The Neo-Realist Understanding of State Conflict - Essay Example

The Neo-Realist Understanding of State Conflict Introduction: The present paper aims to explore the nature and scope of state conflict by paying special consideration upon the neo-realism perspective. The main objective behind elucidating the topic under-consideration includes the imperative alterations being observed the nation-states at global scale in the aftermath of Great WAR II, and establishment of several independent states after the collapse of Colonial Era by the beginning of second half of twentieth century. The study will also take the affects of Cold War, and making of new contracts at regional, continental and global levels, which have introduced new alliances and rivalries among the nation-states. The study is also interested in exploring the causes behind the establishment of new alliances and rivalries, and consequences of the same on the administrations and subjects of the first and third world countries. The paper will also be supported with the classical and realist approaches of international relations in order to elaborate the topic under analysis. Attributed to the contemporary era US theorist and political thinker Kenneth Waltz, neo-realism approach views the modern age of international relations as the age of the growth and development of independent states system at the international stage (Waltz, 1988, p.617). The perspective is of the opinion that after the emergence of several former Asian and African colonies as independent states during 1945-1965, nation-states have turned out to be the most effective and influential actors of international politics (Baldwin, 1993, pp.26-7). As a result, the balance of power is expected to be shifting from the imperialist states to the poor countries as well. Consequently, the recently emerged nation-states would play vital role, according to the perspective, in respect of formation of political policies and strategic schemes by keeping in view the interests of the downtrodden masses belonging to the third world countries. In addition, these nation-states will also embark upon the arduous task of maintaining peace and condemning violence had been being practiced by the powerful states since perhaps the known history of the world at large. It is therefore, neorealist perspective appeared in order to replace the age-old Realism theory, in the light of which there would be conducted researches in respect of international relationships, and nature and scope of state conflicts from various international platforms (Powell, 1994, p.318). The claim has partly been articulated by keeping in view the distress, destruction and damages the previously-subjugated nation had undergone from eighteenth century onward at the hands of western imperialism (Ihuegbu, 2002, p.22). Since the subjects belonging to these colonised countries have witnessed cruel suppressions and oppressions unjustly inflicted by the foreign invaders upon them, these former colonies of European states must contain the natural tendencies in respect of condemning and protesting of atrocities on the weak nations by the strong and powerful nations at large, which is sure lead to lead the world Fascism, by challenging the Marxist doctrine of equality and democracy (Reich, 1980, pp. 6-7). As a result, presence of these oppressed nations as the member of international forums and platforms including the United Nations, NATO, NAM and several others, the world would never witness the incidences of exploitations of weak and poor nations by the big powers of the globe. However, time has turned down the notion supporting the rise of nation-states as completely sovereign and independent ones in such a way that they could be in a position of making policies regarding their internal problems and external affairs without undergoing any pressure or threat from the external powers. Nevertheless, the idea of being set free from the cruel clutches of former masters appears to be just a wild goose chase for the third world countries, due to the very reality that an overwhelming majority of the countries that have won freedom from the European imperialism during last century is still looks dependent of the big powers in almost all political, social and economic matters (Anghie, 2005, p.145). In other words, it is the big powers that are regulating the affairs of the small states by implementing the political and economic policies of their choice in those states, resulting in the establishment of new colonial era, where the poor countries will obey and comply with all the commands of their western masters against the heavy loans, financial aids and technical assistance being rendered by the European powers to their former slaves at large (Rajagopal, 2003, p.97). Records of twentieth century political developments provide a significant witness regarding the increase of international conflicts between various neighbouring countries of Asia, Africa and Latin Africa (Peacock, 1982, p.413). Though the international agencies have intermeddled the contending issues in the name of arbitration etc, yet no dispute of international nature between two