Answer:
Below \/
Explanation:
The Treaties of Velasco
On April 21, 1836, the forces of the Mexican army under General Santa Anna were handed a decisive defeat by the Texans at San Jacinto. Dressed as a common soldier, Santa Anna attempted to flee, but was taken prisoner the following day.
On May 14, Santa Anna signed two peace treaties with interim Texas president David G. Burnet. The public treaty consisted of ten articles; a second, secret treaty consisted of six additional articles. The secret agreement was to be carried out when the public treaty had been fulfilled.
The public treaty provided that hostilities would cease and that Santa Anna would withdraw his forces below the Rio Grande and not take up arms again against Texas. In addition, he also pledged to restore property that had been confiscated by the Mexicans. Both sides promised to exchange prisoners on an equal basis. The Texans would send Santa Anna back to Mexico and would not pursue the retreating Mexican troops.
In the secret agreement, the Texans agreed to release Santa Anna immediately in exchange for his pledge to use his influence to secure Mexican recognition of Texas independence. Santa Anna would not only withdraw all troops and not take up arms against Texas again, but would arrange for a favorable reception by the Mexican government of a Texas mission and a treaty of commerce. The Texas border would be the Rio Grande.
On May 26, General Vicente Filisola began withdrawing Mexican troops in fulfillment of the public treaty. However, the Texas army blocked Santa Anna's release by the Texas government. Moreover, the Mexican government refused to accept the treaties on the grounds that Santa Anna had signed them as a captive. Since the treaties had now been violated by both sides, they never took effect. Mexico was not to recognize Texas independence until the U.S.-Mexican War was settled by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848.
Im kinda stuck on this one.....but due to the " Empire " I believe its Imperialism. I hope this helps!! :D
Answer:
I hope it helps u.
Explanation:
Arms races have generated a great deal of interest for a variety of reasons. They are widely believed to have significant consequences for states' security, but agreement stops there. In the debate over their consequences, one side holds that arms races increase the probability of war by undermining military stability and straining political relations. The opposing view holds that engaging in an arms race is often a state's best option for avoiding war when faced with an aggressive adversary. Debate over the causes of arms races is just as divided. One school believes that arms races are primarily rational responses to external threats and opportunities, whereas arms race skeptics believe that arms buildups are usually the product of a mixture of internal, domestic interests, including those of the scientists involved in research and development (R&D), the major producers of weapons systems, and the military services that will operate them. The policy implications of these contending views are equally contradictory; critics see arms control as a way to reduce the probability of war and rein in domestic interests that are distorting the state's security policy, and proponents argue that military competition is most likely to protect the state's international interests and preserve peace.
Arms buildups and arms races also play a prominent role in international relations (IR) theory. Building up arms is one of a state's three basic options for acquiring the military capabilities it requires to achieve its international goals; the other two are gaining allies and cooperating with its adversary to reduce threats. In broad terms, choosing between more competitive and more cooperative combinations of these options is among the most basic decisions a state must make, and it is often the most important.
Mark me as brainlist answer,
Have a nice day,
Thank you ☺
You need a republic because it is seen in a form of protecting the citizens’ rights and preventing as state form becoming a dictatorship