Theories of International Relations - Coursework Example

Theory of International Relations Critical Perspectives Table of Contents Introduction 2 Anarchism as a Theory of International Relations 2 Anarchism and Realism 3 Idealism in opposition to Militarism and Anarchism 5 Mutual Aid Theory 6 Critical Realism 7 Democracy 8 Liberalism, Realism and Constructivism 11 Existing and Recommended Policies for United States 14 Bibliography 16 Theories of International Relations Introduction The different schools of thought liberalism, realism and constructivism have important implications for different societies and are widely studied by different practitioners and researchers. There is no system which should be called as perfect as there are numerous contextual and environmental factors which vary from time to time and impose different implications for different societies. As the trends in world economy changes, it trickles down the effect on the international and political systems of the nations. Anarchism as a Theory of International Relations Anarchism has different uses in international relations and political philosophy [Eri10]. Realist scholars define anarchism as complete ‘absence of government’ and absence of political authority in the states which have differential power culture [Eri10]. International system is a very complex and interconnected system which adapts itself and has the tendency to reorganize itself. It basically controls the relationship between different units and guides the conduct during war and peace time. International system is embedded in complex physical system like class based and racial systems and the whole political scenario of a state. Anarchist school of thought and complexity theorists have overlapping assumptions about each of the concepts. Anarchism says that no government exists and complexity theorists also talk about freedom and self-organization There is a difference in the philosophies of political and international systems because objectives of each of them are different. Political system philosophy has the main objective of ‘good life’ while International system focuses on ‘survival’ [Eri10]. Ordering principle is an important component of any political system. This ordering principle determines the relationship between different units. There is a lot of debate about the concept of anarchy. Complex theorists gave a concept of co evolution. It says that systems are formed with the increase in interactions with the environment, while anarchists believe that they can organize themselves without the interdependence on each other and without the presence of legal formal authority. [Eri10]. Anarchism and Realism Realism says that nations are like ‘billiard balls’ where each billiard ball represents a sovereign state. These balls are independent and are not changed by changes in human interactions and changes in international system [Eri10]. It is very difficult to predict about any international system during the nonlinear situations and a lot of other complex developments and relations between cause and effect of war, peace and other political developments within a country. There is a debate going between anarchist and complexity theorists. Both schools deal with the issues of order, anarchy is a defining feature of realism which ensures that everybody has right to pursue his economic growth. Complexity theory deals with the issue of emergence of order without an orderer [Eri10]. Realists are of point of view that universe exists on the principle of ‘survival of the fittest’. States co-evolve and co-exist with each other, and they are affected by a range of human and non human factors [Eri10]. In any system which is non linear, it is very hard to predict any international system because there is no set pattern. However a debate of anarchism and complexity enables a better understanding of the concepts. Anarchism and realism lacks the support of public because of its association with violence and chaos [Ric10]. World’s politics operate within an anarchical system but still, presently, any political system is hard to implement. Realism and anarchism keep in a balance between anti state traditions of political engagement and important role of cooperation and non violence [Ric10]. Also the school of thought of realism suggests a point of view of disowning the baggage which is its harsh side. To ensure a mass mobilization of public, it is hard to attain keeping in view the harsh side of the realism school of thought. This school of thought is also hard to be applicable because of its co incidence with the western culture. As it is explained above that realism is concerned with individualistic approach of progress in life and ignoring the others’ rights, it has faced strong opposition because of its similarity with the western culture of individualism, ignoring the mutual interests of society [Ric10]. There are few challenges in promotion of anarchism. The system of anarchy is stereotyped as a system which is a sociopathetic bomb thrower. After 9-11 events, this system was further stereotyped as a system more related to terrorists and terrorism. Anarchists are considered those kinds of people who turn peaceful situations into harmful and violent carnivals. Such people are believed to be anti-state people with no serious agenda or policy in their mind [Ric10]. Realism talks about the irrelevance of laws and ethics in the pursuit of order and security at an international and global level. Increased and unwarranted reliance on laws and institutions was named as ‘Grotian’ traditions and was criticized by Bull and he was the supporter of realism [Ric10]. Bull was critical about military leaders of defeated Germany because they pursued criminal policies in the violation of international law. He was also very critical about this belief that United Nations can act as a maintainer of peace without bias. In other words, in Bull’s point of view justice and peace cannot be achieved by transcending the states and sovereignty; in fact it requires the prevalence of pluralist systems and promoting their dynamics [Ric10]. Realism promotes self help system, ignoring the normative concerns and the cooperative arrangements. According to Bull, opportunities for cooperative actions are affirmed and promoted. However, Bull’s point of view was different from philosophical anarchism because he regards war as an inevitable and a must feature of political system of world [Ric10]. Philosophical violence