conflicting states could have observed a peaceful solution altogether. Since no third world state is in such a position of resolving its contentions with the rival states altogether, they have to seek the support of the international forums successfully being administered by the big powers, which maintain the authority of deciding the fate of the poor nation-states. The poor countries of Asia and Africa were turned European colonies from eighteenth century onward in the name of spread of religion, education and democracy; however, the nineteenth century missionary cry of ‘Africa for Africans’ had become universal shibboleth for the future days to come. (Tiryakian, 1962, p.701) The establishment of United Nations, in October 1945, was aptly claimed to be the beginning of a new era of peace, progress and prosperity. Actually, WWII had brought such enormous destructions and turmoil that all peace-loving states developed an unabated trust in the then recently established organisation. Somehow, the organisation always proved it to be the cat’s paw of big powers, where each and every resolution would be passed with the hidden agenda of protecting and safeguarding the interests of the big nations of the world matters (Anghie, 2005, p.298). Whenever a poor nation attempted to seek justice and rescue from this very platform, it had obtained nothing but a long, dreary and an unending wait for the introduction of such policy that would force the aggressor state to mend its way by paying the war indemnities as well as stop inflicting cruelties on the victim state in one way or the other; the examples of US-Vietnam conflict, Indo-Pakistan wars and age-old Kashmir issue, Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), Russian invasion of Afghanistan, Arab-Israel conflict, US atrocities on Afghanistan and Iraq and several other issues of international nature are moot point in support of the failure of international forums, predominantly the United Nations, which would not allow peace between the neighbouring states because of the vested interests the big powers contain in the augmentation and prolonging of the disputes between the purported independent and sovereign states belonging to the third world (Mahajan, 2003, p.611). The sovereign states underwent exploitation by the big powers particularly in the aftermath of the beginning of Cold War between the USA and former USSR by late 1940s on the German issue (Miller, 2001, pp. 6-7). The cold war not only played formidable role in dividing the entire world into two blocks, but also paved the way towards the formation of alliances being led by the USA on the one side, and former USSR on the other. Both the great powers applied their economic and strategic influences and devised new political schemes and policies in the name of peace just to woo as many countries as they could; however, the later developments proved the bitter reality that the third world was divided into two zones in order to play in the hands of the great nations for safeguarding their vested interests in many ways, perhaps in the best interest of the Veto powers of the world, actually. The nature of the conflicts particularly between the poor and recently freed sovereign states, as per the evidences from historical records, is geographical and economic rather than religious and ideological as it falsely propagated by the states. It is especially true with the Kashmir dispute of South Asian politics, as well as the Palestinian problem misrepresented by the Jews and Muslims of the Middle East region (Armstrong, 1997, p. 331). Somehow, Pakistan always looks for administering of plebiscite in the Kashmir valley in the light of the resolutions passed by the United Nations time and again (Bhutto, 1967, p.9). Actually both India and Pakistan have been interested in annexing this extremely gorgeous dreamful valley with their territories for their expansion on the one side, and for obtaining high financial gains through tourism and natural products generated by the beautiful valley (Talbot, 1998, p.102). Similarly, the Palestine problem is incorrectly regarded to be a dispute based on religious differences between the Zionists and Muslims; though both these communities look for having political control over this region, considered to be sacred for the followers of Abrahamic faiths i.e. Jews, Christians and Muslims (Armstrong, 1997, p. 295). Thousands of people have lost their lives, in the holy land of Jerusalem since the establishment of the Zionist state of Israel in May 1948 at the heart of the Arab region, along with demolishing of houses, offices, and other public and governmental buildings and edifices attributed to the Palestinians. Three horrible wars have also been fought between the Arabs and Jews in the sacred name of faith, and even the foreigner peace-seekers and human rights activists, including Rachel Corrie and others have sacrificed their lives in the pursuit of peace in the region (Zaidi, 2012). However, the United Nations, and the big powers have always turned a deaf ear to such a troublesome state of affairs in the Gulf zone. Thus, UN’s inability to solve the disputes of international