Post Cold War era determined various changes at the political and economical face of the world where countries were changing their allies and increasing their strengths to better cope up with the situations of security. The author of the book “Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security” by Barry Buzan and Ole W'ver critically defined the theory which works in the background for the shifting of powers. The authors followed the theme that the realm of all the social situations should be viewed under the regional divisions. The regions have different issues regarding from religion and culture and most of the times it just encompasses the world because the other countries feel vulnerable about the conditions over in these countries. In fact, this view is far more hoaxed without any reason. The situation of Sub Continent which has two nuclear powers India and Pakistan are always under the heat of negotiations and misconceptions between them and currently is one of the most disputed areas. The regional aspects require that these countries must be seen at a regional stature because of the economical, cultural and religious matter not on the matter of the international security (Jackson & Sorensen, 2007). The international security is the term that is most often used to increase the criticality of the situation in many countries in order to get their social and economic benefits (Buzan & W'ver, 2004). Whatever happens in India and Pakistan will remain in between them and there is no question that the problem will be solved if Israel and USA back away from providing the armory support to India and Pakistan.
The security threats are most of the times not real as they are socially constructed for benefits. Consider the current situation of Iraq where the US army attacked on the false reports of the availability of the weapons of mass destruction but in the end found nothing and the whole army campaign killed thousands of people, in the end for no reason. How this action could take place where the UN and EU are present for the security of the rights for the people from different parts of the world? The answer is the social creation of the threat. For the economical and political benefits, the campaign was designed in such a way that it encompasses all the countries of the world that were assured that they could be destroyed by Iraq if it uses those weapons of mass destruction. In the end nothing was found because Iraq didn’t have the ability to create these things and even USA knew that. But to gain control of the oil vessels of the Middle East their presence was a must. In order to take care of the Iran’s nuclear threats, it was imperative that US must stay in Middle East and US achieved their motive here.
The post cold war era was also phased through these important decisions from the countries. The International Relations studies were getting into the curriculum with the enhancements and changing in the syllabus because of the facts that were changing due to the cold war. The stance of USA against North Korea has been a harsh one. The threat may be socially constructed but it is not completely secure situation. But on the regional perspectives it is important to understand that these actions have importance for the survival of their own country. But this is not a clash of the civilization by any means. USA and North Korea are far apart in every aspect of their lives, then why USA cares so much for North Korea and asks it dissolve its nuclear program? The answer is the regional conspiracy. The USA will not ask France to stop their nuclear testing in the Atlantic as it will harm the environmentalism and other issues like race in the arms or US will not stop India from doing the nuclear tests in Rajhistan and will help it in the civil programs for the creation of power generation where at the same time it will put sanctions on Pakistan which is its strong ally in the war against terror if it takes any step towards the nuclear proliferation (Goldstein & Pevehouse, 2007). Thus the stance changes from the regional situations. The countries like India and Pakistan do have some differences of power in between them, but the involvement of the modern and the far off states like US is this matter makes the issue more critical and the social construction of the threats becomes far more applicable where in real nothing that bad is there to happen.
The difference in opinions and difference in the political foreign policies of the countries make the shifts quite fanatically. The downfall of the Soviet Empire was the biggest disaster of the last century. Everyone knows that the responsible one is the USA which supported Pakistan to create Jihad fighters against the Soviet. The war was one because of the involvement of the USA training and budgeting and Soviet lost. The Soviets although knew were not able to take any action rather than just to wait. And the stance of the US changed towards those Jihad fighters in the early 21st century when these fighters did the same to US which they did to the Soviets (Goldstein & Pevehouse, 2007). Thus the problem is same all the way but the interpretations and the perceptions become different at different times. The countries look at the situations differently and create the threats just to get their involvement in the issues and taking control of the regional politics for the power sharing.