Theory Complex Interdependence Analysis

863 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Importance of interdependence and international cooperation

The theory of complex interdependence was created as a reaction to the realist theory. The theory of complex interdependence has many parts but has been compounded into a simple definition of being “the entire intricate range of interactions among modern nation, which has made transnational forces even more important” (49). The ideas of complex interdependence represent a challenge to the realist ideas about national sovereignty because according to realism, the only thing motivating the states is endurance of sovereignty. National sovereignty is the supreme controlling power by which an independent state is governed, and the realists believe that the supreme power in an independent state should be based on its military and economic force. With the complex interdependence theory, the government does not rely as much on military and a power balancing force (hard power), but focuses more on increasing the economic relations with other states in a peaceful manner which decrease the amount of security dilemma that nations face. The idea of national sovereignty is lost in this aspect because with complex interdependence the focus shifts from the survival of one’s own nation state to cooperating with other nations to make better ties in international affairs.

Realists believe that the state is the dominant actor in the international system and that the state can use force to get what it needs. Realists believe that a state’s external relations should be based more cautiously on a basis of military and economic strength, also known as “hard power” (31). Realists are very cynical when it comes to world affairs; instead of seeing nations coming together to work and make peace, they see the unending threat of conflict and war. Realist be...

... middle of paper ...

...x interdependence uses other resources such as international organizations and transnational actors as their major instruments, which they find more effective than using force.

Even though, complex interdependence does hinder some of the realist ideas, both theories produce different political outcomes. With complex interdependence, there are multiple goals to pursue; with more actors in play, each actor will pursue his or her own goal. Complex interdependence may have been created as a possible solution to the way the realist approached national sovereignty but there is no plausible way to take out the military force out all because at some point war and conflict is unavoidable.

Works Cited

Johnson, Loch K. 1942-. American Foreign Policy and the Challenges of World Leadership. Power, Principle, and the Constitution. New York: Oxford UP, 2015. Print.

Show More
Related

  • The Key Differences Between Realists, Morality of State Theorists, and Cosmopolitans

    1550 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...heories outlined in this paper. One of the defining principles of realism is that the state is paramount to anything else, including morality. Realists argue that deviation from the state interests in an anarchic system creates vulnerability. Morality of state theorists uphold state sovereignty and argue that intervention is not permissible unless the circumstances are crass and warrant action. They talk about aggression as the only crime that one state can commit to another and suggest that aggression should only be allowed as a retaliatory measure. Finally, cosmopolitans believe that morality can be achieved at the individual level and that morality can be somewhat universally applied. Non-realists do not support preemptive actions or intervention under almost any condition, and the criteria by which intervention is warranted aligns with the principles of justice.

    Read More

  • Theoretical Perspectives on Iraq War 2003

    2300 Words  | 5 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Nuclear Issue in the North Korea from the Eyes of Neorealism and Neoliberalism

    2055 Words  | 5 Pages

    What neorealism believes is fear and distrust originated from the anarchy of international system, resulting in the pursuit of power for survival. As stated by Mearsheimer (2010), power is the currency of international politics. The statement addressed a simple but important question: “why do states want power?” While “human nature” is always claimed by the classical realism, the neorealists, or the structural realists such as Mearsheimer specified the structure or architecture of the international system which forces states to pursue power. All states desire sufficient power to protect th...

    Read More

  • Understanding International Relations

    1517 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Leadership And Foreign Policy

    2218 Words  | 5 Pages

    Realists disregard the fact that moral values guide ones foreign policy. They also believe that even though one might deceive themselves about considering democracy and morals, the matter of the fact is that people will always put their self-interest before anything else thus governments act upon things such as geopolitical, economic interests for example. According to realists, there is no higher authority to punish those countries that misbehave so a country can just do whatever it pleases.

    Read More

  • The Realism of Kenneth Waltz

    2320 Words  | 5 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • fog of war

    1454 Words  | 3 Pages

    According to realist view ordering principle of the international system is based on anarchy. There is no higher authority other than the states themselves to check and balance their actions. Consequently, nation-states are the main players in this system. In other words, sovereignty inheres in states, because there is not a higher ruling body in the international system. This is known as state centrism. Survival is an obligation continuing to be sovereign. On the other hand, sovereignty is the characteristic feature of states and its meaning is strongly tied to use of force. According to the most of the realist variants, states are “black boxes”; the determinative factor is states’ observable behavior, not their leaders’ characteristics, their decision making processes or their government systems.

    Read More

  • Realism During the 1994 Rwanda Genocide

    1226 Words  | 3 Pages

    In realism, states are seen as rational, unitary actors. Realists assume that the actions of a state are representative of the entire state’s population, disregarding political parties, individuals, or domestic conflict within the state (Goldstein & Pevehouse, 2010). Any action a state takes is in an effort to pursue national interest. National interest is “the interest of a state overall (as opposed to particular political parties or factions within the state)” (qtd. in Goldstein and Pevehouse, 2010, p. 355). If a state is rational, they are capable of performing cost-benefit analysis by weighing the cost against the benefit of each action. This assumes that all states have complete information when making choices (Goldstein & Pe...

    Read More

  • Offensive Neorealism Essay

    917 Words  | 2 Pages

    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

    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

  • Political Realism

    2261 Words  | 5 Pages

    However, the structure and process of international relations, since the end of World War II, has been fundamentally impacted through an immense growth of a variety of factors at multiple levels, which leads to the liberalist theoretical perspective of global complex interdependency. The complex interdependency is constructed from the liberalist theoretical perspective emphasizing interdependence between states and substate actors as the key characteristics of the international system (Ray and Kaarbo 7), which means that cooperation can be made more te...

    Read More

  • The Realist Approach to International Relations

    982 Words  | 2 Pages

    To conclude, there are four main components of the realist approach to international relations, they are: state which includes egoism as the states are composed by the selfish people, self-help which includes balance of power as power is used to enhance the survival rate, survival which includes hegemony in order to maintain its position and anarchical system which related to lust for power and led to security dilemma.

    Read More

  • International System Essay

    926 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...ment and well-being. It is clear that without the ongoing presence and work of international organisations, the international system would be in a far worse and more chaotic state, with a far greater chance for a civil war to breakout. They also are a major player in helping develop states political and economical systems.

    Read More

  • International Relations Essay

    1095 Words  | 3 Pages

    The study of international relations takes a wide range of theoretical approaches. Some emerge from within the discipline itself others have been imported, in whole or in part, from disciplines such as economics or sociology. Indeed, few social scientific theories have not been applied to the study of relations amongst nations. Many theories of international relations are internally and externally contested, and few scholars believe only in one or another. In spite of this diversity, several major schools of thought are discernable, differentiated principally by the variables they emphasize on military power, material interests, or ideological beliefs. International Relations thinking have evolved in stages that are marked by specific debates between groups of scholars. The first major debate is between utopian liberalism and realism, the second debate is on method, between traditional approaches and behavioralism. The third debate is between neorealism/neoliberalism and neo-Marxism, and an emerging fourth debate is between established traditions and post-positivist alternatives (Jackson, 2007).

    Read More

  • The Dependency Theory: The Dependency Theory

    1223 Words  | 3 Pages

    The dependency theory is a very different approach than the others. It offers great insight into a concept that is often overlooked, however, this theory risks being too narrow. It does not do a great deal to account for other types of international relationships. Power is at the center of this theory as well, and in this situation, it is beneficial to one

    Read More

More about Theory Complex Interdependence Analysis

Open Document