consideration cry shame as a black mar on the face of big claims made by the big powers while depicting the sovereignty of the small states as well as achievements of the world organisation in general. One of the most startling challenges the purported sovereign states witness include the enforcement of the political policies, cultural values, technological advancements, navigation equipments and warfare schemed and designed the few real independent powers of the world. The western powers, Rajagopal laments, secretly project and promote the so-called human rights movements, by recruiting the activists from the local population consists of both civilian and military personnel and intellectuals, in order to get their policies and schemes implemented in the poor nations in the name of law, justice and equality (2003, p.81). These horrible movements, launched by making big claims of safeguarding human rights, actually mean to weaken the geographical and ideological boundaries of the third world nations, so that the big powers could introduce and enforce the social and political schemes of their choice subsequently. It is therefore, conflicts and clashes between the members of various communities co-existing in one and the same society are projected in the name of faith, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and socioeconomic statuses etc. Consequently, a society victim of the condemnable conflicts and clashes between its members not only starts growing weaker and weaker, but also turns out to be dependent of the big powers in the pursuit of seeking peace and prosperity at national scale; the same is also applied to the neighbouring states, disputed issues between them are especially highlighted through media in such a manner that gulf of hatred finds new heights between them in the wake of international agenda and purported world order woven by the master minds of developed states. Realism perspective, on the other hand, rightly declares the existence of absolute anarchical state of affairs all over the world, where there could be no possibility of the existence of a regularity authority that would regulate the affairs between the independent states, and hence could play the part of a neutral and an impartial arbitrator. Such an anarchical and perturbed situation actually reflects the authenticity of the notion might is right, where no powerful neighbour would allow the weaker one to lead the life of peace and stability at any cost. Since might is always determined to demonstrate itself in one way or the other, the weaker are sure to taste humiliation and disgrace because of being unable to tame and overcome the stronger politically, culturally and economically as well. Consequently, the stronger is always declared justified one in respect of invading the land of the weaker, plundering the wealth, massacring their males, dishonouring their women and smashing their adolescents; the Nanking incident of 1937, where the Japanese troops not only destroyed the defence system of the vanquished China, but also raped thousands of women in the wake of massacre of the Chinese forces, and imprisonment of the military and civilian males of the defeated country (Woods, 1998, p.271). The same is also applied to the US invasion on Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, which serve as the worst examples of and strong evidences in support of the same claims. Vietnam War was commenced by the US military and strategic intelligence in order to keep the Far East region away from the influence of Russia. Consequently, the war actually reflected the growing tension between two superpowers of the era i.e. the USSR and USA; it took two long decades to the humiliating surrender of the US forces from the small state of Vietnam in the aftermath of the heavy losses of men and material of the invaded Vietnam on the one side, and painful mortification, humiliation and dilapidation of the invader USA eventually. Although, the American administration and forces applied every possible strategy and even military brutality on the country, particularly the Mai Lai catastrophic massacre (Fallows 2009, p.2); nevertheless, the Vietnamese refused to allow the Americans to defeat the nation in anyway. Furthermore, the world had just closed its eyes on the indescribable atrocities committed by the powerful Americans on Abu Ghraib prison, where every kind of disgrace and humiliation was exercised on the prisoners of war kept in the prison. They were inflicted with physical, mental and sexual tortures, along with applying electric shocks, stripping them nude, and tying them with one another in a highly painful and degrading manner. Moreover, many of the torture practices and interrogation techniques that were used at Abu Ghraib may have been designed specifically with the religious beliefs and prohibitions of the Muslim prisoners in mind (Zurbriggen, 2008, pp. 303-304). Had Iraq been an independent sovereign state, no one could have dared to insult, torture and rape its innocent masses, busy in defending their country, in any way and at any cost. Consequently, the US invasion of Iraq served as an imperative blow on the face