Theories of I.R-2


Published on

Lecture 2 Slides.

  • Be the first to comment

Theories of I.R-2

  2. 3. Meanings of IR <ul><li>The term ‘international’ was first used by Jeromy Bentham in the later part of eighteenth century, with regards the law of nations. </li></ul><ul><li>Consequently, the term international relations was used to define the official relations between the nation-states </li></ul>
  3. 4. <ul><li>Two views regarding the meaning of IR </li></ul><ul><li>Narrow view: international relations are “the official relations conducted by the authorized leaders of the state </li></ul><ul><li>Broader view : official and unofficial relations by official and unofficial organizations fall within the domains of international relations </li></ul>
  4. 5. <ul><li>Other Views </li></ul><ul><li>K.J Holsti “It is not only the nations which international relations may refer to all forms of interactions between the members of separate societies, whether government sponsored or not </li></ul>
  5. 6. <ul><li>Quincy Wright , “ It is not only the nations which international relations seek to regulate ----- </li></ul><ul><li>Varied types of groups--- nations, states, governments, people, regions, alliances, confederations, international organizations, cultural organizations, religious organizations must be dealt with in the study of international relations, if the treatment is made realistic </li></ul>
  6. 7. <ul><li>“ International relations is the discipline, which tries to explain political activities across states boundaries and, to date, it has been chiefly concerned with the political relations between government the official representatives of states </li></ul>
  7. 8. <ul><li>Stanley Hoffmann , the discipline of international relations is concerned with the factors and activities, which affect the external policies and the power of basic units into which the world is divided </li></ul>
  8. 9. <ul><li>Trygue Mathiesen says, “it embraces all kinds of relations traversing state boundaries , no matter whether they are of an economic, legal, political or any other character, whether they be private or official, and all human behavior originating on one side of a state boundary and affecting human behavior on the other side of boundary </li></ul>
  9. 10. <ul><li>According to Theodore A. Couloumbis & James H. Wolfe “ It is not only a distant field of study, but it also include international theory, comparative foreign policy analysis, international organizations comparative politics and regional studies strategic studies, international development, international communications, peace studies and conflict resolutions including arms control and disarmament </li></ul>
  10. 11. <ul><li>In summary ; the IR, includes; a wide variety of transnational relation , official and unofficial , formal & informal </li></ul>
  11. 12. EVALUATIONARY PHASES OF IR <ul><li>Historical phase ; how the present had been formed from the past. Legalistic phase, nation states increasingly implicated in a complex set of rules </li></ul><ul><li>Organizational Phase ; foundation of IR & ordering the world through international institutions like; League of Nations after WW-I </li></ul><ul><li>Great Power Interplay Phase ; Military strategy came into being –disastrous stage birth of UNO after WW-II </li></ul>
  12. 13. <ul><li>Cold War Phase ; Controversies over the Ideologies in world politics & appearance of bi-polarism; idealism & realism of nation- state’s power dominated </li></ul><ul><li>Sanitized Realism phase ; autonomy of state actors & their max role in the name of National interest. Traditionalism prevailed in academic IR </li></ul>
  13. 14. <ul><li>Scientific Thinking Phase ; Replaced both classical & traditional orientation by scientific method, behaviouralists played </li></ul><ul><li>Post-behavioural Phase ; Peace & world order got central position. Institutionalization of new field of IR; International Political Economy </li></ul>
  14. 15. International Relations & International Politics <ul><li>An interchangeable Term; EH carr & Quincy Wright </li></ul><ul><li>IR has wider scope than intl Politics; John Hanessian, Spiro etc </li></ul><ul><li>IR is Primarily used to describe official Political relations between govts on behalf of states </li></ul>
