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 …show more content…
The declining use of military force is the questionable aspect of this perspective because throughout the years it has been demonstrated that this is not true. Military engagements in the nations states continue to be a problem and a violation to the state’s sovereignty established by the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. Although both of these theoretical perspectives have their flaws, they can both be used to analyze current issues of today, thus establishing different interpretations for the same events, such as the oil crisis, global warming, and the most recent issue the occupy movements. To begin with, one of the issues in today’s society that has remained a dilemma for many years has been the oil crisis. The oil crisis is the problems where the major industrial countries of the world, particularly the United States, faced substantial shortages of petroleum. As mentioned in Maxine’s presentation in my Pols-311 class, the two worst crises of oil have been the 1973 oil crisis, caused by the Arab Oil Embargo of OAPEC, and the 1979 energy crisis, caused by the Iranian Revolution. The issue of the oil crisis has lead many nations to seek petroleum by violating states sovereignty and using the military in many occasions to do so. It has also lead nations like the United States to military support monarchies and dictatorships that would allow the United States to
Realists’ belief that, “war is unavoidable and natural part of world affairs.” According to Bova, there are over 200 sovereign states, and they all interest to gain power to defend themselves. As a result, state’s feeling of insecurity causes it to take any means to feel secure whether it is through the formation of ally with another powerful state or accumulation of military and economic power. Such action threatens other states provoke them take similar actions. This cycle applies to all states, and the feeling of threat and desire to survive is innate in humans In understanding International Relations, McNamara’s lesson is useful in the regards that actions that state takes to protect itself causes the complexity and conflicts of foreign policies that human beings are incapable of
Oil has often been referred to as any economy’s lifeblood. Although this is an overemphasis, oil has been the key, nonhuman resource of the economy throughout the largest part of the 20th century. In the book “The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, And Power” by Daniel Yergin, the author illustrates the political, societal, economic, and geo-strategic importance of this product.
For realists the international system is anarchical, war is an ever present threat and the survival of a state is never guaranteed. This is why security is the main focus of most realists. States are forever seeking greater amounts of security, in a never ending search.
Realism and Liberalism are two extremely prominent theories of international relations. These doctrines exhibit sagacious perceptions about war, foreign affairs and domestic relations. The fundamental principles of protocol in which we rely upon aren’t always apprehensive (Karle, Warren, 2003). By interpreting the data one could fathom these ideas. The assessment of these faculties wield noteworthy dominance about the concepts of international affairs. In analyzing this data, you will comprehend the variant relationship between Realism and Liberalism.
Realism is a theory which believes that sovereign states are the primary actors in the international system. It also believes that the international system has always been anarchic due to the nature of states not trusting each other and each state seeking to gain or maximize its own power capability. The Realist approach to the Cold War was also that of an “anarchical constitutive” and had seen the Cold War as something that was not out of the ordinary. The realists believed that states are always competing to maximize their own power, “the basic premise of its understanding is that the Cold War was not historically unique. the Cold War rather reflected in general terms the ongoing logic of inter-state conflict derived from the anarchical constitutive nature of the international system, and the ‘power maximization’ policies of states” R.Saull (2001:7).
Realism is a theory that depicts world politics as a ceaseless repetitive struggle for power. In other words, political realism seeks to explain international relations between states in terms of power. Realist “views that nation-state as the most important actor…because it answers to no higher authority;” in other words, it is an anarchic system (Kegley, 27). Some traits of realism are that states are sovereign, non-cooperation among states, and the exclusion if morality in policies.
Conflict over energy resources—and the wealth and power they create—has become an increasingly prominent feature for geopolitics particularly in the Middle East . The discovery of oil in the late nineteenth century added a dimension to the region as major outside states powers employed military force to protect their newly acquired interests in the Middle East. The U.S.’s efforts to secure the flow of oil have led to ever increasing involvement in the Middle East region’s political affairs and ongoing power struggles. By the end of the twentieth century, safeguarding the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf had become one of the most important functions of the U.S. military establishment. The close relationship between the United States and the Saudi royal family was formed in the final months of World War II, when U.S. leaders sought to ensure preferential access to Saudi petroleum. The U.S. link with Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region has demonstrated to be greatly beneficial to both parties, yet it has also led to ever deepening U.S. involvement in regional politics.
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
The Importance of Oil in U.S. Foreign Policy During the oil and energy crisis of the mid-1970s Americans became painfully aware of the consequences of the United States dependence on foreign sources of oil. Unfortunately, research and exploration for alternative sources of oil in North America has not been pursued vigorously enough to cease such foreign dependence. As a result, in the mid-1990s Americans find themselves in the same precarious position as they were during the 1970s. The Persian-Gulf War in 1991 was all the proof needed to convince the United States of how strongly oil still influences our foreign policy and international relations in general. Oil and U.S. Foreign Policy: Historical Issues The United
Due to the economic strife the American public knows all too well what a recession is. It is economic hardship that has led to the loss of thousands of jobs and businesses. This economic hardship has led to many people losing their homes, cars and other valuables. Why is it that when the Obama administration talks about the recession they refer to it as “The Bank Stabilization Plan.” (Stewart) Something that has caused the total meltdown of the American Economy being referred to as “The Bank Stabilization Plan” (Stewart) seems outright ludicrous. Even if they are in the process of fixing the problem, the government insists on using modest language to confuse the public into believing that the issue is not a huge problem; Just a
Since International Relations has been academically studied Realism has been the dominant theory of world politics. The theory’s inability to explain the end of the Cold War, however, brought strength and momentum to the Liberalism theory. Today Realism and Liberalism are the two major paradigms of International Relations. The aforementioned theories focus on the international system and the external factors that can lead to two phenomena - conflict and cooperation. Realism believes that as a result of anarchy and the security dilemma, conflict is inevitable. Liberalism argues that this conflict can be overcome through cooperative activities amongst states and international organizations. This paper will explore as well as compare and contrast the strengths and weaknesses of both theories. It will also debate which of the two theories is more valuable in the
In this essay the conservative theories of Realism and Liberalism will be compared and contrasted in connection with the study of International Relations. Post World War I International Relations was established as a formal discipline with the eructation of the Woodrow Wilson Chair at the University of Wales, given the worldwide urgency to create international order and stability in the wake of the war. Realist in International Relations view human nature and the states behaviour practically and truthfully, adopting a matter-of-fact attitude instead of visualising how the political institutions ought to function. Liberalists
Oil has repeatedly been referred to as any economy’s lifeblood. Whereas this is an overemphasis, oil has been the utmost key, nonhuman resource of economy throughout the largest part of the 20th century. In the book “The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, And Power” by Daniel Yergin, the author illustrates the political, societal, economic, and geo-strategic prominence of this product. The book was published by Simon and Schuster in 2011 in New York, and contains 928 pages, as its ISBN is 1439134839. This research paper aims to provide a book review on Daniel Yergin’s “The Prize.”
Classical realist theory is based upon the idea that human nature is inherently bad and selfish, the international system is anarchic, and the state is the most important actor in international affairs. Basing policy decisions on human nature, the state looks to maximize it’s power and security within its geographic location. Realist theory sees all conflict deriving from power struggles between states, though it is not about fostering wars; rather the opposite.
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