of purported sovereignty being enjoyed by the poor and backward countries of the world. In addition, the same demonstration of cruel and atrocious might has also been displayed by the American forces against their own female co-soldiers while engaged in attempting to protect the ideological and geographical boundaries of the civilised USA. The female cops are not only insulted, rebuked and tortured, but are also raped by the co-soldiers as a routine matter (Dick, 2012). Thus, here appears the Marxist perspective that submits to state that every powerful individual, group, community, nation and state, on the foundations of its concrete strength and domination, embarks upon inflicting pains and sufferings upon the weak just for the sake of exhibiting its power over them. Hence, sense of exploitation is not confined to the relationship of owner and worker, or producer or labourer; on the other hand, powerful male stratum always exploits the weak female folk by dint of its physical power and superiority over them. It is predominantly applied on the developed nations on the one side, and the developing and downtrodden states on the other. The neorealist doctrine has been reflected in the literary piece Lord of the Flies by Golding (1954), where the little boys appear to be left without the existence of the adult supervisors or caretakers in an abandoned island. Since there is no one to regulate their activities, they first manage to get organised and co-operate with one another in food collection and making efforts for capturing the attention of some rescue teams by lightening fire on the mountain. However, the innate lust for power and dominance haunted some of the boys, which turn rebel to the established rules and regulations for the sake of ruling over others. Though a large majority of the boys attempt to stand by the torch-bearer of law and regulation; somehow, urge for food and shelter force them to join the group of rogue boys for their safety and escaping hunger and fear as well. Thus, the rogue group dominates in the dissolute island, engaged in challenging the statutes of law, and the law-makers too as well (Golding, 1954, p.65). The same code of conduct has been in prevalence and in popular parlance in the international politics. When the poor Kuwait was invaded and conquered by the powerful Iraqi forces in August 1990, the tiny vanquished Arab state of Kuwait did not have any option other than seeking the US help for its rescue from the neighbouring invader i.e. Iraq. Later, when the ruler of Iraq was asked why did he call a non-Muslim for help against a Muslim brethren nation. The Kuwaiti king helplessly replied that there had been no Muslim state that could be in a position, both politically and strategically, to force the Iraqi president to vacate the territories he had forcibly and illegally captured from the weak neighbouring state. Thus, the same order determining might as right, decreed by the ancient Greek gods and goddesses, as well as observed by the ancient and medieval era monarchs and commanders (Blond, 2000, p.42) appears to be in vogue in the so-called modern era of technological and spatial revolutions. As a result, the weak states have to associate themselves with one strong power or the other for its security and sustenance of so-called sovereignty, though these states have to mortgage their national dignity and prestige against the political, economic and moral support and favours they look determined to obtain from their masters (Rajagopal, 2003, p.209). The Golding perspective regarding seeking the shelter of the powerful and at the helm of political authority looks being applied and adopted everywhere and in almost all parts of the world without discrimination. It is therefore, every state either large or small is well acquainted with this bitter reality. It is therefore, almost all the nation-states, which had obtained freedom from the western imperialism after the end of WWII joined one of the two blocks led by Russia and America (Miller, 2001, p.37). However, it is up to these big powers and their purported dominions i.e. third world states how they utilised their relationships keeping in view their respective vested national interests, actually. It is therefore, the South Asian state of Pakistan had played the part of US broker, by handing some of its regions for establishing its military zones to challenge the Soviet Russia, though it could not earn anything for the poor broker during its campaign against the neighbouring India in winter 1970-71. Nevertheless, the USA has also proved itself to be a sensible and reliable patron while safeguarding the interest of its Middle East agent-state i.e. Israel. It is therefore, millions of Arabs could not tame Israel during their wars against it in 1948, 1968 and 1973 respectively. America also provided Israel strategic and financial aid during the Israel-Lebanese War of 2006; however, the nationalist militant organisation Hezbollah did not let it make a sure headway at any cost in the region. As a result, the US authorities also had to step down from favouring and aiding its Middle East dominion state, in order to plead neutrality