In this essay, am going to covering why power is the most important factor in international relations, and why power has changed throughout the years, is power or isn’t power the primary factor in international relations? There are several ways that power can be defined, it cannot be categorised in one area, as power is defined in many aspects. When discussing power in terms of international relations, this concept is described as very complicated as many aspects need to be considered. One definition of power in IR is one actor exerting influence over another, this is also known as hard power, or power can be described as having the most control over resources for example oil, gold or food. From another point of view power can be described as something which a state possess which another do not in terms of wealth, knowledge etc. There are many ways power can be obtained, the most significant of these manly include military size and effectiveness, size of the state, technological advancements and its wealth. States would these criteria would be regarded as a ‘superpower’. The importance of power capability has changed throughout history, with one being more important than the other. For example with the US having very advanced military power, compared to china with their technological advancement and being economical stable. The concept of power is primarily used by realist thinkers like Machiavelli and Morgenthau. Machiavelli was known as more of an extremist realist with his famous quote from the prince “it’s better to be feared then to be loved”. Political theorist like Machiavelli believed that power was the most important thing realism theory emphasis that moralist most put aside. The realism few on power, is based on state versus state relationship, in that their is no overarching power in the world. Also the realism theory states that as a result of not having a world government state seek to protect their own interest against neighbouring or rival states. Realism is centred around military power also known as hard power. However on the other hand liberalist believe that co-operation interaction between states is a much more effective means then military threat. Soft power allows states to come to a compromise, both in a ‘win-win’ situation. An example of this is Iran coming to a compromise with the United States on the issue of nuclear weapon. With both countries being rational and open-minded, allowing for life being saved if a war had broken out.
In an earlier century, Niccoló Machiavelli, wrote a document called, “The Prince.” This book was about what it takes to be a successful ruler, and the number one rule of course was: “Power is Everything.” How you acquire the power made no difference as long as you had it. Many people repulsed Machiavelli’s idea of power at all costs, but it would soon be the basis of the government in some countries.
The meaning of “power” to Machiavelli is the ability to eliminate threats and opposition to that power effectively. Machiavelli’s Prince demands power in the sense that it represents absolute authority over the state. Socrates gained significant influence over the community by teaching the youth his questioning methods, which he used to question authority. The political figures ended up exposing themselves, which proved Socrates’ argument. By doing so, Socrates gained followers of the community and continued to expose the political corruption resulting in hatred by the political elite (Plato, 2003
In conclusion, the concept of power is something that has been around for as long as there have been people. And it will continue to be a part of society for as long as people
The debate between hard and soft power first emerged when Joseph Nye introduced the concept of soft power through his criticisms on declinist theories. Soft power was initially popularised in the early 1990s, however its roots date back to the 1980s when Nye criticised declinists and their analysis on the downturn of US relative power. (Zahran, Ramos, 2010, p. 13) Soft power in Nye’s beliefs is in opposition to hard power and describes it as: “The ability to make others want what you want.” (Zahran, Ramos, 2010, p. 13) Soft power relies on culture, ideologies, and institutions to attract supporters and power. In contrast, hard power uses a much more aggressive method and engages through incentives or threats that are usually correlated to
While the definition of power is a point of contention among scholars such as Morgenthau and Waltz, there is a general agreeance that power in an international sense is the ability to coerce a decision based on the political, military or economic clout a nation is able to exert onto another. By this definition the Cold War era of human history is one of the most prevalent examples of both economic and political power (referred too as “Hard” power) as well as cultural influence as a form of power (known instead as “soft” power). In the post-World War 2 era the balance of power theory played a major role in the international relations between the two superpowers, being the United States of America and The USSR through constant volleying of
The dynamics of the post-cold war global situation has cause a shift in the perception of threat, which was originally oriented to be a military threat, becomes multi-dimensional threat that includes aspects of political, economic, social and cultural, which then led to revolution in the nature of security. Besides that, with the risen of terrorism activities that began a few years ago as part of changes in generation warfare, many states has change their concept of security in order to protect and secure their nation. In short, security becomes national interest and scholars start to make another adjustment or changes on the concept of security. The changes was originally more state-centered security becomes people-centered security.
The idea of power has changed since then as well, with power relying on many different aspects and not as a mercantilist view of the 16th 17th 18th and 19th century, and therefore could be weighed with different forms of exertion of power such as the modern day economy, or military, or even soft power politics.
According the Manuel Castells, "power is the structural capacity of a social actor to impose over other social actors" and throughout history we see that there will always be a counter power that goes against this power. In Littl...
