Order ID | 7260836940 | |
Subject | Political Sciences | |
Topic | chapter 1 | |
Type | Revision | |
Writer level | High School | |
Style | Other | |
Sources / references | 9 | |
Language | English(U.S.) | |
Description / paper instructions
What you will find in the attachment is parts of the essay that i have already written, Parts of an essay that I have already written are included in the file.
What is required of you is that you kindly insert academic sources into the areas in the paper that contain “(source)”.
1-3 non-academic sources can be used if necessary.
For the sources, please use the Leeds Harvard citation style.
Sources
In the past, the UAE has taken a policy of partial neutrality (SOURCE), in which it would intervene when necessary but otherwise aimed to focus on its own development while also helping the countries around it, primarily through official development assistance (ODA).
Idealists, motivated primarily by morality, emphasize the significance of taking a humanitarian position, arguing that it is the most important foundation for aid (Lumsdaine, 1993). Idealists think that in order for a country to succeed, poorer countries must be elevated so that they may contribute positively to the global economic and political stability. To ensure a thorough and constructive investment in the recipient nation’s development, social, and economic fields, donor governments must invest in those nations’ development, social, and economic fields (SOURCE).
Realist assistance givers and supporters of the dependency theory are both on the right of the political spectrum, as they place humanitarian values and morality second to the country’s security, economic, and political survival. Their purpose is to protect the state and expand its sphere of influence; therefore, it is best to have influence in various parts of the world to ensure their support, which can assist safeguard the regime domestically (SOURCE). The political right tries to be benefit-oriented, which motivates it to look for ways to improve political and economic benefits.
Idealists, on the other hand, are on the left side of the political spectrum. The left is frequently associated with issues such as humanitarian and environmental concerns. Morality and justice are emphasized more, and these concerns are prioritized over other political or economic considerations (SOURCE). Idealists have attempted to narrow the meaning of ODA (overseas development aid) in order to distinguish it from financial transfers that are ostensibly humanitarian but are often linked to political and economic goals. The right, on the other hand, fights for the definition to be expanded to embrace all forms of ODA benefits by making it ambiguous and flexible. Furthermore, because development aid projects elevate society, the left is more interested in being involved. Non-market ideals such as income redistribution are embraced by social democratic welfare states, which favor development aid (Nöel and Thérien, 1995). The main distinction between the political right and left is the motivating force behind each side’s actions. Though the actions stay the same, the intentions have the ability to influence the outcomes to some extent due to the priorities that have been established.
2.3 UAE Development Aid Motivations
I Religious and identitarian incentives for aid dispersal
To comprehend a country’s purpose or reason, a holistic approach is required to reveal the purposes (Lancaster, 2008), which is accomplished by breaking down the purposes. In the case of the UAE, the goals will be separated into two sections, the first of which is during the founder’s reign. During this time, UAE aid was mostly directed toward Arab countries in the name of religious and ethnic unity. The second portion will look at how assistance disbursement has changed in connection to the UAE’s foreign policy.
To begin with, foreign policy does not have a unified outlook or perspective. Instead, successful foreign policies normally focus on economic, cultural, and military initiatives to ensure that the objectives are met to the best of their abilities (SOURCE). They concentrate on many issues such as human rights, humanitarian foreign aid, commerce, security, and finance, all of which serve the donor state’s business interests to some level (and sometimes the recipient state). Initiatives are created with a certain goal in mind, and if that goal is met, it results in a favorable outcome for both the donor and the receiver. As a result, more stringent diplomatic contacts can be established.
