The issue of security has long been the preoccupation of international relations. It has been argued that there is no common concept of security and disagreement in the normative and methodological approach. In the simplest form, the core of security is survival, and consequently a lack of threat. In terms of international relations, the state has been the main referent object of security. Arnold Wolfers proposed the definition of security as the "(security), in an objective sense, measures the absence of threats to acquired values, in a subjective sense, the absence of fear that such values will be attacked".” In the traditional approach, threats to security comes from a hard power source and is framed through a national security paradigm. It was argued that security is only concerned with power politics and military action. Proponents of the traditional approach argue that international relations is dominated by a realist perception. States are obliged by anarchy in international relations to follow a course of self-protection and face a security dilemma. External physical threats are the main source of insecurity for state. For traditionalists, protecting national boundaries and sovereignty is the central focus of security. In his seminal paper titled, “The Renaissance of Security Studies,” Stephen Walt argues that the domain of security studies is “the phenomenon of war.” For Walt, security is rightfully preoccupied with analyzing the impact of the use of force on individuals, societies, and the state. In this perspective military power was used as in instrument of foreign policy, political propaganda, and for economic aims. The former approach to security dominated the Cold War era. During this time, global military c...
... middle of paper ...
... question of the referent object of security. Nonetheless, the tie that binds the paradigm is the belief that conceptualization and definition of security in international relations requires an expanded approach. At the forefront of this paradigmatic shift has been Barry Buzan. In his book People, State and Fear, Buzan argues that along with the traditional Political and military dimensions, Economic, Societal, and Environmental are at the core of security. The five dimensions of Buzan’s security concept create a complex synthesis of security concerns. Furthermore, Buzan offers a holistic approach as he contends that defining a particular referent object is not productive. The selection of a referent object depends on the perception of the question being analyzed. In this context, the referent object can be the individual, the state, or the international system.
In the article, Offense, Defense, and the Security Dilemma, Robert Jervis argues that the security dilemma is more lethal and that the international conflict is more likely to occur when the offense has an advantage over defense. Robert Jervis also maintains that, when a defense is prominent the chance of war and conflict decreases exponentially. Throughout the article, Jervis makes multiple compelling arguments regarding the offense-defense balance and the security dilemma. The security dilemma exists when "many of the means by which a state tries to increase its security and decrease the security of others. " Security dilemma provides a rational foundation referred to as the ‘spiral model’, which is a term used in international
Followers of Realist school of thought argue the case of 2003 Iraq war from the standpoint of power and Security. The Bush administration’s rationale for launching a pre-emptive attack against Iraq was based on two misleading assumptions: firstly, Iraq had or was developing Weapons of Mass Destruction (along with Iran and North Korea) and secondly, that it was aiding and protecting terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda. Such a conjecture based on unsubstantiated evidence helped Bush administration conjure up a dystopian situation which justified 2003 invasion of Iraq under the pretext of “security maximization”. This explanation was given in pursuance of the realist assumption that States’ as rational actors always act in accordance with their national security interests.
Shiraev, Eric B., and Vladislav M. Zubok. International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
...dens the understanding of international relations and correspondingly broadens the understanding of security. Built on Thayer’s and Waltz’s theory, the paper suggests that structure of the international system is central to international security and to achieve peace, suitable strategies are necessary to balance the power relations. While it should not be ignored that the Evolution theory still falls within realism realm with many other forms of complex security problems unexplained.
The policy of Containment is a strategy that was recommended by Foreign affair 's expert George Kennan. The policy was adopted and executed by the US government after the WW11. In his 8000-word telegram, Kennan recommended the strategy of “containment” of Soviets Union’s exploitation of other weaker East European countries. He further analyzed that curtailing the communist ideologies of Soviet Union these countries would be the best option to preventing another world war. He advised against military confrontation but instead called for a “patient, persistent and firm" strategic efforts to contain Soviet expansionism. He cautioned President Harry Truman of the evils of Stalin’s communist ideologies; these ideas included limiting the freedom of its people. The Soviet Union wanted a world modeled on their own country’s society and values, unlike the US and western Europe countries that sought to practice capitalist ideologies and democratic governments that allowed their citizens the freedom to elect government and exercise their civil liberties. He
Wendt, Alexander. “Constructing International Politics.” International Security. Cambridge: President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1995. 71-81. Print.
