Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Critics of realism in international relations
Soviet Union collapse
Critics of realism in international relations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Critics of realism in international relations
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation or NATO was established in 1949 with the aim to provide security to its members against the Soviet Union. However, with the end of Cold war and subsequent disintegration of Soviet Union, NATO’s raison de’tre came into question. While some IR theories spelt doomsday for NATO, others hoped that it can sustain by adapting itself and riding on the ‘collective identity’ it created within the alliance. NATO not only sustained but also expanded its scope of operations and memberships post the Cold war. The essay will engage with various theories of International Relation to explain the creation and survival of NATO. In the process, the essay will also try to look into the design and decision-making process at …show more content…
From that perspective, realism plays a role crucial in explaining why NATO was created amid the geopolitical contest between the East and the West and between the Soviet Union and the West. According to the realism alliances are a response to ‘the existence of an external threat.’ Realism as an IR theory was used extensively by scholars to dissect the events of the Cold War years as it gives powerful explanations for war, alliances in a bi-polar world. However, realism has its limitations; Through the bi-polar power alignment lens of realism, NATO would not survive in the absence of the Soviet Union …show more content…
For neo-realism the presence of a common threat and a bi-polar power structure is imperative for the existence of NATO. End of the cold war resulted in an unipolar world order that, according to neo-realists, doesn 't justify the existence of NATO. NATO ‘might persist on paper but it would [cease] to function as an alliance. ' Waltz in 1993 wrote that 'NATO 's days are not numbered, but its years are.’ However, NATO’s durability has led some of them to revise their positions. Waltz argued that NATO cannot be considered as the same entity anymore, as it has changed considerably from the end of the Cold War. However, Waltz conceded that ‘it is the old purpose of NATO that has disappeared not NATO
This book showed NATO as being an organization that is very unorganized. It came across as though the countries involved did not respect each other’s thoughts and opinions. It dwells on the mistakes made by countries for example the United States, various other European countries. It made it seem as though NATO was in conflict within each other making the organization as a whole seem incapable of compromise and the defence of anything. At many points NATO wanted to vote the United States out of the organization but this obviously never happened. At one point it was a problem “about the possibility of being dominated and ultimately overwhelmed by too close an association with the United States” (pg.30) for Canada and their relationship.
The author doesn’t forget to mention the relationship between USA and NATO. He thinks that Americans welcome NATO as a weapon for America’s affairs, not of the world’s. In his final words, it is suggested that either Europe should invite USA to leave NATO or Europe should expel America from it.
In doing so, this assessment of U.S. interests in Crimea supports the options of non-intervention and a non-provocative stance in order to maintain long-term stability because the Russian invasion has only violated peripheral interests of EUCOM and SACUER. One of EUCOM's primary roles is to strengthen NATO's collective defense and assist its transformation since the fall of the Soviet Union. This is accomplished through building partner capacity to enhance transatlantic security. EUCOM supports American interests in Europe as outlined in the National Security Strategy: The security of the United States, its citizens, and U.S. allies and partners; A strong, innovative, and growing U.S. economy in an open international economic system that promotes opportunity and prosperity; Respect for universal values at home and around the world; and An international order advanced by U.S. leadership that promotes peace, security, and opportunity through stronger cooperation to meet global challenges.
According to Elaine Tyler May in her article Security against Democracy: The Legacy of the Cod War at Home, the cold war made an impact on Americans state of mind. During the nuclear arms race, many Americans became paranoid about their own country as well as foreigners . Instead of trying to get rid of this situation and mediating it , America decides to join this race, which only fuels the fire. At the same, American citizens were living their lives in fear everyday. Citizens were preparing themselves in case of an attack, as a result of the government doing nothing to try to protect America. Elaine Tyler May also states that the media back then was only fueling this phobia to grow. For example, the Los Angeles Times showing hypothetical bomb targets if the Soviets were to attack in Los Angeles. Some Americans, who were considering the possibility of a nuclear war, modified their homes into concrete to resist an atomic blast, created backyard bunkers, or even sheltered in their basements. In addition, whether you were for or against the buildup of nuclear weapons, fear would be present.
According to Kissinger, Wilson had dreamed of a “Community of Power” that would collectively provide international security. This community would come to be known as the “League of Nations.” Thanks in great part to Wilson’s grand vision, global cooperation is now being achieved through organizations such as the United Nations (UN) and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). International organizations like the UN and NATO have deep Wilsonian roots. Since 2004, NATO has added nine Baltic states to the organization (making a total of 28 members), which has arguably strengthened security cooperation efforts in that region. It is apparent Wilson’s dream of a “Community of Power” has persevered, due to the continued U.S. practice of promoting democracy as an instrument of conflict
During the late 1940's and the 1950's, the Cold War became increasingly tense. Each side accused the other of wanting to rule the world (Walker 388). Each side believed its political and economic systems were better than the other's. Each strengthened its armed forces. Both sides viewed the Cold War as a dispute between right and wron...