  15. 16. <ul><li>Intl Politics is not conducted between or among nations </li></ul><ul><li>Padefold & Lincoln: IR & intl politics are two different aspects </li></ul>
  16. 17. Scope of IR <ul><li>Pre WW-I ; Study of Diplomatic History & Contemporary International Affairs </li></ul><ul><li>Post WW-II ; International Law, International Institutions & Organizations </li></ul><ul><li>Pre WW-II – War as an instrument of state craft & Global system of collective security </li></ul>
  17. 18. <ul><li>Post WW-II; Enhancement in the Political & economic aspects of IR </li></ul><ul><li>Current Scope of IR ; Diplomatic Theory, International Principles, National Interest, Foreign Policy, International Affairs, International Law, International Institutions, Etc </li></ul>
  18. 19. Five Ingredients of IR <ul><li>Nature and operations of state system </li></ul><ul><li>Factors which effect the power of the state </li></ul><ul><li>International positions and foreign & foreign policies of the great powers </li></ul><ul><li>The history of recent international relations </li></ul><ul><li>The buildings of a more stable world order </li></ul>
  19. 20. Seven Ingredients by Vencent Baker <ul><li>The Nature & Principle forces of International Politics </li></ul><ul><li>The Political, Social & Economic organization of social life </li></ul><ul><li>The element of National Power </li></ul>
  20. 21. <ul><li>The instrument available for promotion of the National interest </li></ul><ul><li>The limitation & control of national Power </li></ul><ul><li>The foreign Policy of one or more major powers & occasionally of small state </li></ul><ul><li>The historical ingredient as a background for other factors & as a history of recent international events </li></ul>
  21. 22. Why Study IR <ul><li>Studying the International Political activities </li></ul><ul><li>Study of Human’s behavior & its effects on International Politics </li></ul><ul><li>Contribution to the formulation of Foreign Policy </li></ul><ul><li>Study of IR for awareness of Concepts, hypothesis & Model of disciplines to develop views </li></ul>
  22. 23. Approaches to study IR <ul><li>Traditional Approach </li></ul><ul><li>Scientific Approach </li></ul><ul><li>Behavioural Approach </li></ul><ul><li>Post- Behavioural Approach </li></ul><ul><li>System Approach </li></ul>
  23. 24. <ul><li>Traditional Approach (TA) </li></ul><ul><li>Derived from Philosophy, history & Law </li></ul><ul><li>Have tentative & inconclusive status </li></ul><ul><li>As per TA: “IR is Study of patterns of actions & reactions among sovereign states – covers range of relationships spanning from cooperation to conflict & from Peace to War” </li></ul><ul><li>Variables affect the behavior of diplomats & administrators, who implement the state Policy </li></ul><ul><li>Factors are; climatic, geographic, population, interest, religion ideology etc . </li></ul>
  24. 25. <ul><li>Leading exponents of TA; Raymond Aron, Stanley Hoff mann, Hans Morgenthau etc </li></ul><ul><li>Morgenthau advanced the theory of Political Realism </li></ul><ul><li>Basic Concepts of TA ; Balance of Power, world order & National interest </li></ul><ul><li>IR is a sub Division of Political Science & History with a unique identity </li></ul><ul><li>Minor variants of TA ; Historical , philosophical, legal & institutional </li></ul>
  26. 27. <ul><li>REALIST THEORY </li></ul><ul><li>Leading exponents: Geoge Kennon, Henry Kissinger & Hans J Morgenthau </li></ul><ul><li>International Politics like other Politics is a struggle for Power </li></ul><ul><li>Whatever the ultimate aims of International politics; power is always immediate aims </li></ul><ul><li>Statesmen and people may ultimately, seek freedom, security prosperity or power itself, they may define their goals in terms of religious, philosophy, economic or social ideals </li></ul>
  27. 28. <ul><li>They may hope that this ideals will materialize through its own inner force, through divine intervention or through the natural development of human affairs </li></ul><ul><li>They may also try to further its realization through non-political means, such as technical cooperation, but whenever they strive to realize their goal by means of international politics, they do so by striving for power ” </li></ul>
