In Kautilya’s own words, “Strength is power, and happiness is the end.” However, power is not constant at all times and thus, the Mandala Model assumes, that any two kings, whose territories are geographically contiguous, are natural enemies of one another. Although, this model bestows a high degree of theoretical sophistication and as per the Realist School of thought precedes Machiavelli’s philosophy, it does present an ideal representation of the contemporary international system. Since, it presumes a nation state to be unstable, conceivably self-destructive in the long run, as the system is in a constant state of conflict and there is no equilibrium, i.e. state of cooperation. The main focus of this paper is to highlight the Kautilya’s Madala Model in the existing geo-political scenario and its application as the model emphasizes on relative power in the international system.
In the first example, Pakistan is the Vijigishu and the main states that constitute the various elements in Pakistan’s Mandala i.e. enemy, ally, middle king and neutral king are discussed below, with justification and evidence. In the context of Pakistan’s bordering, the other states with contiguous borders are Iran, Afghanistan and China, although relatively do not share the same stature as India. India and Pakistan were born out of their independence from British colonial rule in 1947, with similar cultural, historic origin, and contiguous territories, India is identified as Pakistan’s natural enemy as prescribed by Kautilya.
Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 was the direct military confrontation between India and Pakistan during the Bangladesh Liberation War, India’s dominance in the military, political and economic realm since has been indisputable. In an ...
... middle of paper ...
...utral, and portrays Iran to be a military threat to vital interest in the Gulf, however the gulf leader focus on ideological difference and perceived political threats .
The analysis of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia within the current geopolitical scenario using Kautiliya’s Mandala Model proves that any two kings, whose territories are geographically contiguous, are natural enemies of one another. Also, ‘the pathological need for power’ as proposed by the Realist School of thought is substantiated through the examples. The struggle connotes instability and conflict within the system, inter-state alliances reveal inherent tensions and opportunities that accompany the choices exercised by states such as ‘double policy’, ‘war’, ‘peace’ etc. the case study aims to illustrate the contemporary international system and highlights the applicability of Kautiliya’s Mandala model.
In the novel War and Peace In the Middle East, author Avi Shlaim argues that Arab nations have been unable to escape the post-Ottoman syndrome. In particular he describes how the various powers inside and outside the region have failed to produce peace. While some of Shlaim's arguments hinder the message, I agree with his overall thesis that the Middle East problems were caused and prolonged by the failure of both powers and superpowers to take into account the regional interests of the local states.
Political Analysis Political analysis is the method by which the judgement upon any political event, in any part of the world, is performed. It is based on the perception of the political reality of the region or the country in question and the perception of the relationship of this political reality with international politics. In order to perceive the international situation and international politics, it is imperative to have general outlines that explain the political reality of every state and the relationships of these states with the other states of the world, especially the major powers that influence the progress of events in the world. Since the Islamic Ummah is commanded to carry the Islamic Da'wah to all people, it is therefore obligatory upon the Muslims to be in touch with the world with awareness of its conditions and perception of its problems. The Muslims must acquaint themselves with what motivates the states and the peoples and pursue the political actions that occur in the world.
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.
...dens the understanding of international relations and correspondingly broadens the understanding of security. Built on Thayer’s and Waltz’s theory, the paper suggests that structure of the international system is central to international security and to achieve peace, suitable strategies are necessary to balance the power relations. While it should not be ignored that the Evolution theory still falls within realism realm with many other forms of complex security problems unexplained.
Edin, Peter. "1947 the Birth of India & Pakistan." New York Times Up Front. 30 Jan 2012: 16-
The purpose of this essay is to inform on the similarities and differences between systemic and domestic causes of war. According to World Politics by Jeffry Frieden, David Lake, and Kenneth Schultz, systemic causes deal with states that are unitary actors and their interactions with one another. It can deal with a state’s position within international organizations and also their relationships with other states. In contract, domestic causes of war pertain specifically to what goes on internally and factors within a state that may lead to war. Wars that occur between two or more states due to systemic and domestic causes are referred to as interstate wars.
War is a universal phenomenon, it is a violent tool people use to accomplish their interests. It is not autonomous, rather policy always determines its character. Normally it starts when diplomacy fails to reach a peaceful end. War is not an end rather than a mean to reach the end, however, it does not end, and it only rests in preparation for better conditions. It is a simple and dynamic act with difficult and unstable factors which make it unpredictable and complex. It is a resistant environment where the simplest act is difficult to perform. In this paper, I will argue why war is a universal phenomenon and what are the implications of my argument to strategists.