Aid was offered to countries that shared the UAE’s language and religion in the early years after its inception. In the guise of solidarity, aid was given to countries in the Levant and North Africa. Sudan, Djibouti, and Somalia were also included in the UAE’s identity-sharing countries in the Horn. According to Al Mezaini (2012), religious teachings and the personal beliefs of the late Sheikh Zayed influenced the UAE’s aid allocation; thus, morality and duty drove the UAE to engage in development aid in those countries, which is what idealists and humanitarians agree should be the purpose of government ODA. The UAE’s leader, on the other hand, wanted to obtain support from those countries in order to strengthen and secure the UAE’s newly acquired position on the world scene (Al Mezaini, 2012). He further claims that this was done to protect the UAE against Iranian expansion, claiming that the more countries with whom the UAE maintains links, the more influence it will have.
In many civilizations and throughout history, religious considerations for assisting others have dominated. When it comes to delivering aid, Christian countries have traditionally prioritized countries that share a similar faith or sect. The Vatican used to support Roman Catholic states and would prioritize them over other religious affiliations (SOURCE). Similarly, Muslim Arab countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) preferred to provide help not only to Arab countries but also to non-Arab Muslim countries such as Indonesia. Construction of mosques and educational institutions, as well as support for Islamic finance, are examples of this type of assistance.
Motives that are humanitarian
The subject of humanitarian and development aid has remained consistent throughout the UAE’s aid distribution. The UAE has helped countries regardless of their political relations, and in certain situations, aid has been granted solely for humanitarian reasons. Western countries have taken the lead in reducing commercial and economic revenue from aid, and Arab countries are following suit with less strategically important countries or states suffering from catastrophic conditions such as starvation, conflict, or natural catastrophes.
Through the backing of regional and international institutions, the UAE has demonstrated its commitment to humanitarian help in both the bipolar and unipolar worlds (Hellyer, 2001). In the cause of compassion, the UAE has put aside existing political disagreements with the government in extreme circumstances. This is frequently done by institutions that are semi-governmental or represent the country in some capacity, such as the UAE Red Crescent. While diplomatic and political tensions between the UAE and Iran are rising, the UAE delivered aid to Iran through the Red Crescent when the country was battered by a hurricane (SOURCE). This act was solely humanitarian, with no intention of easing political tensions or gaining any other benefit. Ironically, by doing so, the UAE has a better chance of improving its international reputation, even if this was not one of the aid’s purposes. To summarize, whether aid has underlying objectives or not, the donor country will profit from it, either directly or indirectly, whether it is in the form of improved diplomatic ties, more revenue, or even a boost to the donor’s position through improved reputation.
Extremism is a threat.
Those upheavals turned the Middle East from a zone of entrenched autocracies into a web of conflicts fueled by political Islamists linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, whom the UAE and Saudi Arabia consider adversaries.
The UAE has been on board with the US since the start of the fight on terror. The UAE has a zero-tolerance policy for extremist behavior and has made substantial steps to combat terrorism. This is primarily owing to the Middle East’s concentration of terrorist organizations, which can have a direct influence on the country’s economy, especially as it has received repeated threats from various organizations over the years. The Arab Spring had a crucial role in highlighting the concerns posed by the emergence of extremism in the region, as several organizations such as ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQAP emerged from hiding and escalated their activities. All of these groups openly criticized the UAE and, at times, even called for Jihad against the Emirati government. An American teacher was murdered in the washroom of the Al Reem mall in Abu Dhabi’s capital in 2014. (SOURCE). The event is thought to have occurred in response to an ISIS leader’s call for people to fight wherever and whenever they can to help the cause (SOURCE). This concerned the security services since the foreign issues had now become home.
In addition, several sleeping cells associated with terrorist organizations, the most notable of which was the Muslim Brotherhood, were discovered in the country. The cell intended to depose the current administration and replace it with one that adhered to Islamic precepts. The UAE arrested those linked to the overthrow plan and made their names public during the internal crackdown that followed the incident, as part of an effort to make them known to the public and disgrace them.
As a result, in order to better protect itself from extremism, the UAE has taken steps to pursue a more aggressive foreign policy, which has seen it expand its activities throughout the MENA region. Because the Horn of Africa’s countries are coastline, they present a geostrategic advantage.
|