declares non violence and peace as important constituents of realism. Bull’s work was opposite to anarchism also because of the concept of ‘Great Powers’ [Ric10]. He says that this inequality in roles is a very important attribute of existing political systems. Great powers contribute a lot towards the formation of international system because they manage their relations with each other as well as with the central body to govern the affairs in the society. So, both the systems of philosophical anarchy and bull’s anarchy have different perspectives and none of them is enough to handle the historical perspectives of a state alone. Some researchers see anarchism and realism as a source of violence and disorder and other group of researchers find anarchism useful if philosophical anarchism is used as a source of enriching society [Ric10]. Idealism in opposition to Militarism and Anarchism The increasing trend is towards to maintain a balance in the society and to pursue global commons and ensure disarmament [Ric10]. There also should be a greater focus towards addressing global issues like global warming, pollution, water and other resources scarcity, because these are some common problems which need to be dealt with after establishing a common ground. Also there should be a policy of equal transfer of such resources as safe water and other such resources. There is a need of enhancing global democracy and combined efforts to reduce poverty. Idealism also says that there should be a less dependence on hard and military power and more inclination towards soft power like peaceful contracts and peaceful settlements [Ric10]. For achieving such goals there needs to be change in policies and procedures. The concept of state as a foundation for human community needs to be changed as soon as possible. However states, nowadays, are displaying opposite attitudes like America after 9-11 attacks has displayed use of hard power and military attitude. America is also bullying Iran by use of hard power (Militarism) rather than soft power use (e.g. Legitimacy wars) and look for a peaceful settlement to promote peace in the region [Ric10]. There is lot of confusion and states perceive that there is no middle ground between central leadership and anarchy. But surely there is a need of replacement of hard power by intellectual elements adaptation and it can lead to peace and utopianism (idealism). Mutual Aid Theory A very different perspective of human life system is given by Mutual Aid theory of Kropotkin. Mutual theory says that human beings evolve through mutual cooperation with one another and there is a strong dependence on others [Ada10]. It is in opposite to Malthusian assumption that individuals survive on the basis of their own abilities and competencies [Ada10]. Kropotkin rejected the Darwinian Theory and said that animals who have the habit of mutual aid survive at the end of the day and they are the fittest. So ‘survival of the fittest’ idea was discarded saying that mutual cooperation makes a species fittest for survival, rather than war and competition. Anarchism was opposed by Kropotkin by using biological evidences. Anarchism beliefs that society should follow principles like cooperation and sympathy. It treats State as an artificial institution imposed over pre existing societies. It considers State as a hindrance in the birth of society because it crushes the individual liberties [Ada10]. However, Kropotkin takes the biological evidences to prove the human nature and then he applies it on human society. However this sociobiological model is not applicable in American social sciences because of four factors. First, this evolutionary development is not accepted and diffused by academy, secondly ideologies of liberalism tend to dominate over this concept, thirdly past negative experience against the Darwinism has created a negative image of this process and lastly, anti evolution debates and concept remain indulged in the academic field in America. Realism has faced a challenge by Darwin theory of evolution, however, reductionist viewpoint again supports realism because it says that human nature is asocial. Kropotkin’s observations, in turn, are thought to be influenced by political world however; he had these assumptions by observing the natural world. Although the dispute between Darwin and Kropotkin is very important and humongous however, it was found that cooperation has a bigger affect on societies rather than competition. On the other hand, Darwin theory was not applicable for his Russian audience because in Russia it was supposed that life is difficult and to survive, organisms can even surmount themselves. It clearly means that the same theory can have different implications for a different geographical area [Ada10]. Malthusian point of view was that strong survives and weak dies out. Similarly, Kropotkin said that individual power is nothing and sociability is indispensable in society. He said that social instincts are stronger than individual instincts and animals do risk their lives for the sake of saving their herd [Ada10]. Critical Realism Critical realism is a whole philosophy which is opposite to positivism and empirical realism. It says that societies are irreducible for people and they pre-exist [Ada10]. Critical realism states that actual events occur as a result of observable and unobservable events. We can understand it with the help of an example. Consider a person who is conducting an experiment, he controls the environment and creates certain conditions like temperature or humidity etc. Those can be called as observable events. But the result of the experiment is always affected by some uncontrollable and unobservable factors like may be the composition of apparatus, the composition of air being given to experiment etc. So results do change in actual scenario and go somewhat opposite to what was being observed. So critical Realism says that mechanisms do exist independently without our capacity of knowing them and pre existing social forms are autonomous. So, by inferring this we can say that sociability do exists in human beings and there is a tendency for mutual aid however human ego comes to hinder it. Efforts are needed to overcome the human ego part, forcefully or with the help of institutions like law [Ada10]. The above notion of critical realism shows that unobservable factor of social dependence and mutual aid exists and it cannot be ignored. So, there is a need to realize this realty and