Theories of State Interaction, Research Paper Example

Let’s face it, international political conflict is inevitable and have been “prevalent since the times of the Post-Cold War era and were reiterated Post-9/11 period with Globalization further changing the traditional aspects of international affairs.” (Herbert, 2007).  In order to identify with the concept of realism in world politics, Mingst notes that the reader must continuously reach a level of consciousness that will all but enable him/her to gravitate to the information posed in the book as to feel it through hi/her own pulse. This can be accomplished through reading daily news of current international affairs and through various websites dealing with current international affairs. In a realist political society there is no presence of global government. “Further the military is the largest protecting force of the governing body of a nation and act defensive and offensive to protect the citizens.” (Grant, 2008). Leverage is kept through even bargaining instead of manipulative means of transparency. “Surprisingly realists believe that there is no room for ethics in international affairs and preserve the right to do anything to sustain power within the government.”  (Grant, 2008). Realism views conflict and war as the means to settle international disputes.

In the international system the focus in on the structure acting on the states with individuals acting as a whole on the state as a human nature. With respect to international government in a neo-realistic society, there is no central government rather anarchic and states act as political sovereign units. “Neo-realists fear that because violence and anarchy is central to their government, this presence is likely to incur in the future”. (“Neorealism Theory”). By virtue of a pessimistic view, an achievement of peace is not seen as an outlook for the future. “First, the neoidealist argument of moral factors being foundational to aid may be more convincing than a standard neorealist argument of security-related factors being the main direct causes, but neorealism is not automatically silenced. This article argues that neorealism – arguably the dominant theory of international politics – can be properly maintained against a recent neoidealist critique that emphasizes the moral impact of the ‘foreign aid regime’: the more than fifty-year old international practice of overseas development assistance.” (Kamminga, 2007).

Ability to sustain polarity, to keep power and to deter offensive balance barriers are some of the areas of vulnerability to both realism and neo-realism international political societies. “It is found that predictors of such factors can be stabilized through democratic, judicial, statistical and statistical norms.” (“Conquering Myths:  Testing Realists, Liberal and Constructivist Arguments about State Vulnerability to Conquest”).

Realism is a term that is synonymous with power politics with interest in security and international affairs. Realism further influences and emphasized world politics as being superior built on a distinctive set of idea and idealisms. The foundation of neo-realism supports that the theory is based on moral factors rather than political dominancy. Validity of theories is shown through impact of foreign regimes as well as academic support writings.  Theories of realism, liberalism and structuralism have been tested by empirical evidence for the presence of political supremacy. The situation between the United States and Iraq is a prime situation that holds empirical weight to the idea that political supremacy is powerful over any theory of realism or neo-realism. Realism and liberalism fail to appropriately describe and support the true conflict between these two countries. The study of states and how they interrelate in a rational manner is supported by realism theories. Foreign policy is based on the best action for the states. Nations can only survive through the practise of power. This is very determinate and distinct. Nations are forced to act strategically to protect their best interests, therefore suggesting political supremacy sometimes of irrational behaviour. “In realism the anarchistic behaviour cannot be overcome, rather it is fixed or permanent.” (“International Relations: Iraq and the United States”).  Iraq is a dictatorship which presents itself as an anarchistic dictatorship with supreme government. A government cannot present itself as a supreme government and as a realistic government.

Conclusion

It appears that realism and neo-realism have their distinct role in political society. There is vulnerability in international political societies with both respects however both have a strong presence within our international government. Further it appears that the majority of our international disputes with other countries present itself as supreme power disputes as such with the Iran/United States war and the Al-Qaeda/Taliban and United States War.

References

Herbert A. (2007) Introduction to International Relations Retrieved October 7, 2009 from, http://www.uga.edu/intl/Herbert3200sp07.pdf

Kamminga, M. (2007) Morality under anarchy:  neorealism and the foreign aid regime Retrieved October 8, 2009 from, http://philica.com/display_article.php?article_id=109

International Relations: Iraq and the United States Retrieved October 8, 2009 from, http://instructional1.calstatela.edu/tclim/Models/IR_essay1.pdf