Collapsing states are largely a consequence of weak governmental institutions, corruption, and in some cases poverty. Some of the consequences linked to collapsing states are migration of citizens because of fleeing from conflict in their country, and the spread of conflict to another nearby country known as a proxy war. Conflict and collapsing states have always existed. They have been well recorded in history, and can be traced back to ancient times. The motives of each state collapse is different, although there can be some similar patterns. The geography of a state and its natural resources can be motives of conflict and collapse.
A liberalist would argue that one of the options the world has to reduce the frequency of collapsing states is to promote democracy and for states who do not have a democracy to transition into this system. A realist reason for democracies to prevent war from happening is that states are threatened of a “third party” getting involved in the conflict (Waltz). “Conformity of countries to a prescribed political form may eliminate some of the causes of war; it cannot eliminate all of them. The democratic peace thesis will hold only if all of the causes of war lie inside of states” (Waltz). Moreover, the qualities of democracy within a state would be to conserve peace within the state and abroad, and if would leave every country feeling secure in this system (Waltz). “The guarantee of the state’s proper external behavior would derive from its
Since the dawn of human civilization, individuals have been constantly immersed in conflict with each other. Whether these conflicts stemmed from socio-economic inequalities, political disputes, property rights, religious disagreements, or any other contentious matter, the creation of human governments has necessarily been to handle, organize, and resolve conflicts between people within communities in the least destructive manner possible. Governments act as a formal instrument through which individuals in a society can agree upon shared rules, solve problems, and engage in cooperative behavior, and it helps avoid the severe repercussions resulting from revolutionary social upheaval. The purpose of government – as spelled out in the Preamble of the Constitution – is to “establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” While countless forms of government have sprung up over the centuries, only one has been resilient enough and has had the pervasive influence necessary to stand the test of time: democracy. While there are many different types of democracies, this paper will focus on liberal democracy specifically. A liberal democracy is a form of representative democracy that operates under the paradigm of classical liberalism. According to the Center for Research on Globalization, liberal democracy is defined as:
The Collapse: The Accidental Opening of the Berlin Wall by Mary Elise Sarotte explains the causes and events leading up the opening of the Berlin Wall. By first describing the state of Eastern Europe, Sarotte leads the reader into descriptive chapters about the people and events that lead up to November 9, 1989. The story of the opening of the Berlin Wall, or the Iron Curtain as some call it, is compelling told by using a profusion of sources and actions that all play a major role in this watershed moment in history.
In being so, liberalism possesses both economic and political components. Economic liberalism argues that, increasing economic interdependence would lead to a more peaceful international realm. Political liberalism bases itself on the belief that ‘A just world order assumes the establishment of republics ’. Thus, political liberalism as practiced by the United States during Cold War becomes a critical proponent of democracy promotion by noting that overlapping national interests will allow for a tamer international environment, engendering the notion that democracies do not engage in wars. Although democracy as interpreted by liberal theory on its own does not lead to free market, it may create the necessary infrastructure for such an event to occur. The promotion of democracy, to a great extent, increases economic interdependence through the alignment of core national values and therefore decreasing the probability of hegemony between the states. However, The notion of liberalism was undermined in the literature of the United States foreign policy after the Cold War. Even though the states were economically interdependent during the Cold War yet they engaged in rivalry for resources to the extent that if, assumingly, the “World Trade Organization” came to be perceived as a corrupt institution,
The book, Collapse, by Jared Diamond, is composed of many different societies and places that were know to be great and to this day remembered in our history, but soon subsided with nothing left but a few walls. The chapters each expel absorbent information about a specific, now collapsed, society or place. Diamond successfully starts each chapter by introducing the subject, then continuing by providing detailed background information on how it has collapsed. He also is very personal within the essay by adding his own experiences and thoughts of the subject. Jared Diamond writes of how the collapse of societies is executed, it is said to be when the people demolish the environment, economy, and the population.
Liberalism was previously a projection of how international relations ought to be; now, liberalism is a modern theory towards peace attained with a state’s ambition for dominance. “Self-interest” has two definitions in accordance to liberalism and realism. Liberalism considers the measure of power within states through stable economies, the possibility of peace and cooperation, as well as the concepts of political freedoms (human rights). Realism believes states are driven by competitive self-interest; international organizations hold little to no real influence because states are self-preserved. International relations is governed by states acting in their self-interest through liberalism; states act in their self-interest by cooperating with one another through international organizations, transnational advocacy networks, and non-governmental organizations. International organizations, normative values, and terrorism are all examples of how international relations is progressing into liberalism.
