Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Realism and liberalism theory in international relations
Realism and liberalism theory in international relations
Political effects of the cold war
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed and in its wake there were a flood of essays from political scientists around the world. The general theme of the essays was the fall of the Soviet Union would usher in a new age of peace and prosperity that the world had never known before. However, the events that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union were the exact opposite . There was an increased need to restore political order in countries around the world, promote human rights and pacify conflict zones. The chaotic times after the Cold War revealed something that was missing from leading realist and liberal theory that had defined the international relations debate. What was missing was the historical and cultural context. Liberal and realist theory only used generalizations about states at the core of their arguments. These sweeping generalizations no longer adequately described the new world and new questions began to surface about how states transition from peace to conflict. These questions would later turn into a more quintessential question; how does change occur? Martha Finnemore , in her essay, International norm dynamics and political change, makes the argument that change is actually a gradual process and is based off developing norms. In her paper she describes how norms have a three stage life cycle. The first stage is known as stage emergence. This is where a norm entrepreneur uses organizational platforms to promote new norms. The next stage is norm cascade where the norm becomes institutionalized by organizations and the states. This phase is essentially unpredictable and difficult to identify. The final phase is where the norm is accepted by the international community and is no longer questioned (Finnmore894). My...
... middle of paper ...
...ganization . 52.4 (1998): pp 887-917. Web. 26 Mar. 2013.
Finnemore, Martha . "Constructing norms of humanitarian intervention." the culture of national security . n. page. Print
Gowan, Richard. 2011. “Floating Down the River of History: Ban Ki---moon and Peacekeeping, 2007-2011.” Global Governance 17(4): 399-416.
Traub, James. The Best Intentions . New York, NY: Farrar,Straus,Girux, 2006. Print.
Annan, Kofi. The United Nations . Office of the Secretary General . In Larger Freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all. . New York, NY: , 2005. Print.
Dunne, Tim, Milja Kurki, and Steve Smith. International Relations Theories . 2nd. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2010. 178-194. Print.
United Nations. The United Nations Mission in Côte d'Ivoire. Backround. he Peace and Security Section of the Department of Public Information , 2004. Web.
United Nations. Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide. Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide. New York: , 2010. Web. .
"Peacekeeping and Peacemaking." Reading and Remembrance . N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Jan. 2014. . (tags: none | edit tags)
New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Shiraev, Eric B., and Vladislav M. Zubok. International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. Silver, Larry.
Edkins, Jenny, and Maja Zehfuss. Global Politics: A New Introduction. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.
Mearsheimer J. J. (2010). Structural Realism. International Relations Thoeries, Discipline and Diversity (Second Edition), p.77-94
Frieden, Jeffry A., David A. Lake, and Kenneth A. Schultz. World Politics. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2013. Print.
The international system is a complex and constantly changing realm that requires assistance to understand. Theory helps to simplify this by providing a lens to look at the world through. Realism is the political theory that provides the best explanation for why actors in the system interact the way that they do. With a focus on the blood side of the system rather than the money side, acts of aggression make more sense with this outlook. Power is pivotal in this theory as it is the defining factor for what actions a state can perform. This theory has seven assumptions that it uses to describe, explain, and predict the outcome of situations that occur in the system.
However, as the nature of conflict changes and the international system edges towards a global society based on interdependence, some argue that this traditional notion must be updated. Tony Blair, for example, called for sovereignty to be “reconceptualised” (Bellamy, 2009; p.25). This is most likely due to the rise of humanitarian crises and the UN’s growing role in intervention. With global media coverage, it is harder for governments to ignore the will of the people, and public pressure to intervene in said crises. Therefore, humanitarian intervention is being viewed more as a responsibility than an option. The current system cannot effectively deal with this, as the debates over the violation of traditional sovereignty slow the process. As Lu says (2006; p. 81) “Critical opportunities to engage in preventive and non military actions, before a crisis explodes or escalates to the level of mass atrocity, are missed when the concepts of intervention and the use of force are conflated”. The problem of sovereignty blocks the UN from completing its mandate of “maintaining international peace and security”. Moreover, Kofi Annan points out that state sovereignty must not replace human rights: “the Charter protects the sovereignty of peoples… Sovereignty implies responsibility, not just power.” (Bellamy 2009; p. 28) Again we are reminded that governments should be
Whenever world politics is mentioned, the state that appears to be at the apex of affairs is the United States of America, although some will argue that it isn’t. It is paramount we know that the international system is shaped by certain defining events that has lead to some significant changes, particularly those connected with different chapters of violence. Certainly, the world wars of the twentieth century and the more recent war on terror must be included as defining moments. The warning of brute force on a potentially large scale also highlights the vigorousness of the cold war period, which dominated world politics within an interval of four decades. The practice of international relations (IR) was introduced out of a need to discuss the causes of war and the different conditions for calm in the wake of the first world war, and it is relevant we know that this has remained a crucial focus ever since. However, violence is not the only factor capable of causing interruption in the international system. Economic elements also have a remarkable impact. The great depression that happened in the 1920s, and the global financial crises of the contemporary period can be used as examples. Another concurrent problem concerns the environment, with the human climate being one among different number of important concerns for the continuing future of humankind and the planet in general.
Donnelly, J. (2005). Realism. In A. L.-S. Scott Burchill, Theories of international relations (3rd ed., pp. 29-54). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
The study of International Organizations falls in the realm of International Relations theory. As a relatively new field, International Relations (IR) theory is difficult to define. It is often taught as a theory that seeks both to explain past state behavior and to predict future state behavior. To my understanding, International Relations attempts to explain the interactions of states in the global interstate system, and it also attempts to explain the interactions of others whose behavior originates within one country and is targeted toward members of other countries. In short, the study of International Relations is an attempt to explain behavior that occurs across the boundaries of states,
The study of international relations takes a wide range of theoretical approaches. Some emerge from within the discipline itself others have been imported, in whole or in part, from disciplines such as economics or sociology. Indeed, few social scientific theories have not been applied to the study of relations amongst nations. Many theories of international relations are internally and externally contested, and few scholars believe only in one or another. In spite of this diversity, several major schools of thought are discernable, differentiated principally by the variables they emphasize on military power, material interests, or ideological beliefs. International Relations thinking have evolved in stages that are marked by specific debates between groups of scholars. The first major debate is between utopian liberalism and realism, the second debate is on method, between traditional approaches and behavioralism. The third debate is between neorealism/neoliberalism and neo-Marxism, and an emerging fourth debate is between established traditions and post-positivist alternatives (Jackson, 2007).
Baylis, Smith and Patricia Owens. 2014. The globalization of World Politics: An introduction to international relations. London. Oxford University Press.
Fifty-one countries established the United Nations also known as the UN on October 24, 1945 with the intentions of preserving peace through international cooperation and collective security. Over the years the UN has grown in numbers to include 185 countries, thus making the organization and its family of agencies the largest in an effort to promote world stability. Since 1954 the UN and its organizations have received the Nobel Peace Prize on 5 separate occasions. The first in 1954 awarded to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, for its assistance to refugees, and finally in 1988 to the United Nations Peace-keeping Forces, for its peace-keeping operations. As you can see, the United Nations efforts have not gone without notice.
For the most part of second half of twentieth century, realist mode of thinking had dominated the discipline of international relations (IR), at least in the United States. Scholars and diplomats such as Hans Morgenthau and Henry Kissinger steered US foreign policy towards a state centric realist ‘highway’. The main signposts on that highway, among many others, were anarchy, national security, sovereignty and power politics. However, in 1960s, realism came under attack for its lack of scientific vigor. In response to their critics, neo-realists attempted to develop their methodology on a truly ‘positivist’ grounds to account for an objective and universal ‘science’ of IR (Tickner, 1992; 11). In the subsequent decades, realist ideology, along with its dominant positivist methodology, was confronted by multiple schools of thought. Notable among these are, liberal institutionalism, Marxism, constructivism and Critical theory of Frankfort School. The particular ‘voices of dissent’ (George & Campbell, 1990; 269) under consideration in this paper, however, are postmodern and feminist responses to mainstream realist and liberal IR theory. In the light of post-structural and feminist insights to social theory and knowledge construction, the paper endeavors to build on the thesis that mainstream IR has been narrowly defined and contested by the dominant players of the field. In carrying out this narrowly defined ‘modernist’ project, it is argued here that mainstream IR has excluded multiplicity of voices and issues. Furthermore, these voices and issues not only have the potential to bring their unique insights to IR, but are also sensitive to changes in international affairs. The second part of argument flows naturally from the first prep...