Answer:
The tea-opium connection led to the Opium War.
Explanation:
The tea-opium connection refers to the commercial relationship between the Europeans and the Chinese during the 18th century. China used to be self-sufficient, meaning that, since they had more exports than imports, they had no need to establish new trade relationships with Europe. However, Britain was interested in importing Chinese tea. By smuggling opium into China, Britain managed to get the Chinese people addicted to it and therefore created a demand for a British good in that country.
The tea-opium connection was clearly beneficial for the Europeans and not to the Chinese, and the British refusal to smuggle opium into China led to the Opium War.
Answer:
This plan was presented to the Emperor by Prime Minister Hideki Tōjō and in effect ended discussion of invading Australia. The FS Operation was not implemented, however, due to Japan's defeats in the Battle of the Coral Sea and Battle of Midway and was cancelled on 11 July 1942.
<span>At the core of most intractable conflicts are deeply rooted divisions affecting parties' fundamental interests, needs and values. These include irreconcilable moral values, matters of justice and human rights, high-stakes distributional issues, unmet human needs, and issues of identity. Such conflicts tend to be protracted and have very damaging effects.IntroductionIntractable conflicts are ones that remain unresolved for long periods of time and then become stuck at a high level of intensity and destructiveness. They typically involve many parties and concern an intricate set of historical, religious, cultural, political, and economic issues.[1] These matters are central to human social existence and typically resist any attempts at resolution. In fact, parties often refuse to negotiate or compromise with respect to such issues. As a result, each side views the rigid position of the other as a threat to its very existence. They may develop a mutual fear of each other and a profound desire to inflict as much physical and psychological harm on each other as possible.[2] This sense of threat and hostility often pervades the everyday lives of the parties involved and overrides their ability to recognize any shared concerns they might have.<span>
Additional insights into the underlying causes of intractable conflicts are offered by Beyond Intractability project participants.</span>As conflict escalates, any tangible issues may become embedded within a larger set of values, beliefs, identities, and cultures. Disputes about land, money, or other resources may take on increased symbolic significance.[3] Over the course of conflict, the original issues can even become irrelevant as new causes for conflict are generated by actions within the conflict itself. Those on opposing sides come to view each other as enemies and may resort to highly destructive means. Eventually, the parties become unable to separate different issues and may see no way out of the conflict other than through total victory or defeat.[4]Why do some conflicts become intractable? Many describe intractability in terms of the destructive relationship dynamics that govern the adversaries' interaction. For example, if one party resorts to inhumane treatment in waging conflict, this deepens antagonism and may lead the opposing side to seek revenge.[5] Likewise, when extremist political leaders appeal to ethno-nationalist ideology to arouse fear, this may increase support for the use of violence and contribute to intractability. Other factors that make some conflicts extremely difficult to resolve include the vast numbers of people involved, the large number of complex issues to be resolved, and a previous history of violent confrontation. But what are the underlying causes of these destructive conflict dynamics?What is common to all intractable conflicts is that they involve interests or values that the disputants regard as critical to their survival. These underlying causes include parties' moral values, identities, and fundamental human needs. Because conflicts grounded in these issues involve the basic molds for thought and action within given communities and culture, they are usually not resolvable by negotiation or compromise.[6] This is because the problem in question is one that cannot be resolved in a win-win way. If one value system is followed, another is threatened. If one nation controls a piece of land, another does not. If one group is dominant, another is subordinate.While sharing is possible in theory, contending sides usually regard compromise as a loss. This is especially true in societies where natural fear and hatred is so ingrained that opposing groups cannot imagine living with or working cooperatively with the other side. Instead, they are often willing to take whatever means necessary to ensure group survival and protect their way of life. Below are brief summaries of some of the central underlying causes of intractable conflict.</span>
Answer: Athens
The Delian League (or Athenian League) was an alliance of Greek city-states led by Athens and formed in 478 BCE to liberate eastern Greek cities from Persian rule and as a defence to possible revenge attacks from Persia following the Greek victories at Marathon, Salamis, and Plataea in the early 5th century BCE. (from www.ancient.eu)