In Morgenthau’s “Politics among Nation’s”, his main point is that survival is a national interest, and survival comes from power; therefore, the national interest is power. Morgenthau further mentions the balance of power which means that if states were to strive for more and more power, then they will get further away from their goal of survival. Morgenthau has even said, “…that the balance of power and policies aiming at its preservation are not only inevitable but are an essential stabilizing factor ill a society of sovereign nations..”. Morgenthau is saying that the balance of power is crucial for the survival of these nation states. Morgenthau also mentions an equilibrium in order to talk about the balancing of powers. Morgenthau said “that without a state of equilibrium among them one element will gain ascendancy over the others, encroach upon their interests and rights, and may ultimately destroy them.” This is exactly what defensive realists are all about, that if a state receives too much power, the system is ultimately going to try and balance themselves out and will most likely lead to conflict or war. Morgenthau also mentions how power and social life are connected, he almost has a constructivist approach (conflict or cooperation based on one’s social/historical norms) to it. Morgenthau thought that social norms about order and power will either result in conflict if the norms are weak or cooperation if the norms are strong. For example, we can relate this to the game stag hunt as an analogy, Morgenthau would agree that if there is a way for two states to cooperate, they will ultimately get the best outcome. He would say a close community will want to help others and cooperating is in everybody’s interest. Morgenthau argues that if the international system has a strong sense of community then the balance of power will keep peace. Without a strong knit community, the
Power has been defined as the psychological relations over another to get them to do what you want them to do. We are exposed to forms of power from the time of birth. Our parents exercise power over us to behave in a way they deem appropriate. In school, teachers use their power to help us learn. When we enter the work world the power of our boss motivates us to perform and desire to move up the corporate ladder so that we too can intimidate someone with power one day. In Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness Kurtz had a power over the jungle and its people that was inexplicable.
Power is implied in the very essence of Machiavelli’s writing. It is tied in with the greed,
Realism by definition is an approach to global politics derived from the tradition of power politics and belief that behavior is determined by the search for and distribution of power. [5] By using the concept of power it is easy to discuss basics of realism. Realist theories are based of beliefs that states are motivated by aggressive or defensive urges, the national interest is survival and states are unitary actors each moving towards their own national interest.[4] The first key feature of realism is statism. Statism is an idea that the state is an accurate representative of the will of its people.[4] The state is sovereign and therefore is able to govern itself as it wants. With this sovereignty that state is able to institute security. After a state has established security it is then able to continue with a communal culture. In international relationships however sovereignty does not supply security therefore a state must vie with its neighboring states to accomplish it. This can lead to a power struggle to ensure that state’s people can live in security.[5] A second key point of realism is survival. Survival to realists is rather simple; the state with the most power stands a better likelihood of survival. Naturally it is believed that survival is the definitive objective of realism. To guarantee survival a state may stray from their set of ethics because it cannot worry about moral issues. If state were to hold onto its set of beliefs, it may suffer at the expense of a more powerful state. In realism cases there are two conflicting segments, defensive and offensive realists.[5] A state with a defensive realist perspective believes they must obtain enough power to ensure security, but not so much power that their security...
Power is one of the key concepts in the great Western tradition. It is at the same time, a concept on analytical levels, and a notable lack of agreement. It is the ability to influence or control the behavior of people. With a political power, you have the ability, an ability held by individuals and groups in a society that allows them to create policies. Political power controls political behavior of others, to lead and guide their behavior in the direction desired. But can power also mean having a sense of liberty? Liberty is the independence and freedom from physical restraint and force. It is also a concept that protects all individuals, frees man, and protects the state. These are significant topics, so what is the relationship between
By Rishana Balkisson Mark Simpson looks at the evolution of international relations as a study and the methods that scholars have over the decades used to study I.R. Judging from this analysis, does International Relations have any relevance in the 21st century? Justify your answer to the question. We are now living in the 21st century, our world has been through two major world wars and we are still fighting many wars and battles. It has been found that many countries come together as a team and then end their relationships with blood in their hands.
Economic gain, the main concern of states proved to be a barrier to international cooperation. Game theory uses the Prisoners Dilemma game to illustrate, isolate and analyse the rational decision-making processes involved in co-operation to reduce the possibilities for cheating and free-riding. In 2009, the Obama administration announced that the misile defense system in Europe which Russia disapproved of will come to an end, this was viewed by many as a way to attract the Russian support for santions against the nuclear program in Iran (Goldstein & Pevehouse, 2007:87).