International Relations Case Study

1063 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Machiavelli and political science

This paper concerns the two main paradigms in international relations, realism and liberalism. It will first define the terms separately, then discuss the origins of each theory, then examine the strengths and weaknesses of each theory and demonstrate how the theories work on their own. At the same time, this essay will investigate the most convincing theory of the both as it incorporates the presumptions into the case study of the United Sates’ invasion of Iraq in regards to realism and liberalism. This essay will conclude by elaborating on why realism is the most convincing theory in international relations.

To contextualize, it is important to start by defining the main concepts used in this paper. The treaty of Westphalia in 1648, was …show more content…

As a consensus dominant theory, realism formally did not arrive until World War II, but its tenets had been practiced since 431 BC when Thucydides wrote “The History Peloponnesian Wars”. He stated that the war between the Athenian and Spartan empires was caused by a shifting balance of power in Greece (Hutchings, 1999). From here came the idea of “balance of power”, its defined as when states seek to balance each other in terms of power and prevent each other from growing stronger (Baylis, 2011). Following supporters of realist views include Thomas Hobbs, who asserted that the “state of nature” is contumacious and brutal where humans’ only concerns is to increase their own personal power and safety (Roesch, 2013); Carl von Clausewitz (1832), who stated in “On War ” that armies are a vial political tool exploited by states to maximise their power; and Machiavelli (2005), who proclaimed in “The Prince” that the exclusive idea of a prince was to strive for power and security. As a rebuttal to this theory, it might be argued by many that Liberalism is the rightful dominant theory of international relations. Originally, it came to view during the European Enlightenment Period (Baylis, 2011). However, its been executed during World War I when the United States’ president Woodrow Wilson presented an idealistic, liberal future for the world (Carr, 2001). Moreover, the theory is universally affiliated with liberals, …show more content…

However, none of them are uniquely sufficient in predicting the entire international history on their own. For instance, realism as a theory is adequate during times where there is competition between states for hegemony. The reason is that the nature of this environment increases the probability of a state facing threats from another. In this case, using the tenets of realism such as security maximisation is a more appropriate explanation than the arguments of liberalism. Opposite to this, when there is an obvious global hegemon, states will not worry about rivalry from others. The tenets of Liberalism here seems more

Show More
Related

  • The Key Differences Between Realists, Morality of State Theorists, and Cosmopolitans

    1550 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...heories outlined in this paper. One of the defining principles of realism is that the state is paramount to anything else, including morality. Realists argue that deviation from the state interests in an anarchic system creates vulnerability. Morality of state theorists uphold state sovereignty and argue that intervention is not permissible unless the circumstances are crass and warrant action. They talk about aggression as the only crime that one state can commit to another and suggest that aggression should only be allowed as a retaliatory measure. Finally, cosmopolitans believe that morality can be achieved at the individual level and that morality can be somewhat universally applied. Non-realists do not support preemptive actions or intervention under almost any condition, and the criteria by which intervention is warranted aligns with the principles of justice.

    Read More

  • Theoretical Perspectives on Iraq War 2003

    2300 Words  | 5 Pages

    Followers of Realist school of thought argue the case of 2003 Iraq war from the standpoint of power and Security. The Bush administration’s rationale for launching a pre-emptive attack against Iraq was based on two misleading assumptions: firstly, Iraq had or was developing Weapons of Mass Destruction (along with Iran and North Korea) and secondly, that it was aiding and protecting terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda. Such a conjecture based on unsubstantiated evidence helped Bush administration conjure up a dystopian situation which justified 2003 invasion of Iraq under the pretext of “security maximization”. This explanation was given in pursuance of the realist assumption that States’ as rational actors always act in accordance with their national security interests.

    Read More

  • What Are The Three Types Of Political Realism?

