![]() 4 In response, the UK acted to prevent any U.S. actions that could intentionally or unintentionally escalate or broaden the conflict posed a more imminent threat than communist military operations. By the end of 1950, however, the UK concluded that U.S. The United States and the UK joined the United Nations (UN) coalition during the summer of 1950 with their interests initially aligned around a common goal: the defense of South Korea from communist aggression. This article argues that military and civilian leaders should recognize the potential for strategic divergences between coalition partners and be ready to manage them it uses as a case study the relationship between the United States and its primary Western coalition partner, the United Kingdom (UK), during the Korean War. 3 This viewpoint suggests that coalition members do not need to prepare for cases where strategic divergences occur or to develop mechanisms to manage a member’s internal dynamics. Coalitions, according to Patricia Weitsman, are “ad hoc multinational undertakings that are forged to undertake a specific mission and dissolve once that mission is complete.” 2 Weitsman claims that coalitions tend to be more cohesive than formal military alliances because of their ad hoc nature, the ability of the coalition leader to tailor membership to suit the mission, and, most relevant to this article, the absence of formal institutions and consultative processes found in formal alliances. political, economic, military, intelligence, and other capabilities.” 1 Since the end of the Cold War, countries have preferred to collaborate through coalitions rather than formal alliances because the latter are more liable to impose political constraints. Its most recent version notes that “allies and partners are a great strength of the United States” that “add directly to U.S. The situations aren’t completely normal yet but status quo conditions have been maintained.Collaboration with other countries is an integral part of the U.S. The 38 th parallel divides the North and South Korea. Note:A brief explanation of the 1953 conditions has allowed us to figure out the correct answer. Both the nations maintained stiff relations but no war broke out until 1965. >Radcliffe Border or commonly known as India and Pakistan border was named after its curator Sir Radcliffe who was the then chairman of the Border Commissions in 1947. As a result, the 38 th parallel was established as the boundary between them. North Korea was backed by the USSR and South Korea was backed by the US and Britain. In 1953 an arms conflict broke out between them which alarmed the United Nations Organization and hence, a resolution was passed by the virtue of which UN peace forces were deployed. >The two Koreas were in constant strife with each other. >MacMahon Line is the other name given to India and China border.During 1950s, both the countries maintained cordial ties and there was no unrest between them until 1962. Also, India and Bangladesh were never under the control of the USA or erstwhile USSR because India chose to be a Non-alignment after its independence and Bangladesh attained its independent existence in 1971. It is not known as the 38 th parallel, thus the answer is incorrect. ![]() ![]() >Indian and Bangladesh border is known as the Purbanchal Border which was established in 1947 by Sir Cyril Radcliffe. We shall now see it divides which countries. It crosses Europe, the Mediterranean, Asia, the Pacific, North America, and also, the Atlantic. The 38th parallel north is the latitude parallel that is 38⁰ north to the Earth's equatorial plane. Hint:The countries which this parallel divides were under the control of erstwhile USSR & USA during the 1950s and 38th parallel was established as their boundary in 1953.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |