Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Character of international law
Character of international law
Enforcement of international law
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Shortcomings of International Regimes International regimes are overloaded with high expectations to address rising conflicts caused by major actors in international relations. Their relative universality in comparison to domestic governance leads to state dependence on international organizations, law, and norms to combat the surmountable power of major actors to shape world politics. Although regimes possess the potential to shape the actions of and constrain major actors in international politics, they are limited in their ability to truly do so. The shortcoming of their power lies in the inability to enforce established agendas and the lack of tangible incentives for nations to comply with the standards and regulations that such agendas would impose. Although there are benefits for major states to comply with international regimes, such as adding legitimacy to their actions or the payoffs of international cooperation, inevitably there are times when the benefits of noncompliance outweigh those of collaboration in the eyes of the acting state. Whether it be to advance an agenda that is widely criticized by these international norms and laws, or to protect themselves from threats to their own sovereignty, major actors specifically have the ability to make decisions outside of the realm of regimes. As demonstrated in current global affairs, they take advantage of this power frequently. Thus, international regimes have limited power in constraining major actors in international politics. The prospective capabilities of regimes appear potent, but do not viably extend to the major actors in international relations. John Mearsheimer discusses the theory of liberal institutionalism in his paper “The False Promise of Internation... ... middle of paper ... ...laws and norms evolve naturally with the balance of power. Effectively, regimes do not fulfill their promise to coerce major actors in the realm of international relations. Word Count: 1,499 Works Cited Herzenhorn, Mark Landler. “With Military Moves Seen in Ukraine, Obama Warns Russia.” The New York Times 28 Feb. 2014: Print. Hoffmann, Stanley. “The Uses and Limits of International Law.” 146-51. Web. Keohane, Robert. “International Institutions: Can Interdependence Work?” 151-58. Web. Mearsheimer, John J. “The False Promise of International Institutions.” Essential Readings in World Politics. 5th ed. W.W. Norton, 2014. 355–66. Print. Smale, Allison. “Russia Is Ousted From Group of 8 by U.S. and Allies.” The New York Times 24 Mar. 2014: Print. Stack, Liam. “Dozens Reportedly Arrested in Nigeria Amid Antigay Crackdown.” The New York Times 14 Jan. 2014.
In my paper "The undone change of American Foreign Policy after the Cold War" I addressed the inability of the U.S. institutions to meet the newly created challenges of the post-Cold War world. I argued that due to a lack of leadership, especially by the President, the opportunity to "reconfigure" U.S. foreign policy institutions; supported by an absent corresponding ideology; the U.S. had missed its chance to change its foreign policy in the post-Cold War world.
The establishment of the discipline’s discourse did not firmly cement its foundational concepts. As such, various forms, such as the balance between great powers and super power, appeared and further fractured its theoretical base. Jack S. Levy (2004) writes that “some say a balance of power helps maintain the peace; others say it contributes to the onset of wa...
Mearsheimer J. J. (2010). Structural Realism. International Relations Thoeries, Discipline and Diversity (Second Edition), p.77-94
Wendt, Alexander. “Constructing International Politics.” International Security. Cambridge: President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1995. 71-81. Print.
Tarrow, Sidney. “Transnational Politics: Contention and Institutions in International Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science, 2001.4.
" Journal of International Affairs 52.2 (1999): 691. Academic Search Elite -. Web. The Web. The Web.
Frieden, Jeffry A., David A. Lake, and Kenneth A. Schultz. World Politics. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2013. Print.
Balaam, David. Introduction to International Political Economy, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Pearson Education, 2005.
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.
Navalny, Alexey A. 2014. How to Punish Putin. NY : The New York Times, 2014.
Mingst, K. (2011). Essentials of international relations. (5th ed., p. 70-1). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company
Globalization and the increasing role of non-state actors have shifted the position of states, the traditional “main players” in global governance. However, whether this change undermines states is debatable. In one sense, states’ roles have somewhat diminished: Non-governmental entities – namely transnational corporations (TNC), but also global non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and others – have an increasing voice in global policy debates, which may lessen states’ influence in governmental affairs. But in several other key ways, states’ retain their powerful role. For example, states remain the key negotiators and entities in major global governance entities. Additionally, states retain compulsory power over their subjects or constituents, a form of control that new players in global governments have generally not obtained.
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”.
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).
However, Hedley Bull, in his most famous analysis ‘The Anarchical Society’, rebuts these realist criticisms, writing about the primacy of International Law and insists that it is a ‘negligible factor in the actual conduct of international relations’ alongside the fact that states ‘so often judge it in their interests to conform to it’. This directly opposes the idea that realists put forward, as it suggests that states are actually inclined to adhere to international law, and it is crucial to the success of it. Although there is an element of truth in realists’ analyses, it is not to the extent of which realists contend and it should be noted that they fail to acknowledge the fact that the favourable conditions order would bring serves an incentive for states to cooperate within the realms of an international society. Furthermore, realist critiques do not actually deny the existence of an international society, but there critiques revolve around an evaluation of its effectiveness. Opposing the popular conception of neo-realists that the current political climate consists of an anarchical system with all else following from this by chance, therefore assuming that it is a contingent, is Brown’s emphasis on there being ‘a reason we have and need an international society’: to achieve a good amongst all states. This is shown by international organisations such as the European Union and United Nations, the latter of which has the ability to impose sanctions and other punishments on states if it does not adhere to international laws. The United Nations mandate explains how it seeks to ‘save succeeding generations from the scourge of war’, as it was initially born out of the League of Nations which was set up after the end of World Wa...