    1875 Words  | 4 Pages

    Liberalism might seem like a great theory, but there are some downsides. Realist argue that they have not learned from their mistakes. The League of Nations and the PCIJS do very little to influence states behavior. These institutions that they create does not help create a balance of power. Also realist argue that these international institutions does not keep states safe. They mainly focus on commercial, financial, and environmental affairs. They do not do anything to maintain national security and that proposes a problem. Of course realist believe that national security the only thing that helps a nation survive. They believe that they can only count on themselves, not on any other state or institution to keep them safe. The last complaint about liberalism is that they turn policy into moral decisions while realist just do what is necessary for their state. Liberals believe that they have a responsibility to protect populations that are vulnerable. For example President Obama states, “Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries, The United States of America is different. And as President, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter

    Read More

  • Nuclear Issue in the North Korea from the Eyes of Neorealism and Neoliberalism

    2055 Words  | 5 Pages

    What neorealism believes is fear and distrust originated from the anarchy of international system, resulting in the pursuit of power for survival. As stated by Mearsheimer (2010), power is the currency of international politics. The statement addressed a simple but important question: “why do states want power?” While “human nature” is always claimed by the classical realism, the neorealists, or the structural realists such as Mearsheimer specified the structure or architecture of the international system which forces states to pursue power. All states desire sufficient power to protect th...

    Read More

  • Structural Realism after the Cold War

    984 Words  | 2 Pages

    The prominent scholar of Political Science, Kenneth N. Waltz, founder of neorealism, has proposed controversial realist theories in his work. Publications such as "Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis", "Theory of International Politics” and “The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate,” demonstrate how Waltz's approach was motivated by the American military power. In acquaintance of this fact, the purpose of this paper is to critically analyze Waltz theoretical argument from the journal "Structural Realism after the Cold War". Firstly, this paper will indicate the author's thesis and the arguments supporting it. Secondly, limitations found in theoretical arguments will be illustrated and thirdly, synergies between the author's thesis and this analysis will be exposed.

    Read More

  • Realism And Liberalism Research Paper

    1108 Words  | 3 Pages

    In conclusion realist and liberalist theories provide contrasting views on goals and instruments of international affairs. Each theory offers reasons why state and people behave the way they do when confronted with questions such as power, anarchy, state interests and the cause of war. Realists have a pessimistic view about human nature and they see international relations as driven by a states self preservation and suggest that the primary objective of every state is to promote its national interest and that power is gained through war or the threat of military action. Liberalism on the other hand has an optimistic view about human nature and focuses on democracy and individual rights and that economic independence is achieved through cooperation among states and power is gained through lasting alliances and state interdependence.

    Read More

  • Realism and the War on Terror

    529 Words  | 2 Pages

    Realist thought on international relations fit comfortably within the context of the great wars of the twentieth century. Powerful nations possessing massive military forces took aim at one another to affect the hierarchical structure of the international system for the good of their own security and power. These wars, however, differ greatly from today’s unconventional war on terrorism. Therefore, the realist theories of yesterday, while still useful, require at least some tweaking to fit the present situation.

    Read More

  • Offensive Neorealism Essay

    917 Words  | 2 Pages

    Both of these are international relations theories. International relations theories aid the individual in better understanding why states behave the way in which they do and “several major schools of thought are discernable, differentiated principally by the variables they emphasize” (Slaughter 1). That being said, to understand offensive neorealism, one must firstly be able to know the basis of realism in itself, as well as differentiate neorealism from neoclassical realism. Stephen G. Brooks argues in his article “Dueling Realisms” that both “neorealism and postclassical realism do share important similarities: both have a systemic focus; both are state-centric; both view international politics as inherently competitive; both emphasize material factors, rather than nonmaterial factors, such as ideas and institutions; and both assume states are egoistic actors that pursue self-help” (Brooks 446). Structural realism is another term for neorealism, and both will be used interchangeably in the following case study. Aside from these shared values that both reflect, the two forms of realism both present very different or conflicting views on state behaviour. For one, neorealists believe “the international system is defined by anarchy—the absence of a central authority” (Slaughter 2) and that states take action based on the possibility of conflict, always looking at a worst-case scenario, whereas postclassical realists believe that states make decisions and take actions based on the probability of an attack or act of aggression from other states (Brooks 446). To expand on neorealism’s possibility outlook, Kenneth Waltz argues, “in the absence of a supreme authority [due to anarchy], there is then constant possibility that conflicts will be settled by force” (Brooks 447). Neorealists look at the possibility of conflict due to the potential cost of war, due to