  28. 29. Morgenthau’s six principles of Realist theory <ul><li>Politics is governed by objective laws, which are based on human nature and psychology </li></ul><ul><li>The facts can be ascertained through reasons, thus political theory is based on human psychology and reason </li></ul>
  29. 30. <ul><li>The concept of the national interests can be defined in the terms of power. Politics can be understood on rational basis rather than moral or religious ones </li></ul><ul><li>National interests is not fixed & is molded by the environments, thus the environment determines the political action </li></ul>
  30. 31. <ul><li>Universal moral principles can not be applied to states actions and these must be molded to the circumstances of time and place </li></ul><ul><li>State can not observe the same standard of morality, as are observed by individual. Individual can scarify his liberty for moral principle, but sate can not </li></ul>
  31. 32. <ul><li>There are no identity between moral aspiration of a nation and moral law, which govern the universe and asserts that all political actors pursue their national interests </li></ul><ul><li>Political sphere is an autonomous as the spheres of economists or the lawyers or the moralist. The political actors think in the term of national interests, as the economist think in term of utility and lawyer in the term of conformity of action with moral principles </li></ul>
  32. 33. <ul><li>Theory is ambiguous & inconsistent </li></ul><ul><li>No universally accepted definition </li></ul><ul><li>Wrongly assumed that all individual & states seek their national interests in term of Power </li></ul><ul><li>Wrong assumption that Power is the most important goal which Nations Pursue </li></ul>Criticism
  33. 34. <ul><li>Is defective; treats the World as a static unit </li></ul><ul><li>Wrong in claiming that national Interest carries its own morality </li></ul><ul><li>Defective in a sense that hardly there is any relationship or activity which does not involve Power </li></ul>
  34. 35. <ul><li>Advantage of Realist Theory </li></ul><ul><li>Persuasive & supported by historical experience </li></ul><ul><li>Compels scholars to re-evaluate their own assumption </li></ul><ul><li>Relied by Scholars due to its validity </li></ul>
  35. 36. <ul><li>Leading exponents : Rousseau, Kant, Woodrow Wilson & Condorcet </li></ul><ul><li>Power Politics as passing Phase of history </li></ul><ul><li>Future international society based on notion of reformed Intl system free from, Power Politics ; immorality & violence </li></ul><ul><li>Aims at bringing about a better world with help of education & Intl organizations </li></ul>The Idealist Theory
  36. 37. <ul><li>Rousseau says “ let us not search for what has been done, but rather what should be done & lets dismiss evil & mercenary authority….” </li></ul>
  37. 38. <ul><li>The system asks for high morale Principles in Place of Power – generally not Possible in Practice </li></ul><ul><li>Need to defeat totalitarian forces through democratic methods – difficult to attain </li></ul><ul><li>Theory is also short of factual position – Nations do not behaves as expected </li></ul>Criticism
  38. 39. Salient of Traditional Approach <ul><li>Adoption of middle course – Ecliptics; a synthesis of Realist & Idealist Theories </li></ul><ul><li>TA is too Vague as a whole </li></ul><ul><li>Traditionalists do not analyze the international issues but remain in Past </li></ul>
  39. 40. <ul><li>Main exponents : Harold Guetzkow, Morton A. Kaplon, Kelmon, Rosenau etc </li></ul><ul><li>The approach advanced tentative hypothesis </li></ul><ul><li>Based on logical & mathematical Proofs or strict empirical Procedures of verifications </li></ul><ul><li>Collections of data & relevant material to verify or discord original hypothesis to includes ; collection ; classification, arrangement & appraisal leads to; explanation ; predictions & prescription </li></ul>Scientific Approach
  40. 41. <ul><li>Produced more promises than performance & more process analysis then substantive experimentation </li></ul><ul><li>Scientific facts can be acquired through : data collection; data classification; arrangements of data & setting up of generalization </li></ul><ul><li>Difficulties of scientific approach : Personal involvements; Characteristic of data & Process of Acquiring Knowledge </li></ul>
