Commentary on Margaret Thatcher, Statecraft: Strategies for a Changing World

The foreign, military and economic policies of states, the intersections of these policies in areas of change or dispute, and the general structure of relations which they create, are all analysed in terms of aspirations to achieve national and/or international security. Security is most commonly associated with the alleviation of threats to cherished values (Williams; 2008). However this is a definition that is undesirably vague and a reflection of the inherent nature of security as an ‘essentially contested concept’ (Gallie; 1962). Security in the modern day context has many key concepts associated with it: uncertainty, war, terrorism, genocide and mass killing, ethnic conflict, coercion,

The discipline of international relations (IR) is one that has witnessed a multitude of variations and shifts. It has produced a fair amount of debate between academics within the international relations scholarship. Due to a plethora of circumstances scholars have subjected the traditional rationalist theories of neorealism and neoliberalism to critical re-evaluations. As a result, constructivism is a concept that has emerged as an alternative approach to dominant IR theories. It focuses on the importance of state identities in defining and gaining knowledge of state interests, actions and goals. There are theorists who purport that the rise of constructivism allows for a further understanding of another international theory, feminism.

Tony Blair introduced me to politics. Taken by my parents to protest in London against the Iraq war I experienced the inability of national politics and international relations to be mutually exclusive concepts. Key issues such as the growing refugee crisis, the debate regarding Britain’s place in Europe and trade agreements such as TTIP all have national and international implications. Britain’s political sovereignty has been eroded by Unions, Agreements and world events. This opens up the debate as to where power is concentrated. A more controversial debate would address whether national and global decisions are in fact being made by politicians at all, or if global corporations impose greater power. Regardless of this nihilistic view, the

The Cold War holds a special place in the study of international relations and its paradigms and perspectives. In this part of the course, three readings work together to provide a basis of arguments and positions on the origins of the Cold War as they relate to international relations. As George Kennan describes in the article written under the pseudonym ‘Mr. X’ in the early years of the Cold War, the Soviets were widely recognized in the western world as being fundamentally expansionist by nature, and this fundamental attribute would lead to the ultimate quest to spread communist ideology across the globe, eventually leading right up to the United States’ doorstep. Similarly, Douglas J. MacDonald lays out the viewpoints held by policymakers

The era of globalization has witnessed the growing influence of a number of unconventional international actors, from non-governmental organizations, to multi-national corporations, to global political movements. Traditional, state-centric definitions of foreign policy as "the policy of a sovereign state in its interaction with other sovereign states is no longer sufficient. Several alternative definitions are more helpful at highlighting aspects of foreign policy

After World War 2, faith in the United States government was at an all time high. A brief, superficial, and weak understanding of the history on the aftermath of World War 2 leads the reader to understand that not only did the United States help defeat the evil Nazis, the fascist Italians, and the imperial Japanese. In the wake of World War 2, the United States of America ended up cementing itself as a world power – if not the world power, usurping the empty throne previously held by Great Britain and subsequently sharing it with the Soviet Union. Yet as is typical, there can never be two champions. There can never be two reigning super victors – one of the two powers had to lose. So began the conflict that never was, the cold war – a global chess match of attrition. Neither the USSR nor the USA would outright engage in conflicts with one another, but in the thirst and pursuit for more influence and power, they continually opposed each other through pawn states on a global scale for approximately 44 years. This type of warfare was known as ‘proxy’ warfare, and though the dates specifically for the Cold War are not known, the common dates for the war range from 1947 to 1991. With this understanding, it can also be inferred that it was not just a war for power, it was a war of ideologies.

Elizabeth Edwards Spalding, argues that Truman’s principles, expectations, decision, and policies not only gave rise to and defined containments content, but also shaped America’s understanding of the Cold War and as a result of this fundamental role, it is right to say that Harry S. Truman was the first cold war warrior. Truman’s containment strategy also provided the grounds for a new liberal internationalism. For Truman, international meant that American leadership was central as his ideas and policies stemmed from a multifaceted definition of peace, composed of freedom, justice, and order.

