Was the Falklands a vital factor in Thatcher's political survival Essay

Was the Falklands a vital factor in Thatcher's political survival - Essay Example Britain in reaction to this, established a navy task force to attack the Argentine navy and the air force. Their main aim was to put in place an amphibious operation which would assist them to win back the Islands. On June 1982 Argentina surrendered leaving the Islands under the control of the British. This brought the conflict to an end. A total number of 907 people perish during the attack; among these were 255 British and 652 Argentine most of who were soldiers, sailors, and airmen. In addition, several people got injured and three islanders also perished. The two countries had a strong case which was inconclusive. Even though the British argued that they had put the international law into consideration it was not well-founded. According to Gamba (1987) an analysis made with the involvement of the Government, the Royal Navy and Parliament It showed that several impertinent factors and pressures majorly determined the decision of the task force being sent to south Atlantic. The gov ernment survival threat due to the argentine invasion factor greatly determined how the conflict was conducted. This situation had a great impact on Thatcher survival in office hence; all the actions put in place was mainly to favour her. Despite the various achievement of the British military the Falkland’s crisis was not solved appropriately The main focus in this paper is the impact of international war participation on political leader’s survival in office. The relationship that exists between the performance in war and the fate of political leaders afterwards is of great significance. In most cases leaders who involve their nation in war are more likely to be faced with domestic political hazard which may interfere with their retention of political power. As compared to the democratic leaders, the authoritarian leaders incline to war for a longer durations when they successfully come to power. In addition, democratic leaders are involved in wars which have lower c hances of defeat than the authoritarian leaders. In this case, Margaret Thatcher is central to all the events that took place in the Falklands conflict. The British Prime Minister was criticized by the British press after she invaded the Argentine Falkland Islands. She was perceived as having been slow in reacting to the situation. This greatly affected her political fortunes. Prior to the war, it was uncertain that Thatcher and her party would be re-elected. However, a year later after she managed to repel the argentine forces successfully, Thatcher together with her party was returned to by a large majority to the parliamentary power in the general election that took place in 1983. The Falkland conflict had political impacts that were strong in the two countries. In Britain, Margaret Thatcher was under pressure from the parliament and she had to utilize this opportunity in order to ensure she survived in office. On the other hand, in Argentina Galtieri's Junta opted to invade the Falkland’s for political survival while considering the domestic situation in his country. The intention In most cases armed conflict is pursued with specific intentions which include; obtaining the just causes objects, to correct the impact of aggression and injustice, to pursue peace and reconciliation in the presence of conflicts, and to immediately bring hostilities to an end. The British government Margaret Thatcher being

Imperialism was always seen as positive for Westerners, but as Essay

Imperialism was always seen as positive for Westerners, but as destructive by the peoples of Africa and Asia. To what extent does this statement appear to be true - Essay Example This was a major step by these countries in the west but to the subjects, i.e. Africa and Asia, this was a bad dream if not a nightmare. Africa was specifically chosen because in Africa, declining empires and wars among the locals left many states vulnerable. Furthermore, it would make available of the raw materials e.g. rubber and tin not locally available in the region and would also create a ready market for the goods. The force of European commerce, culture and power in Asia resulted to a rise to growing trade in goods/commodities that were a key development in modern world free market economy. The motives of this imperialism which were accomplished by the end of the 19th century were improving communications, medical advances, and military technologies. By 1860, Africa was still developing internally on its own terms. The dynamism and importance of Africa on the global continuum supports the theory that Africa would have evolved/developed and sustained level of advancement/devel opment and civilization without the contact with imperial forces. Also, many states had been weakened by slave trade1. On one hand, the imperialism was damaging as it led to large portions of Africa came under European colonial rule. When the imperialists saw how divided and uncivilized the local people were, they thought that with a little help they can easily conquer and rule the land. Another factor that enhanced their morale was the primitive weapons used by Africans and also they took advantage of the hospitality of the local people. This style is called ‘divide and rule . Westerners sought to fight African tribes among themselves which made it easier for them to take control and earn the ‘free’ land. Another damaging factor was famines that resulted in regions where farmers grew cash crops for export for imperialistic nations instead of food for local use. Indigenous people lost