By the end of the Cold War the literature focusing on strategic studies has highlighted transformational changes within international system that affected and altered the very nature of war. As a result many security studies scholars have renounced traditional theories of strategic thought. Clausewitzian theory, in particular, has taken a lot of criticism, regarding its relevance to modern warfare. (Gray, How Has War Changed Since the End of the Cold War?, 2005)
To understand the international relations of contemporary society and how and why historically states has acted in such a way in regarding international relations, the scholars developed numerous theories. Among these numerous theories, the two theories that are considered as mainstream are liberalism and realism because the most actors in stage of international relations are favouring either theories as a framework and these theories explains why the most actors are taking such actions regarding foreign politics. The realism was theorized in earlier writings by numerous historical figures, however it didn't become main approach to understand international relations until it replaced idealist approach following the Great Debate and the outbreak of Second World War. Not all realists agrees on the issues and ways to interpret international relations and realism is divided into several types. As realism became the dominant theory, idealistic approach to understand international relations quickly sparked out with failure of the League of Nation, however idealism helped draw another theory to understand international relations. The liberalism is the historical alternative to the realism and like realism, liberalism has numerous branches of thoughts such as neo-liberalism and institutional liberalism. This essay will compare and contrast the two major international relations theories known as realism and liberalism and its branches of thoughts and argue in favour for one of the two theories.
Atzili, Boaz. (2007). When Good Fences Make Bad Neighbors: Fixed Borders, State Weakeness, and International Conflict. International Security. 31 (3), p139-173.
Progressive era foreign policy was motivated by a variety of factors including racial and national superiority, business and economic interests, strategic concerns, and idealism. Excerpts from For the Record provide various examples supporting the concerns that led to America’s foreign policy.
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 international politics as a struggle for power dominated by organized violence, “All history shows that nations active in international politics are continuously preparing for, actively involved in, or recovering from organized violence in the form of war” (Kegley 94). The downside of the political realist perspective is that their emphasis on power and self-interest is their skepticism regarding the relevance of ethical norms to relations among states.
Taking into account that states asses its strengths in order to adopt the most effective strategies to deal with potential menaces, westerns states understand the advantages of the aforementioned theory. The current threats that the Western world take into account are composed by local, regional and global menaces. To this paper it is essential recognise the scope of all of those elements that configure a threat to the West. Among many others there are drugs, crime, and terrorism, geo-strategic actors such as the Middle East and Russia, and growing powers such as China. These are complicated patterns that states need to strategically cope with. In fact, the security strategy from Western states is framed between the combination o...
Whenever world politics is mentioned, the state that appears to be at the apex of affairs is the United States of America, although some will argue that it isn’t. It is paramount we know that the international system is shaped by certain defining events that has lead to some significant changes, particularly those connected with different chapters of violence. Certainly, the world wars of the twentieth century and the more recent war on terror must be included as defining moments. The warning of brute force on a potentially large scale also highlights the vigorousness of the cold war period, which dominated world politics within an interval of four decades. The practice of international relations (IR) was introduced out of a need to discuss the causes of war and the different conditions for calm in the wake of the first world war, and it is relevant we know that this has remained a crucial focus ever since. However, violence is not the only factor capable of causing interruption in the international system. Economic elements also have a remarkable impact. The great depression that happened in the 1920s, and the global financial crises of the contemporary period can be used as examples. Another concurrent problem concerns the environment, with the human climate being one among different number of important concerns for the continuing future of humankind and the planet in general.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is a regional security based organization. This organization is unique in many ways and has been contributing to the security of its members and neighbors since 1975. The OSCE has had a busy history from the Cold War and beyond. With the end of the Cold War major shifts have come about in the area of international security that this organization primarily deals with. The OSCE is now facing a new era where it needs to convince its members that it still has a role to play.
The discipline of international relations (IR) contains several theories that contain theoretical perspectives to the idea of power. Within the realist perspective there are two approaches that help paint the portrait of the realist theory, the classical approach to realism and the neo-realist approach. Classical realism and neorealism both have been subjected to criticism from IR scholars and theorists representing liberal and constructivist perspectives. The key tenets to realism contain three essential characteristics of international relations which are the state, anarchy and the balance of power. This essay will closely analyse all three characteristics with special regards to power being central to the realist perspective.