  41. 42. <ul><li>Originated in 1960s/1970s </li></ul><ul><li>Leading exponents; Karl W. Deutsch </li></ul><ul><li>Politics can not be studied scientifically </li></ul><ul><li>Scientific analysis concerned with facts not values & IR is not free from Values </li></ul><ul><li>Focused on methodology rather on facts or ideas , thus called behavioral approach </li></ul>BEHAVIORAL APPROACH
  42. 43. <ul><li>Study IR, FP by concentrating on actions & behavior of individuals & statesmen </li></ul><ul><li>Main contributors are behavioural sciences like: Sociology, Psychology & Anthropology </li></ul><ul><li>Approach can not be relived upon because; behavior of state being an aggregate can’t be determined </li></ul>
  43. 44. <ul><li>Promoter; Rudolph Rummel </li></ul><ul><li>Originated in 1980s </li></ul><ul><li>Eclectic trend in study of approaches </li></ul><ul><li>Two findings for the courses of Wars by Rummel : democratic states less involve in wars; then authoritarian & libertarian states do not engage in War for economic progress & prosperity </li></ul><ul><li>IR is in transition ever since </li></ul>Post Behavioral Approach
  44. 45. <ul><li>Dependency Theorists </li></ul><ul><li>Class is much better unit of analysis than state & IR divides World horizontally or into nation states whereas, </li></ul><ul><li>Reality of Political or economical life can be better understood in vertical Terms </li></ul>
  45. 46. <ul><li>World order Theorists : represents the latest stand in idealist though, they believe that the human kind is being threatened by nuclear war, environmental pollution, over –population & recourse-exhaustion </li></ul><ul><li>They call for the peaceful transition from the present anarchic international system to new World order based on legitimate representative international institutions </li></ul><ul><li>The failure will result in the destruction of world through any of above mentioned devices </li></ul>
  46. 47. <ul><li>Independent Theorsts : represent a synthesis of idealist & realist approaches </li></ul><ul><li>They employ the idealist traditions in forecasting the gradual development of an international system of complex interdependence, in which economic, technological & cultural interdependence will render classical warfare over territorial issues </li></ul>
  47. 48. <ul><li>They also turn to the realistic approach & focus on international clusters of specialized activity, such as international trade, international debt, arms control disarmament & war disbandment, </li></ul>
  48. 49. <ul><li>Regime studies employ realist hypothesis in the sense that they relate regime stability to the existence of a single hegemonic power or a nuclear of great power that together establish the basic rules of the game </li></ul><ul><li>Practicability : post behavioural approach is more practicable than behavioural </li></ul>
  49. 50. <ul><li>Leading exponents: Jorden, Gunner, Mydal, Stanely Mortan A. Kaplan etc </li></ul><ul><li>Originated in 1950s ; aimed to consider IR from the Perspective of Intl system in the Post WW II scenario </li></ul><ul><li>An attempt to re-focus attention on the complex interaction between states while retaining the scientific orientation Propounded by behaviourlism </li></ul>System Approach
  50. 51. <ul><li>Provides only possible method, which can ensure the development of scientific Politics </li></ul><ul><li>System is a set of parts which is interrelated & independent. It is a complex whole broken into component Parts, being interconnected </li></ul>
  51. 52. <ul><li>MOST-INCLUSIVE SYSTEM WORLD POLITICAL SYSTEM </li></ul><ul><li>Larger System </li></ul><ul><li> Nation State Geographic Multi- International Transnation </li></ul><ul><li> regions National Organizations Religious </li></ul><ul><li> Cooperation Movements </li></ul><ul><li>Intermediate </li></ul><ul><li>System </li></ul><ul><li> Villages Social Political Labour Corporation Ethnic </li></ul><ul><li> & cities Classes Parties Unions groups </li></ul><ul><li>Lowest </li></ul><ul><li>System </li></ul><ul><li> House holding Family </li></ul>