In her speech, given in memorial of Ronald Reagan, former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher conveys her message that Ronald Reagan was truly a “great president”. Thatcher supports this claim by pointing out Reagan’s many good qualities and explaining how that made him a good president. Thatcher’s main purpose is to honor the life of Ronald Reagan and to show her audience how great he really was. Thatcher conveys this message by utilizing repetition, parallel structure, and juxpositions.

Canada, like most countries, has a unique approach to the formulation of its foreign policy. Because of the dynamic and ever-changing nature of Canadian foreign policy, a number of theories and perspectives have been formulated in order to properly engage and study this area of governmental policy. Perhaps the most dominant of these theories is the Liberal Internationalist perspective. The Liberal Internationalist, or LI, perspective sees Canada as a middle tier power at the international level (Kirton 2007, 29). This perspective recognizes that although Canada is an active, valuable member of the global community, it does not have the same power capabilities relative to those of major power, or principal states (Kirton 2007, 54).

Source A could be considered to have great value to a historian studying the impact of Margaret Thatcher’s Social and Economic policies, as it comes from a speech that Margaret Thatcher made herself 5 years into her premiership. This lends the source some value, as it comes from Thatcher’s own point of view, and therefore could be considered to be very valuable to a historian studying the impact of Thatcher’s policies as no one would know more about how she arrived at her decisions and what her intentions were than Thatcher herself. It could however be argued that the fact this source comes from Thatcher herself is in fact a detriment to its value, as she will be more likely to defend herself and her actions rather than speaking honestly about

This essay will address why the three main approaches to world politics did not predict the end of the Cold War. Firstly it will briefly give a background insight into what the Cold War was. Then it will go on to explain what characterises the three main approaches to world politics which are Realism, Pluralism and Structuralism, it then will briefly look at the distinctive theory behind them. Lastly the essay will analyse whether or not the three main approaches could have predicted and anticipated the end of the Cold War.

After December 26 1991, when the Soviet Union fell, the bipolarity of the international system was effaced. In the post- Cold War era, the United States faced the problem, without a defined enemy, to adopt a new foreign policy. To begin to analyze the political foreign policy of the United States, one must first understand the international system. According to Political Realism, a theory of international thought, the state is the key unit within the acts within the system. These states act according to their key norms, which are allowed by the system. However, these sates are also affected the domestic and external factors which control how they act. The domestic factors include political culture, their economic system, the leadership

Eleanor Roosevelt and countless scholars have observed that international politics is a man’s world (Tickner, 1992). It is a world inhabited by diplomats, soldiers and international civil servants most of whom are men. An important function of Feminist theory is that it helps to explain women’s subordination that exists in varying degrees in society (Tickner, 1992). Gender is denied as an issue in international politics because it has addressed through as system of anarchy and patriarchy (Steans, 1998). Realists when analyzing global conflict assume that the global system via concepts of security should be understood as ungendered and universal (Batnic, 2001). International relations theory is grounded in realist assumptions that regards the position of women as neutral, however international

The international system is a self-help system; states are obliged to look after themselves, because there is no one else to look after them. Waltz does not assume that states are pursuing the increase in their power and the importance of them between others states, necessarily aggressive body, but he does believe that they desire to preserve themselves. This means that they are obliged to be considered with their security, national defence and obliged to regard other states as potential threats (Brown, 2001).

In “Structural Realism...” Waltz defends his theory of Structural Realism against criticism that its tenets are no longer valid in a post-Cold War world. The international system, he writes, is still anarchic, even though that system is unipolar instead of bipolar as it was during the Cold War, and that states still seek hegemony and power. A nation 's ideals and internal factors may count for something (he posits that the US intervention after the collapse of Yugoslavia was the result of such pressures),3 but they certainly shouldn 't. States should make decisions based on the idea of maintaining their own security and maintaining a balance of power in the international system.