at various international forums. Thus, the US authorities played decisive role in the establishment and sustenance of one and the only Jewish state on the face of the earth (Wisse, 2007, p.37). Somehow, Russia had turned out to be a reliable ally for India and other socialist states of the globe at large. It is therefore India regards Russia to be a reliable friend and supporter in the international arena. The modern era world history provides sound evidences in support of Russian aid and strategic assistance to India during the Sino-India War of 1962 on the one side, and Indo-Pak wars fought between the two South Asian states in 1948, 1965 and 1971 (Mahajan, 2003, pp.503-12). Hence, Russia had turned out to be a sincere and loyal friend for India, instead of the fair weather ally i.e. America, which is just an unnecessary burden for the poor countries of Asia and Africa in general (Sheikh, 2007, p.377). On the one side the poor states have to make hard efforts in respect of maintaining their sovereignty and financial stability; and on the other side, the developed nations are free to make the decisions of their choice without finding any hurdles or obstacles on the way to entering into relationships with the friend nations, as well teaching the rivals a remarkable lesson by either invading over them or keeping them isolated by introducing and implementing the restrictions and banishments on them. The example of the restriction afflicted Iran and North Korea are the best precedents in favour of the same. Nevertheless, the definition of independent and sovereign states as per defined by Waltz in his Neorealist doctrine, look most appropriate and fittest ones while taking Russia, America, England, China, Australia, France, Germany, Japan and Canada into consideration. Not only this that these countries devise their national strategies, related to political, economic, social and cultural matters, without any external interferences or threats altogether, but also these really sovereign states observe complete freedom for revising and altering the same. In addition, the developed and independent nations do not feel any hesitation in respect of presenting the resolutions of their choice at one or more of the international forums, mostly to thwart the enemy states. It is not a secret anymore that the rogue and terrorist members of Al Qaeda and Taliban organisations were hired and planted by America for stopping the Russian advancements to the south and south west. It is therefore former US President Reagan had declared the status of Afghans and Pakistani tribesmen equivalent to the founders of America. These Arab, Afghan and Pakistani terrorists commenced a filthy war in the northern parts of South Asia, turning the region to be a virtual inferno existing on the face of the earth. The same terrorists have become the eye-sore for Pakistan, by challenging the solidarity of this purported and wretched South Asian state on the one side, and by putting the peace and stability of the entire region at grave jeopardy on the other. It is therefore it has aptly been blamed that the same Taliban were involved in the Mumbai terrorist attacks of November 2008 (Schifrin, 2009). Hence, though millions of voices appear against the condemnable and shameful offences practiced by the terrorists, though no single voice appeared to censure and condemn the planters of terrorists i.e. American thinkers and strategic analysts. Further, one of the most astounding characteristics elucidated by Waltz (1979, p.91) in his neorealist approach while depicting the sovereign states includes the freedom (and perhaps capability too) these states enjoy in respect of defending the national and ideological boundaries of their countries. However, such type of liberty and privileges are attributed to few states of the world only. Consequently, Marxist perspective again makes its appearance by making arguments in favour of the very fact that the powerful are there just to exploit the weak (Macionis, 2007, p.357); and Chander & Arora also appear to be justified ones in their claim that elephant and sheep could not become equivalent to each other with mere being declared to be possessors of one and the same rights (2003, p.17) on the noble principles of justice and equality in general. It is therefore the small states have to rely upon the big powers while making pursuance in respect of resenting any resolutions at an international platform against the aggressor and antagonist neighbours as well as other exploiter state of the world at large. One of the most distinguished features of the second half of twentieth century includes the upsurge of the authoritarian rulers in most parts of the third world states, predominantly Libya, Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Tunisia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan and others during 1960 to 1980 (Malloch-Brown, 2011, p.89); and the most prominent similarity among all these states included their then-recently obtaining freedom from the clutches of western imperialism. As a result, these autocratic rulers were enforced in these poor states either in the name of religion, or