What are the Key Differences between Domestic Politics and International Politics - Assignment Example

International Relations (Essay) What according to the realists are the key differences between domestic politics and International politics? What is the significance of those differences? Abstract Regardless of the outlook of its opponents, Realism is the leading theory used to elucidate the nature of the (IR) International Relations all through the entire history. Cardinal de Richelieu, initiated through his strategies the pragmatism in European international relations in the name of "raison d?état". He escorted France into 32 War to make sure that the states in control of the Habsburgs do not rule Europe (Hans J. Morgenthau, 1978). (p.4) Realism is a hypothetical strategy to international relations study. Assumptions state that realism has been around for a long time. Thucydides, the narrator of the Peloponnesian confrontation is considered as the founders of Realism. According to Thucydides, confrontation between Sparta and Athens was the result of the increased Athenian military power and insecurity created amongst the Spartants. Max Weber, Nicolo Machiavelli, and Thomas Hobbes are all known as founders Realism (Donnelly, 2000). Morgenthau's description of Realism: According to Morgenthau (1978), he is presenting a "hypothesis of international politics", an assumption that brings "meaning and order” to the bunch of facts. He observes Realism as a difference to liberal-idealism Morgenthau, 1978). (p.4) Morgenthau’s hypothesis is based on unchanging premises which are amalgamated in six key principles. These principles are: “(IR) International relations is ruled by objective laws which are rooted in human nature” The human character is fixed; in that case these objective laws are fixed eventually and are not pretentious by human predilection. The first important outcome of this is the possible of developing a coherent theory based on all these constant laws. Consequently, objective laws of the human nature, attached with a supposition where actors are rational, provide us with a structure for clarification of International Relations. The core indication of political pragmatism is the perception of interest described with reference to power” Additionally international politics is distinguished by the effort for national control between states. The idea of interest described with reference to power sets worldwide politics as an independent sphere of understanding and action separately from other subjects, for example ethics, religion or aesthetics, leaving no room for ethical concerns, individual or prejudice preference in determination of distant policy. This perception offers us with unyielding knowledge about states performances, making the hypothetical perception of politics feasible. "Interest described as power is a purpose category that is collectively valid", though its precise meaning may modify with circumstance and time. The nature and form of state power differ in time, context and place, but the perception of interest described as power remains constant. The cultural, political and strategic environment decides the structure of the state’s power. Hence, this impartiality of significance can dole out as a collective start point for comprehending international politics procedures. "Political realism is sentient of the ethical implication of political action. It’s also responsive of the unexplainable tension between the ethical command and the necessities of successful political action." Realism presupposes that the general moral ideology do not direct state performance. The states aren’t ethical agents as their actions would be reviewed by the conditions of national survival. National benefits are everlasting conditions that supply policy-makers with a balanced channel to action. "The moral ambitions of a meticulous nation?" cannot be recognized with "the ethical laws that rule the cosmos". There’s no set of ethical principles which are unanimously agreed. In that case states attempts to envelop their actions in moral terms, this is planned to lend a hand and authenticity and to promote the national interests of state. Realist politics is a sovereign subject which requires analysis as a body, without being lowered to any extra subject of human apprehension. For development of an independent hypothesis of opinionated behavior, 'political man' should be distanced from other features of human nature. He thinks in requisites of interest described as power, like the economist imagines in requisites of interest described as wealth. The political realist questions: "How does this strategy influence the supremacy of the state?" giving dominance to political deliberations by defining importance in terms of supremacy and all should be secondary to political analysis (Morgenthau, 1978). (p. 5-14) Political Realism Theory According to Political realism theory international and domestic politics are administrate by objective laws with their extraction in human nature. To develop the society it is necessary to know the laws of the society. The Realist practice is based on three scientific presumptions. First, the mechanistic outlook of international politics that views relations amongst states with respect to equilibrium and balance. Second, the biological theory related to Darwin and the villainous struggle for survival. Finally the third theory, psychological theory based on egoism, a theory on which realism rest. (Boucher, 1998).  