First war:
Sudan’s first civil war was fought between the Arab-led Khartoum government in the north and rebels in the largely Christian and animist south. Southern rebels were fighting for regional autonomy and representation in the government.
After a succession of governments, that were never able to address the problems of factionalism, economic stagnation, and ethnic division, a group of communist and socialist officers led by Colonel Gaafar al-Nimeiry took over power in a coup in 1969. Nimeiry made attempts to bring factions within Sudan together, including the southern Sudanese. A peace agreement was signed in 1972 that granted semi-autonomy to the south.
Second war:
Facing pressure from Islamists in Sudan, in 1983 President Nimeiry made the decision to abolish the south’s semi-autonomous government, consolidate power in Khartoum, declare Arabic the official language, and institute Sharia law throughout the country (even the primarily Christian and animist south). In response, Dr. John Garang de Mabior, a career soldier and economist trained and educated in the United States, headed the rebel movement known as the Sudan People’s Liberation Army/Movement (SPLA/M) in an uprising against Khartoum, kicking off the Second Sudanese Civil War. The grievances of the second civil war were similar to the first, and the SPLA/M was fighting against the Islamic state, Islamic law, and centralized power that Nimeiry instituted. Garang believed in a united Sudan without the stark ethnic factional divides that had plagued the country for decades. Nimeiry was ousted from power in 1985, but the war continued. In 1989, Colonel Omar al-Bashir led a group of army officers in a bloodless military coup. Over the years, under Bashir’s leadership he ruled by repression, expanded the influence of Islam in government, and supported radical Islamic groups throughout the region. Khartoum hosted and provided a safe haven to a number of radicals and radical groups, including Osama Bin Laden’s al Qaeda. In 1993, Bashir appointed himself President of Sudan, a position he has held ever since. Three years later, Bashir established the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) and created a single-party totalitarian state. Throughout this time, until the early 2000s, Khartoum committed crimes against humanity, war crimes, and potentially even genocidal attacks on civilian populations in southern Sudan. The government conducted a widespread ‘scorched-earth campaign’–destroying crops, homes, and killing livestock–using food as a weapon of war, in addition to aerial bombardments and military/militia attacks from the ground.
Answer:
The third option
Explanation:
Considering that population ensured more votes, the south wanted to count their slaves as population. However, they were normally counted as property. So the government compromised by making 3 out of every 5 slaves count for population.
<span>American wanted the Philippines because they did not want the Spanish to have posts there and wanted to protect their resources.</span>
Answer:
B. Right to enter into a contract
Explanation:
A contract is the type of right that allows a person to agree with two parties based on legal terms that will cover such a contract.
In any proposed contract that will be legal, there must be an offer, acceptance of the offer, consideration, mutual obligation, capacity, etc to bind such a contract.
Answer: hope this helps!
<h3>
(PLEASEEE BRAILIEST THIS WAS HARD)</h3><h2>Trade and Globalization</h2>
Essay:
Comparative advantage
In economic theory, the ‘economic cost’ – or the ‘opportunity cost’ – of producing a good is the value of everything you need to give up in order to produce that good.
Economic costs include physical inputs (the value of the stuff you use to produce the good), plus forgone opportunities (when you allocate scarce resources to a task, you give up alternative uses of those resources).
The freely available economics textbook The Economy: Economics for a Changing World! explains this as follows: “A person or country has a comparative advantage in the production of a particular good if the cost of producing an additional unit of that good relative to the cost of producing another good is lower than another person or country’s cost to produce the same two goods.”
<h3>so the Evidence is...: </h3>
Is there empirical support for comparative-advantage theories of trade?
The empirical evidence suggests that the principle of comparative advantage does help explain trade patterns. Bernhofen and Brown (2004)25, for instance, provide evidence using the experience of Japan. Specifically, they exploit Japan’s dramatic nineteenth-century move from a state of near-complete isolation to wide trade openness.
Net exports and price changes for 1869, Japan – Figure 4 in Bernhofen and Brown (2014)26
so thats how did economics and trade change through out the years.