The Important Features Of International Relations By Alexander Wendt

The English School (ES) of international studies is a modern and unique spectrum to the study of international relations (IR), because it is prominent, relevant and inclusive of the main elements in the other IR theories such as classical Realism, Neorealism, Marxism, Liberalism (Buzan & Gonzalez-Pelaez, 2009), Globalization (Buzan, 2004), Humanitarianism and Positivism IR theories (Buzan & Gonzalez-Pelaez, 2009, p.2-3). The ES of IR is built on the notion of “international society”, in which the states are the primary actors, engaging, co-operating and conversing to produce joint strategies, interventions and arrangements which help to maintain their inter-relations and shared interests to resolve matters (Cornelia Navari, p. 1). The ES embraces the social aspect through dialogue between players on the international politics arena with recognition of sovereignty, solidarity, level of power and leverage, self-interests and competitiveness each state holds in the international realm. It is therefore not a system like most other IR theories but the methodology for contemporary international conversation (Buzan & Gonzalez-Pelaez, 2009 p. 3) between two or more states when necessary within the global framework of laws, international institutions and customary aspects (Buzan & Gonzalez-Pelaez, 2009, pp.3-4). In the 1984 publication ‘The Expansion of International Society’, the classic ES definition is

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

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

The concept of being a good international citizen departs from this view and has us believe “that states should be cognisant of and accountable to in the conduct of their international politics and foreign policy…” (Langlois, pp. 221). However, there are many barriers to the creation of this cosmopolitan world order and its promotion of human rights. At the core of international relations theory, it is held that all states are considered sovereign. The state has the authority to govern within its territory without the interference of outside states or actors.

In the lay man’s world, there are some universally held beliefs that permeate almost every level of society: Africa is poor and its residents desperate for help, the Middle East is unstable and many of its regional actors are religious fanatics, and so on. However, to say that these are universally held beliefs does not necessarily mean that they are true. These beliefs are sometimes grounded upon a certain understanding of culture and identity of those being portrayed. Some of these portrayals are not based on fact, but merely representations created through discourse to advance state and actor interests in regions of activity. This paper seeks to identity the role identity and culture play in international relations (IR) and world

Instead, constructivists argue that the most important aspect in deciphering international relations is ideas and how they are interpreted. The Great War can thus be view from a number of perspectives. Under a Marxist view it can be seen as a conflict perpetuated by capitalistic tendencies of competition among the bourgeois among Europe and fought by the oppressed proletariat. (Marx 13). It can be just as likely to interpreted its outbreak as a family feud among the grand children of Queen Victoria. For Constructivist Theory, ideas and norms dictate how states behave and are only important when states deem it as important. Constructivism as a result is based on much more abstract ideals than the other theories. Such can include economics, as is the case for Marxism; it could also be based socially, such as the claim that the European powers chose to go to war with each other in order to quell unrest among their own populations, which at that time is becoming more and more politically fragmented. As Alexander Wendt states in his article “Anarchy is what States Make of It”, “All theories of international relations are based on social theories of the relationship between agency, process, and social structure. Social theories do not determine the content of our international theorizing, but they do structure the questions we ask about world politics and our approaches to answering those questions.” (Wendt 1992) This approach in short focuses on social constructs humans project and how they relate to the way interactions take place. Because of the interpretive flexibilities inherent in Constructivist Theory, WWI could be interpreted a number of ways through Constructivist

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

As constructivists are prone to, Applebaum is aware of the differences in definitions of abstract words depending on one’s culture or one’s childhood. Often times, these definitions are derived from an understanding developed through one’s internal understanding as well as by absorbing information from external sources such as parents, cultures, friends and the news. In order to demonstrate differences in definitions, Applebaum addresses abstract terms by categorizing them “in Turkish terms” or by quoting broadly defined words such as “enemies” and “interests” to cause readers to pause and think about why she quoted singular words in the first place.To illustrate the Constructivist’s social theory, Applebaum agrees that social norms and human behavior dictates actions taken for the state. Turkey and Russia were “nearly at war with one

Additionally, constructivism clarifies interest information with focus on the social identities of individuals and states. Identities are the basic of interests, and constructivists in general does not oppose to the realist idea that actors may be self-interested, but argue that this tell us nothing unless we understand how actor define themselves and what effect does the identity has on its interests. As stated by constructivist view of point, identity is vital also because many things are based on how an actor ponders of itself. In some cases, identity change can produce global governance, because successful international organization rest on share principles and norms that states have taken in account in shaping their

While nation-states are not the only actors, they are the primary ones and form the structure of the international system.

This report describes briefly about the history of International Relations (IR) and United Nation (UN) Organization as well as the role of UN in international relation with the world government. It also contain about the importance of international relation and the actors and influencers, power politics, waning of the war, international system, foreign policy, military force and terrorism, international organization, law and human rights. Moreover, it also involve the correlation between International Relations and United Nation Organization as well as the work of UN and its agencies worldwide in handling different issues within the International Relation context.

The ideas that countries float and advocate for at times of conflict usually lead to intense war or peace. In constructivism, the major idea is how structures put in place are influenced by persuasive ideas and common beliefs that countries bring into play in the international arena. Politics in the international community is a product of social construction emanating from common values and persuasive ideas as they arise from influential countries in the world.

Realism is one of the main theories within International Relations. It provides the view that all actors within the international system act on their own self-interests to gain power. This essay intends to discuss its usefulness as a theory and the reasons for and against it being used to analyse world affairs. Firstly, it shall discuss how the theory is advantageous as it explains how shifts in the balance of power can lead to conflict however it is unable to explain why the distribution of power changes. Second, it will portray how it is useful because states do not need to be labelled as good or bad to fit the theory although it disregards the idea of Natural law and gives a cynical view of human morality. Finally, it will suggest that as the theory is very parsimonious, it can be applied to multiple situations within the world system. On the other hand, it will be said that it fails to look at individuals within a state and their influence on the actions of the state. These costs and benefits will be conveyed through the current tensions between the USA and North Korea to link the theory in with current world politics.

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).

A classic book has a timeless effect. It’s ability to reinvent itself every time it is picked up and read gives it a classic certification. When reading this text, the audience already know of its stature, its capabilities and its relevance even though it may be their first time reading the text. But what does this mean in the International Relations dimension. How do texts become classic? In this essay, I will be addressing this concern by deciphering two texts that are, arguable, classics in the IR community. In addition to this I will be investigating the concepts and thoughts of Bliddal, Sylvet and Wilson in their collaborative text ‘Classics of International Relations: Essays in Criticism and Appreciation.’ By doing so I will be discussing their core arguments, my own understanding of their texts, how they are considered classic texts and the critiques that their ideas birth. Ultimately I will be discussing why this text is so important and I will be answering what is the texts contribution to International Relations. I will also conclude that the texts I have analysed have similar features that all make them worthy of classic recognition and I will also state that not all texts have to be outstanding pieces of literature but their ability to influence audiences and change perceptions can account to making them be known as a classic of International Relations. The ability for a text to challenge the knowledge and understanding of its readers can be argued to be a core