If you (or your child) is a rising senior, now is a good time to get started on the dreaded college essay. If you’re applying to a Common Application school – and there are now nearly 500 colleges and universities that use this form – you will have six college essay choices. If it’s any consolation, schools don’t want a long essay. Before the 2011 college admission season began, the Common Application decreed that essays could not exceed 500 words. Some students and counselors squawked, but I think the word-count ceiling is a good thing. Frankly, most teenagers don’t know how to write a compelling admission essay that’s short, much less one that is 750 or 1,000 words or more. I admit that I have no statistics to back this up, but I have read many college essay drafts and most of them have ranged from horrible to is this really the best you can do? The six essays topics on the Common Application remain the same as last year’s. If you’re wondering if schools on your list use the Common Application, here is a list of the organization’s members. Here are six terrific sample college essays from students who attend Connecticut College. You can find more great essays at Johns Hopkins University’s website. Can a Guinea Pig Be in a College Essay? Lynn O’Shaughnessy is the author of the second edition of The College Solution, which was released in May. It contains more advice on college essays.
As a philosophical notion it is crystallised in Tony Blair’s thesis of the Third Way that gives major powers natural rights to intervene in other countries’ internal affairs, if there is a humanitarian disaster there. To the Chinese the connection between political intervention and military intervention is dangerous for its national security. The RMA has become the actual mechanism to put this theoretical concept into practice in the real world politics. Humanitarian military intervention is a particular content of this political objective: restricting dictators’ freedom of military choices and deploying peace-making and peace-keeping forces on the ground of war-torn countries. This political employment of the arms requires a different type of warfare: long-range and pinpoint attack at the enemy’s military targets, total control of the air, and suffocation of the opponent’s military capabilities, and so on. The key to success of RMA type of intervetion is to minimise the western personnel casualties and losses of civilian lives of the opposite side.
If the civilian losses are heavy, then the just nature of the humanitarian interventionism becomes difficult to justify. RMA makes it possible to achieve a human rights objective without waging an all-out war on the ground and thus makes it possible to wage an interventionist warfare relatively easily on the part of the West. In other words because in the past there was not a proper type of warfare against the authoritarian regimes, all the West could do was either conducting a massive war or just watching helplessly. Therefore, international interventionism is based on technological superiority and military dominance in hardware. Politically speaking the larger the gap in the balance of power, the easier is the process of an interventionist war. However, it is risky to indulge in a mentality of using the RMA type of warfare to resolve human rights problems. Such a mentality causes tensions to regional security, as trigger-happy interventionist actions are not based on the fully developed RMA superority that can be employed politically to achieve the desired effects, as seen from the Kosova war. A lot of people get killed in such an intervention.
China and most regional countries are opposed to the concept that human rights is above national sovereignty and they believe that the Third Way can be disruptive for the regional security order. So they responded to the Kosovo War with criticisms: it was viewed as the testing ground for the Third Way thesis to be translated into power play by the West. Then international relations will be defined and served by might. ] Indeed, China’s reaction to the Kosovo War had much to do with the leadership’s concern over China’s own ethnic tensions. Tibet, Xinjiang and Taiwan all have potential to experience what happened in Yugoslavia and invoke outside interference. Anti-China forces in the three places all enjoy external support. Stability in Tibet is maintained largely by force. Taiwan’s future with China is particularly uncertain. China does not want to fight a war with western powers in these areas. Therefore, outside involvement of the Kosovo type there would be a nightmare for the Chinese people.