The Ottoman Empire golden age Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

The Ottoman Empire golden age - Research Paper Example The key to this great wealth and power was due to the fact that the Ottoman Empire existed upon the nexus of trade between Asia and Europe. Occupying this important chokepoint, the Ottomans were able to derive a great deal of riches based upon control and management of the trade that forever flowed between East and West. Much like the Byzantines before them, the Ottoman Empire served as a link between Europe and Asia in greatly benefited from the profits of the exchange that was perennially flowing over these geographic boundaries. This era came to be known as the Golden Age of the Ottoman Empire. Although there can be many identifications and definitions for the means by which the Ottoman Empire was able to exert such powerful degree of influence, military might, and cultural dynamism, it will be the purpose of this analysis to discuss and analyze the means by which a pervasive in nearly continual process of centralisation can ultimately be understood as the defining force that allo wed the Ottoman Empire to survive and thrive for such a very long period of time. Whereas other, lesser powers, have grown powerful, wealthy, and then almost mysteriously vanished into the annals of history, the Ottoman Empire, through this process of centralization – especially during its Golden Age, was able to oversee and ensure that the continued strength and wealth that such a process had previously been able to integrate was furthered into the future.1 It can and should be noted that the process of centralisation is not a process that can be defined one dimensionally. Rather, the only one dimensional aspect of centralisation refers to the level to which a central figure in power structure oversaw, directed, analyzed, and guided nearly every decision that was made within the state/Empire.2 Accordingly, the multidimensional aspects of what centralisation necessarily implies will be discussed and analyzed as a means of integrating the reader with an understanding of how ce ntralisation was ultimately affected within the Ottoman Empire. Moreover, by identifying the level and extent to which centralisation played with regards to ensuring that the Ottoman Empire remained resilient and strong, the author will further be able to detail particular practices and unique approaches that the Ottoman Empire utilized with regards to dealing with its large, multi-religious, and multiethnic population.3 Whereas one could conceivably argue that centralisation plays an important role within the administration and direction of any empire throughout its history, the role and extent to which centralisation, and the necessity for it, played within the Ottoman Empire during the Golden Age cannot be ignored. By the very nature of empire, it is a system in which territories and peoples that are otherwise not necessarily similar to the conquering power are incorporated into the governing structure. As a function of this incorporation, the Empire is usually made relatively mo re wealthy, more populous, and more secure due to the fact that it has been able to extend its boundaries beyond the regions to which it previously laid claim to. Yet, the fundamental drawback that has been seen by a host of imperial powers within the past is the fact that the creation of a multiethnic, and oftentimes multi religious, empire

Should the U.S. intervene in the Syria conflict Essay

Should the U.S. intervene in the Syria conflict - Essay Example Also, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon remarked, â€Å"After nearly two years, we no longer count days in hours, but in bodies. Another day, another 100, 200, 300 dead,† (p.4). The rapid death rate has also been abundantly documented by Human Rights Watch, the U.N. Independent International Commission on Inquiry on Syria and Amnesty International. All have charged the regime of Assad with a state sanctioned policy ‘crimes against humanity’ and ‘war crimes. Besides, the UNHCHR and Navi Pillay have appealed to the U.N. Security Council several times to refer the country to the International Criminal Court (ICC) (Hashemi and Postel, p.4). Syria’s ghost of conflict has been on the limelight of the world for about two years but there seems to be no consensus on how to address the disaster completely. The U.S., the E.U., the U.N. and the Middle East nation-states are mystified on how to cease Syrian conflict (Hashemi and Postel, p.5). Several politics and moral arguments have emerged lately concerning the intervention of the U.S. in addressing conflict of Syria. This paper will justify the involvement of the U.S. in Syrian conflict and refute some of the opposing arguments against the intervention. First, through sending of its forces to Syria, the U.S. could alleviate massive slaughtering of Syrian civilians. The U.S. has to intervene for humanitarian purposes and to prevent a similar occurrence in the future. Morgan-Russell (p.1) argues that in 1994, the international community watched as Rwandan Hutu group armed with machetes massacred the Tutsi community across the country. Despite the fact that the U.S. and human rights observers provided evidence on the heinous acts, the U.S. came to a decision that it had no permanent interests in the African Great Lakes Region and that deploying few soldiers would be extremely risky. After three months, about 900,000 Rwandans were massacred. The international community blamed the U.S.