Critical Analysis of “To Peacekeep Or Not To Peacekeep” By James Ash
In “To Peacekeep Or Not To Peacekeep” James Ash argues that if we consider both the pragmatic and ethical view we can see how peace keeping is the best role for Canadians to take. However, although Ash describes peacekeeping as essential to Canada’s identity, if we look critically at this essay you will find that Ash’s argument is flawed in numerous ways. Ash provides a subjective view in favor of peacekeeping without giving a fair representation to the disadvantages of peacekeeping. Specifically if one looks at Ash’s appeal to motive and false dilemma then one can assess if Ash’s arguments are considered credible and sound.
Ash begins his essay by introducing the concept of peacekeeping through the ethical and pragmatic view. Ash describes the benefits that are associated with Canada assuming the role of peacekeeper. Ash explains different scenarios of how peace keeping can help with war. With taking on a role of peace keeping we will be saving numerous soldiers and helping parts around the world out of the hell they have been living. Ash concludes his essay with encouraging readers to get on board with a peace keeping Canada and to really benefit from what our taxes are paying for. Ash demonstrates continuously how peacekeeping is the best role for the Canadian Armed forces because peacekeeping is philanthropic and earns Canada an identity internationally. Ash attempts to convey to the reader that peacekeeping is necessary for Canadians because according to Ash “The only ethical role for a peacetime army is to try to prevent war” (349). Readers are engaged because if they disagree they are afraid that they will be morally wrong for doing so. Ash flatters with language that intimates with the readers that peacekeeping prevents war. Ash states that “it saves more lives” (349) which creates a positive subliminal association in the readers’ mind for Canada assuming a role of peacekeeping....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document