English Approach to Study of International Relations - Essay Example

English Approach to Study of International Relations Introduction: International relations branches from political science whereby it focuses on foreign affairs and global issues among countries of the world which make up the international system. The tools of international relations are used to attempt to make strategic agendas for the development of different aspects of society. The different approaches to the study of international relations have been shaped by traditions and cultures in the academic world to suit different countries. Scholars who are proponents of each of the approaches have also contributed immensely to the understanding of international relations in the specific countries that they are practiced. The approaches work to provide varied perspectives of events that are a concern to international relations. The approaches in all these events offer opposing perspectives which gives a better understanding of the events. The international relations approaches can be classified into either classical / traditional approach or scientific / modern approach. With regard to classical approach, substances prove to be of greater importance than method. On the other hand, scientific approach proves that methods and techniques are very important. The English approach is one the approaches that offers a specific perspective of international relations. This paper seeks to analyze the English approach to the study of international studies as developed by one Hedley Bull. English approach - Humanism This approach looks at state interaction in terms of the norms and practices that govern this interaction. It proposes that it is important to study history in order to uncover these norms and practices. The “English School” is also referred to as Liberal Realism, British intuitionalists or International Society. The observation is that there is still a “society of states” even though the world is under “anarchy” (Bull 19). Methodology In many ways, the English School supports critiques of international relations rationalist theories. Its main focus lies in the centrality of international society and as Bull postulates, the social meanings of world politics study. There is no evidence of testable hypotheses with regard to state behavior which is seen in other theories. Observation (detailed) and rich interpretation conquers in this school as compared to general explanatory models. These scholars base international system and its relation among states as one to be evaluated using the behavior and language of people in each state. One of this approach’s theorists Barry Buzan calls it “methodologically pluralist approach” (Buzan 470). Interpretation The English school is seen as an interpretative approach by the fact that scholars embark on different methods; legal, diplomatic and historical studies. Critics of the approach argue that there is need to develop scientific methods which will be certainly predictive. Pro-English approach scholars such as Rich Little argue that scientism as compared to broad historical approach is less useful especially when dealing with causal variables (Waever 52). History Hedly Bull observed that the international school was among the five central institutions that worked towards the mediation of international anarchy impact as opposed to the creation of an “anarchical society’ (Bull 21). With emphasis on context and interpretive methods, English School scholars believe that historical understandings are paramount in the study of world politics (Buzan 481). For instance, realists focus on the balance of power in the international system. English School theorists go further and evaluate what preceded such a system, how the states in the system were created, potential threats and motivations that the states might face in future and so on. Anarchical Society The English School is best expressed in Bull’s publication of 1977, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. According to its proponents, international relations is a system that has been established with regard to institutions and rules designed to function as anarchies among states that are sovereign in order to create international order (Clark 46). The anarchy therefore is the starting point towards theorizing on international relations. The international law is the tool used to manifest cooperation through common values and rules among sovereign states. Society of States According to Bull, a society of states occurs when a “group of states” form a society, oblivious of some common values and interests. They perceive themselves as bound by a common system of rules with regard to their relations. They make effort towards the establishment of common institutions. This definition is different from that of an international system which refers to a system formed as a result of constant contact between two or more states. The interaction makes a state’s behavior an important element to the other state. State System There are two different conceptions that define state system according to Hedley Bull. They are pluralism and solidarism. Both come to a consensus that a states system is a society of states whose values, institutions and rules are commonly agreed upon. State Sovereignty A sovereign body is above the law and therefore not bound by any existing law outside of its boundaries. This is in the domestic context. In international perspective, it refers to the international legal freedom of a state that is active at any time. Sovereign states have legal rights and duties in the event that they interact legally with each other (Buzan 473). So long as a state is not incorporated into another sovereign state, it remains sovereign regardless of its international legal obligation. Order and Justice According to English School, there exists some extent of order with regard to world politics. The same applies to justice. Order is a value in international relations according to Bull. It is important to note that at the international level, order can be shaped and sometimes overridden. International order is therefore a pattern that maintains the goals (primary, social or elementary) for the co-existence of states (Jackson 84). It is by no means peace or the absence of war since in some instances co-existence between states may even require use of force. Justice refers to moral ideals whereby certain human actions are treated by. This term can be used interchangeably with virtue and morality. In the international front, justice demands that certain privileges and discrimination be removed to achieve equality with regard to the distribution and/or application of rights of different people of different states. In some instances according to English School scholars, some discrimination is required for justice to prevail. For example between the nuclear and non-nuclear nations as well as wealthy states and poor states and so forth. Conclusion The English School approach to international relations is largely based on two characteristics. Firstly, there is a common consensus on the international society even though not much is agreed upon with regard to its formation and potential future. Secondly, methodological pluralism seems the best way to study the international society. This is because the system itself consists of different cultures, beliefs, structures and perspectives. The implication is that one must employ different methodologies to understand key concepts of international society. Works Cited Bull, Hedley. Justice in International Relations. London: Macmillan, 2000. Print. Buzan, Barry. ‘The English School: An underexploited Resource in IR’, Review of International Studies, 27.1(2007): 471-88. Clark, Ingram. International Legitimacy and world Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Print. Jackson, Reagan. The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Print. Waever, Oliver. Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Print. Read More