establish common grounds between nations so that peace can be promoted and soft power should be used. Cooperative strategies among organisms are basically meant to fulfill self serving logic. Realism states that in an international environment of anarchy, nations have a tendency to dominate each other [Ada10]. Democracy Practitioners and theorists are facing a challenge that ensures the fulfillment of individual and collective goals. The radical policy of today demands democracy throughout the state [Mur10]. But the democracy is being opposed by powers sources which have a tendency to oppose the independence of public. Democratic insurrection means protesting of indigenous communities for independence in a different state. It is also a protest against neo liberalism to save humanity. There is central challenge for practitioners to implement a system which can ensure the fulfillment of collective and individual goals as well as that account for specificity of diverse groups [Mur10]. Insurrection or urgent action is an important area of realism these days. Many anarchist states claim to be following democracy and insurrection is considered legal and liberality in them. According to Mouffe, there is no outside to power, although power is already constituted in relations of dominations, still there is a need to transform the existing power relations. Realists oppose the idea of collectivist and unified society and promote individuality and autonomy. Mouffe says that combined recognition and identification is constitutive of political activity. It is the role of democratic rules and procedures that transform antagonism into agonism and also further defuse the potential and chances of violence and conflict. However, the radicalization of democracy requires an environment of hegemony. If we look into the history of United States, there has been lot of struggle in race and gender. Anarchists oppose hegemony whether it is supported by neoliberals and Marxists. Individuals are a collection of ‘we’ having different race, gender, background and culture. The actual challenge for democratic insurrection is to respect a collection of other groups having different point of views, values and ethics [Mur10]. Democracy requires a conflict based consensus, which means people have to conform to others’ values, languages and religion. Mouffe rejected the existence of independent governing bodies and indigenous and non national bodies so democracy means conforming to a set of institutions but not to the set of values. Movements for global resistance across all national boundaries and many nations are of the view that United States has been trying to create hegemony over the entire world. They have this tendency to dominate over other nations of the world [Mur10]. There is a democratic deficit in all the transnational bodies who try to oppose this hegemony. So researchers propose a multi polar world where there is a respect for different democratic interpretations. Mouffe says that the individualistic culture of West has made it alien with the other cultures of the world. A democratic value system requires a democratic global system which respects the ideology and diversity of values. Several actions of global resistance movements such as global days where nations converge on a single point and act at different location but in the same way and communicating through websites and mobile phones destroy the functioning various institutions like World Health Organization [Mur10]. Democratic insurrection is a democratic and non hierarchical way of implementing democratic practices. It is something which provides a mean for attainment of social and global objectives but has few limitations including the less representation of some groups of society [Mur10]. Despite lot of research at anarchy, still its implications for political systems is often ignored [Ale10]. Anarchy is misconceived as something which creates disorders and chaos. It is just that the system exists in the absence of formal or informal ruler. It does not mean that it creates disorder or there are no rules, no regulations and no institutions to govern and guide a society [Ale10]. Anarchism actually means order in anarchy. It takes place without a formal leader but surely contains the intricate and complex patterns of informal hierarchies [Ale10]. Anarchists seek to attain the emancipation and unpack the outcomes of hierarchy, structure and domination. So anarchy is shown as a response of centralization and domination and it involves and prefers a direct and straight action and protests against the misrepresentation of a group. Anarchists create a more horizontal and empowered structure of society and they struggle to implement a positive change that should be implemented in the society as opposed to racism [Ale10]. There exists a liberal economy in the anarchist’s school of thought. It is basically seeking to attain autonomy of the individual. It struggles against all those campaigns that tend to create inequality in the society. It is in pursuit of transforming and forming new bases of power and discarding the old concepts of power and authority. It has been wrongly stereotyped as a source of chaos and violence, it is a useful source of empowering the less empowered public [Ale10]. Liberalism, Realism and Constructivism Held calls the anarchists as those people who never look for common grounds and are like neoliberals and calls them anti globalists [Ale101]. Marx however, focused on a state control society and was not an anarchist. However, Held was wrong in evaluating anarchism, he undermines many realities and as a result he himself is being debated as an anarchist. There was a narrow understanding of human rationality and that concept was named as liberalism in that time. The core idea of liberalism is the focus of individual freedom and autonomy and this idea was ignored at that time. Held’s idea was to deepen the meaning of liberalism and create awareness about the unknown and ignored concepts of liberalism. He clearly mentioned that the idea of individual autonomy is not what is called the essence of democracy, he defined the autonomy of an individual as equality of rights as well as imposing equal obligations on them as members of society, economic freedom should be given individually as well as guaranteed for the other individuals as well [Ale101]. This definition gave a clear concept and a measuring yardstick of true citizenship. Existing societies fail in this