Realism: Realism is the predominant theory in International Relation. Realist believe in states, being the only actor, have the authorities to decide their behavior towards other states and their behaviors are logical. Power, especially Military Power
Libertarianism is still keenly influenced by Paine’s anti-Federalists sentiments within this paper simply applied to modern issues. As the king was tyrannizing economic freedom with his unfair tax system, on the official libertarian platform they call for the abolition of income tax as “all
It further lays emphasis on state preferences rather than national power as primary determinant of state activities. There are certain events in history that purely served realist paradigm’s fundamental postulates. One main event is the Iraq war 2003. . Thucydides famous statement-the iron law of realism ‘the strong do what they have to do and the weak accept what they have to accept’ can be a satisfying rationalization for the war in Iraq. (Strong hegemonic power-the USA did what she had to do and the weak-Iraq accepted what she had to accept.
The essay provided an outline on each theory before going on to explain the theory’s view on what causes wars. After I evaluated and juxtaposed, it led me to the conclusion that even though there are changing and opposite explanations to answer the question of what causes wars, realism provided the most relevant answer. It seems as if the balance of threat against a potential hegemony has been the most relevant answer as to what causes wars. I can also conclude from this that because states are the primary actors in international relations they will seek to expand their power because they believe it is an essential element in an anarchical
(D) Scope of National Security Versus Insecurity A traditional definition of the State, often attributed to Max Weber, requires as a necessary condition, the effective monopoly of the use of violence within a given territory. The security of States was, therefore, threatened by any change that might threaten that monopoly of violence, whether it was through external invasion or internal rebellion. National Security was therefore, viewed purely from the military perspective. Consequently, National Security was, in the past, narrowly understood and insufficiently conceptualized. From most of the literature available, adopting this narrow view, National Security concept is given an essentially strategic meaning by equating military defence with security as a whole.
Using the framework of the Copenhagen school, this essay will analyze the securitization of terrorism in Peru, considering that for an issue to be securitized it is important to have a speech act, an actor that claims that an issue is existentially a threat, demanding to take extraordinary countermeasures to deal with the threat, and convincing an audience that breaking rules is justified to counter the threat. Securitization of Terrorism in
Rather than focusing only on state’s selfishness and competitiveness, structural realists (neorealists) believe that states enter into alliances with other states (diplomacy) to regulate and keep a check on the power of other alliances and more powerful states. Although the school of structural realism (neorealism) is developed from the classical realist school, there are key differences between these two types of realism. According to Ferguson (2011) and the lectures and other materials of week 1-3, classical realists primarily focus on explaining the nature of man; that is, human nature is aggressive and human aggregates (states) are thus aggressive too. They argue that behaviors of states derive heavily from human nature, and self-centeredness and self-interestedness are presumed to be the fundamental principles of realism. In contrast to this, structural realists (neorealists)
It deals with why nations go to war, and it pertains with the conduct of war. Scholars have identified two (2) reasons for the “just war” theory which are known as “Jus Ad Bellum” (the right to go to war) and “Jus In Bello” (the right conduct of war).
This study attempt to provide complete understanding of the contemporary terrorism by utilizing theoretical perspective specially tells us about the political realities and identical actions and realities of the society which are constructed by human beings they are not inherently exist in society. This essay will analyze how in post 9/11 public discourse. “Terrorism” is constructed. We use language to structure our world. Language not only determines how we see the world, but also what kinds of actions are possible.