The United States Illogical Practice of Democratic Peace Theory in the Middle East

2255 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Peace democratic theory

The idea of a lasting, ideally global, peace has been present in the minds of people for centuries. The most notable formulation of this is Kant’s vision of perpetual peace. “He saw it as a condition that needed to be maintained by politics between states with governments which represented society and separation of power. From this basic framework stems the idea called “democratic peace theory” (pg. 82). Democratic Peace Theory (DPT) asserts that democracies do not generally fight other democracies because they share common norms and domestic institutions that constrain international, state actors from going to war. Sebastian Rosato states, “In practical terms democratic peace theory provides the intellectual justification for the belief that spreading democracy abroad will perform the dual task of enhancing American national security promoting world peace” (pg. 585).

DPT is not only a fallacy, but it does not even begin to understand and contain modern day terrorism. Democratic Peace Theory sounds brilliant on paper, but when closely inspected, its deceptive nature and apparent simplicity becomes evident. One issue that currently divides many experts is the question of defining democracy and liberalism. Furthermore, there is no concise understanding of liberalism and democracy. Democratic peace theory fails to account for human behavior and perception. This is especially crucial when understanding terrorism at its core. This essay proposes certain systemic flaws in Democratic Peace Theory, such as Rosato states, “Democracies do not generally fight other democracies is a false premise; Democracies do not disseminate their norms of domestic politics and conflict resolution, and consequentially the do not respect each other when t...

... middle of paper ...

...tlieb. Washington, D.C.:

CQ Press, 2010. 235-271.

Kant, Immanuel Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch, 1795 via http://www.mtholyoke.edu/

acad/intrel/kant/kant1.htm, accessed 5th November 2013.

Locke, John, and Peter Laslett. Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge [England: Cambridge

University Press, 1988. Print.

Owen, John M. “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace,” in International Security, Vol.

19, No. 2, Autumn, 1994.

Posen, Barry. "Nationalism, the Mass Army, and Military Power." International Security 18

(1993): 80-124. Print.

ROSATO, SEBASTIAN. "The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory." American Political

Science Review 97.4 (2003): 585-602. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3593025. Web.

8 Aug. 2012.

Sixty-Fifth Congress, 1 Session, Senate Document No. 5. Via.

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/4943/, accessed on 5th November, 2013

Show More
Related

  • A Separate Peace Analysis

    1251 Words  | 3 Pages

    A Separate Peace, written by John Knowles is a flashback of the main character, Gene Forrester’s schooling at the Devon School in New England. During this flashback Gene remembers his best friend Finny, who was really athletic and outgoing. Gene and Finny’s friendship was a relationship of jealousy. Gene was jealous of Finny’s talent in athletics, and Finny was envious of Gene’s talent in school. In the end, Gene’s jealousy of Finny takes over and causes him to shake the tree branch that makes Finny fall and break his leg. The break was bad, but it was not until Finny fell down the stairs and broke his leg again, that he had to have surgery. The surgery that Finny would undergo would cause more complications and heartbreaking news for Gene. During the surgery Finny would lose his life due to some bone marrow that escaped into his blood stream and stopped his heart from beating. “As I was moving the bone some of the marrow must have escaped into his blood stream and gone directly to his heart and stopped it” (Knowles 193). Although people do not normally think about bone marrow as being a huge part of the human body, it can cause some major issues if it has to be replaced or escapes into the blood stream.

    Read More

  • American Foreign Policy: Realpolitiks Vs. Human Rights

    1637 Words  | 4 Pages

    (1)Should the U.S sometimes pursue realpolitik and sometimes human rights? In other words, is it acceptable for the U.S. to someimes anything even support dictators, if it is good for the nation, sometimes pursue moral priciples when it can reasonably do so?.(2) I think the U.S. should do what is in the best interest of the United States for example, (3)Just one day after the French surrender at Dien Bien Phu, an international conference to settle the Indochina conflict began in Geneva, Switzerland. There , representatives of the French and Vietminh attempted to to map out Indochina’s future. Cambodia, Great Britain, Laos, the People’s Replublic of China, The Soviet, and the United States. Also with the Panama Canal Treaties and the Chilean Revolution.