International politics means two or more countries getting along together, like the United Nations which is a kind of International Politics. Domestic politics can be termed as politics that are based only in one country, like the President, Prime Minister etc. The key differences between domestic politics and International politics according to realist are: The international politics is rebellious as there is no higher authority above them capable of amending the interactions amongst them. This means that if an amendment needs to be made it has to be a collective decision of different nations and there is no dictatorship from one person or nation. E.g. the decision to declare war against Saddam in order to stop him from invading during the Gulf war was a collective decision of nations linked with the UNO. Domestic politics on the other hand is based on internal affairs of a country. It has a higher authority like the President, Prime Minister who has the power to change a decision if needed (Yaffe, 1994, p. 26). Best .e.g. of this would be a tax waiver decision for MNC for growth and prosperity of a country made by the President of a country on a broader prospective. Sovereign nations are primary actors in the international political beliefs and exceptional attention is given to super power nations like US and they get most of the control on the international stage. Whereas international institutions, multinational corporations, non-governmental organizations, individuals and other trans-state or sub-state actors are scrutinized as having very little independent influence. Nations are coherent unitary actors and each move towards possessing national interest. There is a common distrust of enduring alliance or cooperation. The overruling 'national interest' of each state/nations is for its survival and national security. In search of national security, states/nations endeavour to accumulate resources. Relations between states/nations are indomitable by their relative level of power imitative mainly from their economic and military capabilities. There are no common principles that all states may use to direct their actions. As an alternative, a state should be constantly aware of the actions around it and have to use a practical approach to determine the problems which arise. The inoculation of ethics into international relations causes uncontrolled diplomatic rigidity, commitments, and escalation of conflict. Conclusion Realists deem that mankind isn’t inherently compassionate but rather competitive and self-centred. This Hobbesian perception that views human nature as conflictual and selfish except when given proper conditions beneath which to assist, contrasts with the strategy of tolerance to international relations. To add further, they deem that states are intrinsically aggressive (offensive realism) or/and preoccupied with security (defensive realism); and territorial extension is only restrained by conflicting power(s) (Grieco, 1997, p.170). This aggressive increase, nevertheless, leads to a security quandary where increase in one's security could bring along more instability as the rival(s) erects its own arms in retort. Consequently, security is a zero-sum diversion where only comparative gains may be made (p. 168). References Ashley, R. K. (1984). The Poverty of Neorealism. International Organization 38, 255-86. Boucher, D. (1998). Political Theories of International Relations: From Thucydides to the Present. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  Donnelly, J. (2000). Realism and International Relations. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.   Ferguson, Y. H., and R. W. Mansbach. (1991). Between Celebration and Despair: Constructive Suggestions for Future International Theory.   Grieco, J. M. (1997). Realist International Theory and the Study of World Politics. in M. W. Doyle and G. J. Ikenberry (Eds.). New Thinking in International Relations Theory (pp. 163+). Boulder, CO: Westview Press   Griffiths, M. and O’callaghan, T. (2002). International Relations: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge. Hans J. Morgenthau, "Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace", Fifth Edition, Revised, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978, (pp. 4-15): SIX PRINCIPLES OF POLITICAL REALISM   Palmer, N. (1990). Thoughts on International Relations and World Society: A Dialogue Renewed". International Studies Notes 15 (2): 50-53, 58.   Stupak, R. J. and Leitner, P. M. (2001). Realism Revisited: Philosophical Assumptions, Power Patterns, and American Foreign Policy,  Journal of Power and Ethics, 2(1),86+.    Weber, C. (2005). International Relations Theory: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge.   Yaffe, M. D. (1994). Realism in Retreat?The New World Order and the Return of the Individual to International Relations Studies, Perspectives on Political Science, 23(2), 82+. Read More