principle because in most of the key areas (like economy, cultural life and welfare), individuals have very little or no control. Held argues that if any nation wants to attain democracy, it needs to ensure independence in those key areas especially economy. He adds that State is an independent corporation, consisting of numerous organizations and governed by political bodies. These political leaders do have monopoly of violence but are rational, rather than collection of egoist people taking extreme steps [Ale101]. It shapes the lives and opportunities of those people who come under its jurisdiction however it does not represent itself as impartial arbiter, but even this does not mean that it can support any group of people it wants. Those who are empowered to take decisions by law, we have to depend on them for decision making. But in today’s world we can see an imbalanced economic situation where poor nations do not have the democracy to ask for their rights and the multilateral institutions like WTO are affected by few major economies and cannot assure equality and justice in third world countries [Ale101]. Most action oriented steps in different countries are the efforts to promote constructivism [Chr10]. These actions are actually meant to reduce the havoc created by industrial capitalists in the society. Day says that human property will be left of no value if there will be too many diseases and people will be dying of skin cancer as a result of hazardous radiations. He says that the unit of power should come to a lower level and gives many examples of it. A workplace sabotage done by the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) was strong enough to disturb the whole corporate business and economy of nations. Day finds the school of constructivism as the most acceptable in today’s world where there is a battle going on between interests and more importantly between resources [Chr10]. These three schools of thoughts liberalism, realism and constructivism have very important contribution towards international societies and a lot of work has been done by numerous researches discussed in this paper. Realism says that reality exists independently of being noticed or not. Humans have a tendency to prefer their interests more over the ideologies of nations. Liberalism is what has been called democracy by researches, as shown above, which ensures that there exists a liberty and equality of individuals. It is their right to enjoy equal opportunities as other citizens. Constructivism, however, includes elements of both realism and liberalism. It says that international relations can be liberal as well as real depending upon the situation and it is hard to impose the effect of any one school of thought. International system is formed as a result of ongoing practice formed by the society with the passage of time. In my point of view, America has been following a policy of constructivism and hegemony, neglecting the critical realism assumptions of mutual dependence and also it tends to influence the international governing bodies like United Nations. Such organizations are responsible for maintenance of international peace and harmony in the society and work on the notion of critical realism of interdependence and cooperation. However, United States always try to influence those decisions and use their ‘veto’ power in an unjust manner. We can see the same situation happening many times for example while resolving Kashmir issue. America, having veto power can ask for maintenance of peace in Pakistan or in Palestine. But it never does this because of this unlimited quest of power over other countries. It uses the hard power and military weapons although it positions itself as the biggest supporter and promoter of peace. This difference in opinions and reality of America has been engraved in it because of its history which is full of conflicts and wars between different races. Based on that historical way of doing politics, America is still managing to pursue the same international system of hegemony where it cannot see other economies flourishing. Existing and Recommended Policies for United States In my view, America, instead of spreading inequality in the world being super power and suppressing other nations should follow a liberalism school of thought. It will ensure that every nation is independent and can pursue economic growth depending upon its own policies and procedures rather than affecting other countries independence. The need of the hour is to spread a collective culture and join hands for global issues for distribution of scarce resources such as water, petroleum and oil. The global problems can be dealt with only if all nations combine on their commonalities and ignoring the differences for the betterment of human life. Every citizen of every country should be free to exercise his religion and his values as well as should respect other religions and languages. Such steps can be taken at the policy making level and international forums to make a common ground to start the pursuance of a peaceful world which is also full of harmony. America should realize this reality that by living in isolation it cannot have a control over most of the resources of the world and war is not the solution of this problem. Instead, economy is rising in Asian countries like China and India. There are increased technological innovations and more and more companies are developing. In today’s world, knowledge is the true resource which gives competitive advantage to a nation. Natural resources like oil, gas and others may be acquired easily but competitive advantage achieved through struggle and knowledge is difficult to be imitated. As more and more countries are getting knowledgeable and aware, now it is creating a state of competition between different nations and no country is willing to lose. In my opinion, if we want to make this world a better place to live, there should be collective pursuance of common goals which should be given preference. Pollution and other global problems needed to be handled first. Use of soft power should emerge and competition should be more knowledge and economy based. Bibliography Eri10: , (Hobden and CudWorth), Eri10: , (Hobden and CudWorth 401), Ric10: , (Falk), Ric10: , (Falk 383), Ric10: , (Falk 384), Ric10: , (Falk 385), Ric10: , (Falk 386), Ric10: , (Falk 389), Ada10: , (Goodwin), Mur10: , (Murray), Ale10: , (Prichard), Ale101: , (Prichard), Chr10: , (Rossdale), Read More