Analysis Of Kenneth N. Waltz's Man State And War

Theoretical framework

Introduction

In 1959, American academic and international relations scientist Kenneth N. Waltz wrote a book “Man, State and War” (three images). Although it has not become bestseller among the academics literature immediately, over the time it has become extremely important. Waltz stated in his book that each of these three images represents the cause of war and divide them into three main categories. Waltz as defensive neorealist was always proclaiming the idea of anarchical structure of the international system encouraging states to maintain moderate and reserved policies in order to attain security. Therefore it is important to note, that this paper will touch the problematic of neorealism just on the edge, since

Wars or conflicts are often a consequence of human selfishness, stupidity and inability to control emotions. These we may call primary causes of the war, but since human behavior is extremely hard to shape, we must accept the fact, that change in material matter is improbable. There is a chance or spiritual and religious enlightenment in order to alter human nature, however the primary definition of the nature is “good” or “bad” and often given since the every beginning and cannot be changed. The realist view of the 1st image is often depicted that human nature will always be inclined towards conflict and the probability to reach peace and prosperity is very low. On the other hand the liberal approach is more focus on the learning process of human nature. Historically humans saw the insecurity which can be caused by war, therefore the safest way to maintain security is to co-operate. When talking specifically about Israeli – Jordanian relations, it is necessary refer to the table 1, specifying the direct effect of the 1st image on other

It can clearly highlight the turning points can be clearly highlighted and identify and assign Waltz images to certain events. To be precise, in 1973, during the Arab-Israeli war, the King Hussein was facing a difficult decision. Relations with Israel were growing better every day and now the war bursted out and he had to make a decision which side to take. And since King Hussein needed to maintain its statues among the Arab states, he joined the coalition of Arab states against Israel, although he concluded a secret pact with Israel, in which both side states, that they will be at war against each other, but will try to minimize the direct contact. Human behavior became a source of domestic policy shaping and especially in the case of Israeli-Jordanian alliance it was a matter of existence of the alliance. In 2011 as it can be seen from the table one, the Jordanians publically opposed the alliance with Israel and called for alliance termination, due to the incompatibility of ideologies. Despite this protest, the alliance stayed alliance mainly because of its economical and security benefits for both