  52. 53. PROCESS OF SYSTEM APPROACH <ul><li>Intl system is classified into: Social; Economic & Political system </li></ul><ul><li>Social system focus on Primary units like; individuals, families, social & ethnic groups & other entities </li></ul><ul><li>Economic system study: National economic system & function of individuals, forms, corporation, labour union, economic classes/ activities & govt Jurisdiction </li></ul>
  53. 54. <ul><li>Political system focus on; national Political system, roles of Political Parties, individuals & Pressure & interest groups </li></ul>
  54. 55. Morton Kaplan’s Six Models of International System <ul><li>Balance of Power </li></ul><ul><li>The Loose Bipolar Model </li></ul><ul><li>The Tight Bipolar Model </li></ul><ul><li>The Unit Veto Model </li></ul><ul><li>The Collective Security Model </li></ul><ul><li>The Multi-block Model </li></ul><ul><li>The Multi-polar Model </li></ul><ul><li>The Mono-polar Model </li></ul>
  55. 56. Balance of Power <ul><li>Precedence: 1815-1914; five major powers </li></ul><ul><li>Specific alliance system-limited wars between major powers-minor powers not allowed to escalate </li></ul><ul><li>Intl law remained operative </li></ul><ul><li>Would it happen again-WMD & UNO </li></ul><ul><li>Critic : Limited Nuclear powers & its use as per their wish ; Regional organizations & their domination by major powers </li></ul>
  56. 57. The Loose Bipolar Model <ul><li>Cold war model; existed from 1947-1971 </li></ul><ul><li>Two super powers in intl system </li></ul><ul><li>Controller & protectors of weaker states </li></ul><ul><li>Strict abidance of respective ideologies & credible Nuc arsenals by US & USSR </li></ul><ul><li>Change from Nuc to Economic, industrial & conventional military capabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Long term alliance, readiness for destruction, but avoided confrontations </li></ul>
  57. 58. The Tight Bipolar Model <ul><li>Non Aligned nations absorbed into one or the other block </li></ul><ul><li>Uncompressing hostility on ideology & security remained like LBM </li></ul><ul><li>Each super power maintained tight control over its allies </li></ul><ul><li>Duopoly; assurance of less conflictive system by each super power by playing down their ideological differences </li></ul><ul><li>B. </li></ul><ul><li>C. </li></ul>
  58. 59. The Unit Veto Model <ul><li>Depicts highly unstable model, mainly because of Nuc weapon by max states </li></ul><ul><li>Increases mistrust & doubts, leading to destruction of the world </li></ul><ul><li>No conventional wars </li></ul><ul><li>Crux of model: ask for a single global authority; controlling all nuclear weapons </li></ul><ul><li>Any Nuc accident would destroy the world </li></ul>
  59. 60. The Collective Security Model <ul><li>Ask for a voluntary system for global security without military power </li></ul><ul><li>No aggressions, no alliances </li></ul><ul><li>Violators to be punished by economic & military sanctions by all states </li></ul><ul><li>UNO to resolve all outstanding issues </li></ul><ul><li>Critic : Not practical ; like balance of power , national interests & volunteer submissions </li></ul>
  60. 61. The Multi-block Model <ul><li>Division of world into 5/7 blocks; each to be controlled by one of world super power </li></ul><ul><li>Maintaining influence through institutionalization of security pacts like; NATO etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Economic & political integration at block level like; ASEAN, EU etc </li></ul><ul><li>Will affect balance of power & No trans- continental power will exist </li></ul>
  61. 62. The Multi-polar Model <ul><li>Nation states face fragmentation & disintegration by regional, racial, multi-lingual /multi-religious tendencies </li></ul><ul><li>Separatists movements are likely to increase </li></ul><ul><li>A dangerous model for existence of nation state system </li></ul>
  62. 63. The Mono-polar Model <ul><li>Hierarchical model; opposite to the balance of power system </li></ul><ul><li>Can be achieved from conquest or control of globe by a single power </li></ul><ul><li>US as single power dictates the world today </li></ul><ul><li>May be democratic or authoritarian; would not be very stable </li></ul>
  63. 64. THANKS