The first paradigm of international relations is the theory of Realism. Realism is focused on ideas of self-interest and the balance of power. Realism is also divided into two categories, classical realism and neo-realism. Famous political theorist, Hans Morgenthau was a classical realist who believed that national interest was based on three elements, balance of power, military force, and self interest (Kleinberg 2010, 32). He uses four levels of analysis to evaluate the power of a state. The first is that power and influence are not always the same thing. Influence means the ability to affect the decision of those who have the power to control outcomes and power is the ability to determine outcomes. An example of influence and power would be the UN’s ability to influence the actions of states within the UN but the state itself has the power to determine how they act. Morgenthau goes on to his next level of analysis in which he explains the difference in force and power in the international realm. Force is physical violence, the use of military power but power is so much more than that. A powerful state can control the actions of another state with the threat of force but not actually need to physical force. He believed that the ability to have power over another state simply with the threat of force was likely to be the most important element in analysis the power of as state (Kleinberg 2010, 33-34).
...e power with which powerful states can rule the weak preserving their status as a regional and global hegemony. Finally, it is incorporated the democratic system. Although debatable for some people, democracy serves to spread the altruistic and moralistic rhetoric of a free and peaceful world. Additionally, Western states do not hesitate about the rice of new powerful nations or the threats of the mass destruction weapons, they are constantly monitoring their menaces and evaluating what is the most accurate strategy to maintain at least the status quo in this respect. The Western states need the realist approach in order to be well prepared to cope with any threat. In a final conclusion, all of these reasons have been assimilated by Western states in order to restructure a strategic doctrines with the purposes of counteract any possible threat before they emerge.
The most threatening conflict between Hindus and Muslims is the province of Kashmir. This is where the decision to divide India into India and Pakistan seems to have been a terrible mistake. Kashmir, which is the only Muslim majority city in India, lies between the divided India and Pakistan. After India’s independence in the 1940’s, Kashmir had to choose to either unite with India or Pakistan. The Prince of Kashmir chose India but Pakistan invaded the province soon after and have occupied part of Kashmir since then. Controversy still surrounds the province today because naturally, Muslims want to control it. While many Muslims relocated to Pakistan and the Hindus to India, half of the Muslim population was left in India and their relations did not improve after being partially separated.
"1971- Independence War of Bangladesh." Bangla2000 - The Largest Portal of Bangladesh. Bangla2000. Web. 03 Feb. 2012. .
... will continue to use a variety of means to promote regional security and stability [in the Gulf], working with our friends and allies,”. But it “will remain prepared to defend vital U.S. interests in the region— unilaterally if necessary ”.
The international system is an anarchical system which means that, unlike the states, there is no over ruling, governing body that enforces laws and regulations that all states must abide by. The International System in today’s society has become highly influential from a number of significant factors. Some of these factors that will be discussed are Power held by the state, major Wars that have been fought out in recent history and international organisations such as the U.N, NATO and the W.T.O. Each of these factors, have a great influence over the international system and as a result, the states abilities to “freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development”.
All living things need the resources provided by our natural world to live, leading to them adapting to specific environments. Animals in particular are mobile creatures that move from place to place searching for the best environments for their survival. The most intelligent creatures in our animal world are human beings and like other animals, they moved from place to place while organized into races in search of the elusive desirable environments. However, there is always the likelihood of finding fellow humanity already thriving in that environment. This resulted to conflict as competition for the inadequate resources arose. Consequently, human beings formed nations, allegiance to the national system meant loyalty to the governance, and regions and they formed military groups to defend their resources. However, the military warfare has changed with international understanding, though the idea still rests heavily on fight for resources. Further, international politics illustrates the causes and effects of modern military war have changed due to chan...
Pakistan is the basis in the international fight against terrorism to this day. Many Pakistani terrorist groups have made many terrorist attacks around the world. Pakistan faced the choice siding with or staying against the United States during the aftermath of 9/11. Violence in Pakistan has increased for many years as terrorist groups have targeted many political leaders, tribal leaders, the military, and also schools. Pakistan is divided into people who see the country as modern and/o...