    Read More

  • The Effect of Diplomacy on the Rise of the Modern State

    1795 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...end the thirty years of war by the treaty of Westphalia that had brought peace for many years and had transformed states structures. It was also used by French diplomats in order to cover the deficit of French economy, diplomatic efforts were made to raise capital overseas through trade to rebuild its economy. This important function will continue to develop in Europe. Furthermore, diplomatic effort was used upon Russia in order to obtain the authorization for American ships to sail in their Black sea, and also to maintain tied relationship with them in order to promote the trade. It also was the ideal element used by Adams to free ships seized by Danish as well as by French and British.

    Read More

  • Understanding International Relations

    1517 Words  | 4 Pages

    The liberalism and the realism approaches the international relations from very different perspective, and even though many of its views contrast from each other, the ...

    Read More

  • The Strengths Of Classical Realism In International Relations

    1600 Words  | 4 Pages

    Classical realism originates from the ancient times of the Greek empires. This theory in international relations has dominated the sphere and the conception of world politics for centuries. Classical realists such as Morgenthau and Thucydides outline different factors in explaining politics at all levels and emphasize that politics is described throughout the theory of classical realism. Like every theory in international relations, classical realism has strengths and weaknesses that define its impact in the international level. In our current age of diplomacy, classical realism is not a common theory in current international politics. Although it is not as relevant as it has been in the past, there is potential for classical

    Read More

  • Political Realism

    2261 Words  | 5 Pages

    People’s ideas and assumptions about world politics shape and construct the theories that help explain world conflicts and events. These assumptions can be classified into various known theoretical perspectives; the most dominant is political realism. Political realism is the most common theoretical approach when it is in means of foreign policy and international issues. It is known as “realpolitik” and emphasis that the most important actor in global politics is the state, which pursues self-interests, security, and growing power (Ray and Kaarbo 3). Realists generally suggest that interstate cooperation is severely limited by each state’s need to guarantee its own security in a global condition of anarchy. Political realist view international politics as a struggle for power dominated by organized violence, “All history shows that nations active in international politics are continuously preparing for, actively involved in, or recovering from organized violence in the form of war” (Kegley 94). The downside of the political realist perspective is that their emphasis on power and self-interest is their skepticism regarding the relevance of ethical norms to relations among states.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Brexit

    886 Words  | 2 Pages

    Regarding Brexit, realism and liberalism have different viewpoints. Particularly, since realism claims that a state’s ultimate goal is power, realism suggests that

    Read More

  • The Realist Approach to International Relations

    982 Words  | 2 Pages

    To conclude, there are four main components of the realist approach to international relations, they are: state which includes egoism as the states are composed by the selfish people, self-help which includes balance of power as power is used to enhance the survival rate, survival which includes hegemony in order to maintain its position and anarchical system which related to lust for power and led to security dilemma.

    Read More

  • Realism During the 1994 Rwanda Genocide

    1226 Words  | 3 Pages

    All branches of realism share some central tenets. Realists believe that the world exists in a state of anarchy. Since there is not a world government to keep states from attacking each other, or to punish them when they do, it becomes very important for each government to be able to protect itself and ensure its survival. It is also why states are considered the most important actors in realism. Due to the anarchy, the world operates in power is extremely important. If a state has military power, and to a lesser extent economic power, they are able to defend themselves and even influence other states. Realism stresses the importance of one state being more powerful than its competitors.

    Read More

More about International Relations Case Study

Open Document