    Read More

  • Terrorism is Wrong

    615 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the article “Is Terrorism Distinctively Wrong?”, Lionel K. McPherson criticizes the dominant view that terrorism is absolutely and unconditionally wrong. He argues terrorism is not distinctively wrong compared to conventional war. However, I claim that terrorism is necessarily wrong.

    Read More

  • Can Drones Be Just?

    1247 Words  | 3 Pages

    Mingst, Karen A., and Jack L. Snyder. Andrew H. Kydd and Barbara F. Walter, The Strategies of Terrorism. Essential Readings in World Politics. N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. Print.

    Read More

  • Kant vs. Mill: Human Rights and Utilitarianism

    1725 Words  | 4 Pages

    Farber, H. S., & Gowa, J. (1997). Common Interests or Common Politics? Reinterpreting the Democratic Peace. Journal of Politics 59 (2): 393-417.

    Read More

  • The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism by Pape, Bloom, and Horowitz

    1414 Words  | 3 Pages

    “Terrorism involves the use of violence by an organization other than a national government to cause intimidation or fear among a target audience;” at least, this is how Pape (2003) defines terrorism in his article “The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism” (343). The goal of this article by Pape is to discuss suicide terrorism and how it “follows a strategic logic, one specifically designed to coerce modern liberal democracies to make significant territorial concessions” (343). Similar to Pape, Bloom (2004) and Horowitz (2010) also delve into the exponential increase of suicide terrorism and why it occurs. Although Pape, Bloom, and Horowitz concur that suicide terrorism is increasing, they disagree why it is so prominent. While the arguments presented from each of these researchers is powerful and certainly plausible, suicide terrorism is in fact not irrational, but strategic and is most often caused by state occupation and, when organized, aimed specifically at democracies.

    Read More

  • Is State Terrorism '?: Is State Terrorism A Valid Concept?

    1279 Words  | 3 Pages

    The concept of state terrorism is highly debated. The main opposition to state-terrorism declares that states have legitimate monopoly over violence, therefore, state-violence cannot be considered terrorism (Lacquer). Furthermore, conceptualizing particular properties of state-terrorism has furthered complicated the debate. For instance, should state-terrorism constitute external conflict or internal conflict; also is the normative strength of non-state violence as compelling as

    Read More

  • Neo-Realism and Liberalism: Comparing These Two Different Frameworks Used in International Relations

    1232 Words  | 3 Pages

    In order for countries to cohesively overcome international barriers, frameworks of ideal political standards must be established. Two of these frameworks constantly discussed in international relations are the theories of Neo-realism and Liberalism; two theories with their own outlook at the way politicians should govern their country as well as how they should deal with others. Neo-realism lies on the structural level, emphasizing on anarchy and the balance of power as a dominant factor in order to maintain hierarchy in international affairs. In contrast, Liberalism's beliefs are more permissive, focusing on the establishments of international organizations, democracy, and trade as links to strengthen the chain of peace amongst countries. Liberalism provides a theory that predominantly explains how states can collaborate in order to promote global peace; however, as wars have been analyzed, for example World War II, the causes of them are better explained by Neo-realist beliefs on the balance of power and states acting as unitary actors. Thus, looking out for their own self interest and security.

    Read More

  • The Rules of Realism: The Syrian Civil War

    2013 Words  | 5 Pages

    To be a spectator of any sporting event one must understand the rules that the players and officials use to govern the game. Without this knowledge it can become an immense challenge to understand if things are going well or poorly for your team or player. An excellent example would be if watching a golf tournament and you have no idea that the low score wins. The worst player in the tournament might end up looking like the winner, and that could not be any further from the truth. Understanding world politics can be very much like watching a sporting event you have no idea of what the rules are. The United Nations (U.N.) has rules that its member states should follow, but they are in many cases treated more like a guideline, such as the American invasion of Iraq. So how can the global citizenry understand why some global leaders choose one course of action over another, especially if there are no set rules with guaranteed results for each action, like a touchdown results in six points? For the global citizenry, the best way to understand global politics is to look to the theories that the global leadership subscribe to. And the only way to determine which theory they subscribe to short of asking each leader directly is to analyze their actions. The realist philosophy will be the theory that best explains the actions of global leaders and therefore will become the rule book to look to when understanding global politics.

