International Relations Is A State Centric Discipline Essay

I'm in the process of taking my GRE prep so I can do a grad degree. I'm trying to study Geopolitics coming from a heavy European and American History background, esp. modern History (1337-1848 in my estimation) and then a heavy focus of the USA (1788-present) and the UK (899-1066, esp 1066-1603, 1688-1815) , Germany (Middle Ages to present) and the so called Eurasian or Greater Mid-east focus, of Marshall Hodgskin's variety. Basically studying pre-15c. Eurasian as one mega-civilization. From the Modern History I follow the world system prospective in terms of economy and analysis of economies. The short version is that Spain rose to Hegemony in alliance with Austria, modern Belgium and Italy from 1477-1648, then an uneasy fight Between

Monroe Doctrine: statement issued by President James Monroe stating that the Western Hemisphere was off limits to further European intervention

According to constructivism “The world of international relations is not just the world of material capabilities and materialistic opportunities it is also a social world”. Constructivists believe that actor states are occupied with both normative and material factors. They do not deny that the material world shapes their structure, but they believe that through reflections and discourse, actor states are malleable and influenced by each other. Constructivism thus deals with the process through which principled ideals become social norms. In being so, constructivism becomes a critical component for the international recognition of a state. This becomes crucial for actors, as the internationalization of social norms will ensure compliance over external pressure. Thus, democracy promotion can be subsumed under the socialization and internalization by actors. The persistence of democratic international institutions after the cold war as well as the mass identification of states as democracies and the absence of a strong alternative political ideology have contributed to a process of socialization promoting democratic cooperation. Therefore, after the Cold

Three levels of analysis, each with its own distinct strength, reveals three different ways of understanding international relations. The first states that all nation-states behave similarly, the second emphasizes the unique internal factors of a nation-state, while the third level of analysis focuses on the individual deciding a state’s course of action. Each level of analysis is useful in the study of international relations. Indeed, used all together, it is not long before arriving at a point where a vast number of explanations for the actions of a country are brought to light. However, to best understand international relations, one level of analysis is more useful than the rest, because it provides the most comprehensive

The evolution of U.S. Foreign policy following the Civil War is continually evolving. During the Civil War years, America had an economy that was based on agriculture. Farmers were growing cotton, tobacco and sugarcane. Slaves from Africa worked on these enormous plantations. . At the time, America was in an election year with Lincoln as the candidate of the Republican Party claiming he was going to abolish slavery. When Lincoln won the election he did just that, immediately there after 7 states declared their independence from the US, they were then known as Confederate States. After a few years 4 more states

As the American Revolution ended, the United States emerged as an independent and fragile nation. It had to co-exist in a world dominated by large and powerful empires.It became the job of the first few presidents to guide the young nation through this difficult time.They are recognized for their foreign and domestic policies that helped this country become a strong nation.Throught their actions,they influenced the future of American policy.The events that strengthened the country the most were the XYZ Affair,The War of 1812,and The Monroe Doctrine.

From the late 19th century to 1945 two ideologies and platforms contrasted one another. On one hand you have isolationism, Lassie Faire and a lack of global perspective. On the other hand you have international cooperation and what has been termed “war economies”. The failure of one seems to have cultivated the other as a response. Ultra nationalism, racial imperialism and antisocialism brought about great atrocities and failures both politically and morally. In response we have, not once, but twice, seen the rise of international cooperation to counter Nationalistic expansion. The contrast of a war economy versus an absolute free economy is seen on both sides of the political spectrums. It would be both belligerents that would

America believed that it was isolated from the rest of the world, and its foreign policy reflected these ideas and beliefs. The United States was on its way to becoming a world power and advancing its own interest in the world, especially in the North and South America. Isolationism caused the United States to avoid being involved in other countries politics and for the U.S. to remain neutral in foreign policy

Consequently, the idea of national interest has changed along with the techniques for accomplishing national interest. In place of national interest, convenience must be made for the global interest. What's more, the new States are confronted with the issues of modernization, political strength, financial advancement, managerial productivity and regional integrity. The smaller countries have subsequently to determine their national interest remembering those issues at

Unilateralism principle applies in countries where state policies are deemed autonomous. In America, Unilateralism occurs when the state formulates policies without the mandate of bilateral and multilateral treaties and the resulting actions have impacts on people from the other nations. According to Crosseley (2008), American unilateralism started with the ideologies developed during cold war and traces to Christian influence on US foreign policy over China after World War II. On the other hand, multilateralism is a process of making agreements among the states. The principle compromises self-gains of the countries and creates an environment whereby all the participants have same rights. The principle is committed to ensuring mutual understanding among the states. The system of dispute management advocated by multilateralism enforce particular mode of behavior among member states.

In the article, author John J. Mearsheimer highlights that a state’s main objective in their actions were meant to survive and take any measure to ensure their safety. The state will focus on surviving and will plan around that objective. However, the safest possible position is to be the hegemon of their region. States aim to achieve this whilst still maintaining a secured surviving status. A state that has potential and holds a respected status may be safe now but is still exposed to downfall corresponds to the idea that states will search for opportunities to gain power over rivals. The author supports the notion of creating alliances and absolute power. In reality, states are not seeking equilibrium, rather they seek hegemony. With a regional hegemony

There are two, key conflicting theories in the study of international relations, idealism and realism, known to scholars as the ‘Great Debate’. Realism, offers an account of international affairs through four central ideas; that states are the key players in international relations, the decentralised international stage is anarchic, actors are rational and self-interested

Contemporary international relations is a complex field. Understanding events and attempting to make sense of them can be a daunting task. There are, however, tools available, which can assist in providing clarity to these complex issues. The first of these tools is historic knowledge. Without historic background of an issue, it is nearly impossible to understand the events driving that issue in modern times. A second tool, the one which will be the focus of this paper, is international relations theory. Theory can be defined as “a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action,” (Merriam-Webster) and can be used “in many cases as a basis of prediction.” (Mingst 56) There are three major theories which we

Global Politics The study of international or rather global politics, seeks to provide an account of politics in the broadest domain. The domain of international politics in the twenty-first century is characterised by the increasing number of actors pursuing common and personal interests. It is largely due to the globalised, interdependent nature of the current international political environment that the concepts of sovereignty and power deserve further evaluation.

The first paradigm of international relations is the theory of Realism. Realism is focused on ideas of self-interest and the balance of power. Realism is also divided into two categories, classical realism and neo-realism. Famous political theorist, Hans Morgenthau was a classical realist who believed that national interest was based on three elements, balance of power, military force, and self interest (Kleinberg 2010, 32). He uses four levels of analysis to evaluate the power of a state. The first is that power and influence are not always the same thing. Influence means the ability to affect the decision of those who have the power to control outcomes and power is the ability to determine outcomes. An example of influence and power