On March 24, 1999, the united countries of North Atlantic Treaty Organization, under pressure from the United States, launched an illegal assault upon a sovereign nation. The evidence is overwhelming that leaders within the United State government sponsored this decision with the extreme perseverance from President of the United States. NATO should have dismissed the request for assault and involvement for it was clearly illegal. It’s perpetrators showed total disregard for Article One of the NATO Charter, which incorporates by reference the United Nations Charter, Chapter One, Article Two, Sections Three, Four and Seven. These sections make it clear that NATO’s role is to be purely defensive. The aggression that NATO has undertaken did not come from or with approval of the UN Security Council, which NATO’s Charter clearly states numerous times that the UN Security Council will convene and approve of any such matter or action. It is a brutal violation of NATO’s Charter and of all principles of international law.
International organizations such as NATO and the UN are essential not only for global peace, but also as a place where middle powers can exert their influence. It is understandable that since the inception of such organizations that many crises have been averted, resolved, or dealt with in some way thro...
With the shock of two destructive world wars and then the creation of the United Nations, whose aim is to preserve peace, it is unconceivable for these two nations to fight directly in order to promote their own ideology. But the US and the USSR end up to be in competition in numerous ways, particularly in technological and industrial fields. In the same time they start to spread their influence over their former allies. This phenomenon have led to the creation of a bipolar world, divided in two powerful blocs surrounded by buffer zones, and to the beginning of what we call the Cold War because of the absence of direct conflicts between the two nations.
The realism that will be the focus of this paper is that of Kenneth Waltz. Kenneth Waltz presents his theory of realism, within an international system, by offering his central myth that, “Anarchy is the permissive cause of war”. Kenneth Waltz’s central myth helps answer the question as to why war happens in the first place. During the cold war, there was a heightened sense of insecurity between Russia and the United States due to presence of nuclear weapons. The Movie Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb used cold war tension between the two countries to tell the story of a general who went crazy and decided to unleash his fleet of nuclear bombers onto Russian military bases.
Realism can be described as a theoretical approach used to analyze all international relations as the relation of states engaged in power (Baylis, Owens, Smith, 100). Although realism cannot accommodate non-state actors within its analysis. There are three types of realism which include classical (human
Both of these are international relations theories. International relations theories aid the individual in better understanding why states behave the way in which they do and “several major schools of thought are discernable, differentiated principally by the variables they emphasize” (Slaughter 1). That being said, to understand offensive neorealism, one must firstly be able to know the basis of realism in itself, as well as differentiate neorealism from neoclassical realism. Stephen G. Brooks argues in his article “Dueling Realisms” that both “neorealism and postclassical realism do share important similarities: both have a systemic focus; both are state-centric; both view international politics as inherently competitive; both emphasize material factors, rather than nonmaterial factors, such as ideas and institutions; and both assume states are egoistic actors that pursue self-help” (Brooks 446). Structural realism is another term for neorealism, and both will be used interchangeably in the following case study. Aside from these shared values that both reflect, the two forms of realism both present very different or conflicting views on state behaviour. For one, neorealists believe “the international system is defined by anarchy—the absence of a central authority” (Slaughter 2) and that states take action based on the possibility of conflict, always looking at a worst-case scenario, whereas postclassical realists believe that states make decisions and take actions based on the probability of an attack or act of aggression from other states (Brooks 446). To expand on neorealism’s possibility outlook, Kenneth Waltz argues, “in the absence of a supreme authority [due to anarchy], there is then constant possibility that conflicts will be settled by force” (Brooks 447). Neorealists look at the possibility of conflict due to the potential cost of war, due to
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is an alliance of 26 countries from North America and Europe committed to fulfilling the goals of the North Atlantic Treaty signed on April 4 1949. The fundamental goal of NATO is to safeguard the freedom and security of its member countries by political and military means. NATO links North America and Europe by providing a forum in which the United States, Canada and European countries can consult together on security issues of common concern and take joint action in addressing them.
The New Cold War. Great Britain: Bloomsbury Publishing. Weber, Smith, Allan, Collins, Morgan and Entshami. 2002. Foreign Policy in a Transformed World. United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited.
The international system is an anarchical system which means that, unlike the states, there is no over ruling, governing body that enforces laws and regulations that all states must abide by. The International System in today’s society has become highly influential from a number of significant factors. Some of these factors that will be discussed are Power held by the state, major Wars that have been fought out in recent history and international organisations such as the U.N, NATO and the W.T.O. Each of these factors, have a great influence over the international system and as a result, the states abilities to “freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development”.