    Read More

  • Realism and the War on Terror

    529 Words  | 2 Pages

    Probably the most obvious critique of realism with regard to the war on terrorism is that it is a theory that deals with international relations. The belligerents in the war on terrorism are not always conventional nation-states. Therefore, any theory that seeks to explain international relations must be amended to fit the framework of a situation in which nations are not the only players. This is not simply a matter of diction either. Non-state actors do not always act like states possessing a cohesive foreign policy and a desire for self-preservation and advancement. Furthermore, terrorist organizations are not tied to any specific area of land surrounded by well-defined borders that are protected with conventional military forces. This is not to say that terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda and Hezbollah are entirely devoid of the motivations on which traditional nation-sates act like the desire for power, wealth, and security; beca...

    Read More

  • Analysis of Kant´s Essay on Perpetual Peace

    978 Words  | 2 Pages

    In his essay on perpetual peace, Kant presents his own view on perpetual peace, which could be realized only if a few “Do’s” and “Don’ts” are met. He calls these Do’s and Don’ts “preliminary articles” and “definitive articles”, respectively. In this essay I would analyze what Kant means by “preliminary articles” and “definitive articles” and argue that contemporary globalization is not undermining the nation-state, which is consistent with the views of several other experts.

    Read More

  • Realism And Liberalism Research Paper

    1108 Words  | 3 Pages

    In conclusion realist and liberalist theories provide contrasting views on goals and instruments of international affairs. Each theory offers reasons why state and people behave the way they do when confronted with questions such as power, anarchy, state interests and the cause of war. Realists have a pessimistic view about human nature and they see international relations as driven by a states self preservation and suggest that the primary objective of every state is to promote its national interest and that power is gained through war or the threat of military action. Liberalism on the other hand has an optimistic view about human nature and focuses on democracy and individual rights and that economic independence is achieved through cooperation among states and power is gained through lasting alliances and state interdependence.

    Read More

  • Are Democratic States More Peaceful?

    2382 Words  | 5 Pages

    Democratic states are perceived to be more peaceful because “democracies do not attack each other.” The proposition that democracies never (or rarely; there is a good deal of variation about this) go to war against one another has nearly become a truism. Since Michael Doyle’s essay in 1983 pointed out that no liberal democracy has ever fought a war with another democracy , scholars have treated pacifism between as democracies, “as closest thing we have to an empirical law in international relations.” The democratic peace proposition encourages hope for a new age of international peace. Over the years since Michael Doyle’s essay a lot of literature has been written about “democratic peace theory”. A lot of analysis has focused on the claim- that liberal democracies do not fight each one another. There is a lot of action- reaction sequence in the academic arguments. As an idea catches on it accumulates adherents. The more popular an idea, there is more likehood of a critical reaction that raises serious and strong reservations about the validity of the new idea. In this essay, I would like to examine the claim- that democratic states are more peaceful as democracy causes peace. In this essay I draw on the writings of John M. Owen, Michael Doyle, Christopher Layne, Mansfield and Snyder, Alexander Wendt, Robert Keohane and Lisa Martin for their views on why democracies do not fight one another and then deduce my own conclusions.

    Read More

  • Structural Realism after the Cold War

    984 Words  | 2 Pages

    The first one, refers to democracies. Waltz puts in doubt the peace thesis arguing that the increase number of democracies will not assure peaceful intentions of states towards others. Indeed, Waltz argues that, contrary to peace thesis defenders, the United States and Great Britain, the predominant democracies in the nineteenth century, instead of using force, they used their influence ov...

    Read More

  • The Democratic Peace Theory

    938 Words  | 2 Pages

    The democratic peace theory was not always seen as the substantial argument and significant contribution to the field of International Relations that it is today. Prior to the 1970’s, it was the realist and non-realist thought that took preeminence in political theoretical thinking. Though the democratic peace theory was first criticized for being inaccurate in its claim that democracy promotes peace and as such democracies do not conflict with each other, trends, statistical data, reports have suggested and proved that the democratic peace theory is in fact valid in its claim. Over the years, having been refined, developed and amended, it is now most significant in explaining modern politics and it is easy to accept that there is indeed a lot of truth in the stance that democracy encourages peace. The democratic peace theory is a concept that is largely influenced by the likes of Immanuel Kant, Wilson Woodrow and Thomas Paine.

    Read More

More about The United States Illogical Practice of Democratic Peace Theory in the Middle East

Open Document