The other kind of nonideal theory deals with unfavorable conditions, that is, with the conditions of societies whose historical, social and economic circumstances make their achieving a well-ordered regime, whether liberal or decent, difficult if not impossible. These societies are called burdened societies.” Rawls says that liberal societies should only go to war when they believe their safety and security is threatened. “When a liberal society engages in war in self-defense, it does so to protect and preserve the basic freedoms of its citizens and its constitutionally democratic political institutions.”
Although Greenland and Australia are thousands of miles apart and very different in geography, they also have many similarities. In his book “Collapse”, Jared Diamond shows that both countries have the five factors that can contribute to a society’s collapse. Greenland’s Norse society already collapsed a long time ago, while Australia is still a First World country going strong. If some things there don’t change, the country’s living standard will go down and there could be major problems.
In a realist world, states have “supreme power” over its territory and population, there is an absence of a higher authority. The fact that there is no higher authority has its consequences. States become self-interested, they compete for power and security. It can lead states to continuously struggle for power “where the strong dominate the weak (Kegley, 28).” This ultimately creates a system in which each state is responsible for its own survival, making them cautious towards their neighboring states. In addition, a realist world is a self-help system; “political leaders seek to enhance national security” by building armies and forming alliances (Kegley, 28). Economic and military power are key components to a state sovereignty and to national security.
The idea that democracies do not fight each other can be traced back to the writings of Immanuel Kant over two hundred years ago in essay ‘On Perpetual Peace’, however, only in the early 1980s and with the writings of Michael Doyle was the idea consolidated. According to Doyle and other advocates of the democratic peace theory, liberal democratic states have been able to maintain peaceful relations amongst themselves, but are prone to wage war against non-democratic regimes. In order to prove this theory, vast databases have been constructed of historical dyadic relationships between states as well as detailed breakdowns of incidents of inter-state war. The conclusions reached are best shown in the work of Bruce Russett who has argued that
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
Reading “Railey and Reycraft,” I learned that the several features listed by Renefew show that there are cases of collapse in state and prestate societies. Never knew that some cases of contrary to assumption don’t really imply regional abandonment and etc. Collapse is splits into internal and external divisions, I never knew that can put collapse into two divisions; I thought it was just one meaning to it. Also, collapse external factors are environmental disasters can bring out the collapse of a complex society.
While liberalism believes war to be avoidable through education, reformation of social institutions, and shared interests with other nations, realism finds war to be an unavoidable consequence of the self-preservation of the state. Liberalism sees the potential for and desires change, while realism finds change unlikely. Both theories agree on the principle that the international system is anarchic in nature. However, whereas realism relies on a balance of power to keep the system in check, liberalism does so through cooperation of international institutions and mutual interest of various states.
No global definition exists for states described as “fragile”, “failing”, or failed because they come in all shapes and sizes. Yet, countries that have failed at the basic responsibilities of governance and sovereign authority are generally lumped into this group. Fragile, failing, or failed states share similar characteristics including their inability to control their borders, loss of authority over insurgents, gangs, and warlords, and loss of legitimacy internally/internationally. Examples relevant today of countries that are fragile or failing, and on the path to failed status include Iraq and many of the Middle Eastern countries struggling to maintain their autonomy in the fight against ISIS. Other important indicators of failed states include:
To define any perspective in International Relations, one must understand its’ origin and primary authors, including the context in which they were writing in. Liberalism is one of the more loosely defined perspectives as it has had a number of authors throughout history. Primarily, liberalism relies on the positive aspects of human nature. One of the most prominent liberal authors was Kant- who often wrote of the anarchical nature of international relations- referring to it as “the lawless state of savagery.” He also wrote of three primary routes to obtaining peace within this system, namely treating all aspects of human life with humanity, allowing for a federation of states and
Fukuyama and McFaul make strong arguments for the importance of democracy promotion, but it is not without its flaws. The world is fragmented by ethnic, linguistic and religious differences, and as such, the notion that there exists 'moral universals' is viewed as dangerous (Dunne 2001, pp. 179). Gray (1995, pp. 146) aptly articulated that "the universalizing mission of liberal values such as democracy, capitalism and secularism undermine the traditions and practices of non-Western cultures." And that may illustrate the rejection of Liberalism thus far. Democracy, when promoted by Western states, is inextricably tied in with other Western ideals such as capitalism and secularism. These ideals often do not mesh well with prevailing cultural practices, resulting in dissent and potential military conflict, results contrary to Liberalism's ultimate goal. This leads to the second rationale: national security.