with the false claims of torch-bearers of justice and equality. However, later developments endorsed the solid assumptions and perils about these rulers to be the agents of western imperialism, who would employ all efforts in weakening the political and economic fabrics of their respective lands (Orwell, 2003, p.280). It is therefore the recent rise of purported Arab Spring is also being blamed to be the brainchild and agenda of the US-led modern imperialism, which has felt the immediate need for new systems along with new rulers, in order to get their strategic schemes implemented in the name of the wishes of the masses for bringing change within their socio-political scenario subsequent to the human rights movements, secretly funded and aided by the western masters. To conclude, it becomes crystal clear that neo-realist doctrine maintains certainly validity in its nature and scope, which is equally applied to all countries and sovereign states of the world without discriminations while discussing the perspective theoretically. However, the available evidences entirely negate and refute the possibility of the unflinching and unabated sovereignty claimed about an over whelming majority of the third world states in the presence of the influential, powerful and dominating developed nations, which would not allow the poor and weak nations to invent, introduce or implement the policies of their choices for the best interest of their nation at large. Consequently, the states have to make alliances at regional bilateral and international scales for keeping peace and solidarity on the one hand, and to fulfil their social, cultural and financial needs on the other. In addition to this, the masses belonging to the poor and small states of the world have to lead the life of constant threat and fear because of their inabilities to obtain war deterrence power as well as latest weapons essential for destroying the attacks and aims of their enemies. It is therefore, the Veto powers have been bestowed with the permission of inventing and keeping the weapons of mass destruction, including the atomic and hydrogen bombs for the annihilation of their rivals; but the third world nations are invaded and plundered provided they even attempt to devise far inferior WMDs in comparison with the big powers, for their defence or meeting with their energy crises. Thus, the perturbed state of affairs witnessed by the present day international politics carries nothing in its nature and scope other than complete and unconditional exploitations, partialities, inequalities and injustices, which have been being applied on the downtrodden states in the name of equality, justice, neutrality, freedom and democracy. It is therefore, the establishment of the United States, and bestowing of the power to Veto to five favourite nations of the world, just mean to carry on an unending state of political conflicts between the nations in the name of ethnicity, race, region, religion, territorial expansion and economic gains, resulting into chaos, disorder and destruction in various zones of the mother earth. Bibliography Anghie, Antony. (2007). Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law Cambridge University Press Armstrong, Karen. (1997). Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths Ballantine Books Baldwin, David A. (1993). Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate Columbia University Press. Blond, Anthony. (2000). A Scandalous History of the Roman Emperors Carroll & Graf Publishers New York Bhutto, Zulfiqar Ali. (1968). Peace-Keeping by the United States Elegant Printers New Delhi Chander, Parkash & Arora, Prem. (2003). International Relations Bookhives Dick, Kirby, dir. (2012). The Invisible War. Chain Camera Pictures Productions Fallows, James. (1975). What did you do in the Class War, Daddy? (Washington Monthly 1975) Retrieved from http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2009/0911.fallows.html Golding, William. (1954). Lord of the Flies Wideview/Perigee Book Ihuegbu, Nnamdi (2002). Colonialism and Independence: Nigeria as a Case Study Retrieved from Accessed on November 16 2012 Mahajan, V. D. (2004). International Relations since 1900 S. Chand & Company Limited Malloch-Brown. (2011). The Unfinished Global Revolution: The Limits of Nations and the Pursuit of a New Politics Penguin Books Macionis, John J. (2008). Sociology: a Global Introduction. Prentice-Hall Miller, David. (2001). The Cold War. Pimlico Orwell, George. (2003). Shooting an Elephant Penguin Books Limited Powell, Robert. (1994). Anarchy in International Relations Theory: The Neorealist-Neoliberal Debate. International Organization 48 (2): pp. 313–344. Rajagopal, Balakrishnan. (2003). International Law from Below: Development, Social Movements and Third World Resistance Cambridge University Press Reich, Wilhelm. (1980). The Mass Psychology of Fascism Third Edition Farrar, Straus and Giroux, Ritzer, George. (2008). Sociological Theory McGraw-Hill Schifrin, Nick (2009 November 25). "Mumbai Terror Attacks: 7 Pakistanis Charged – Action Comes a Year After India's Worst Terrorist Attacks; 166 Die". ABC News. Retrieved 17 May 2010. Sheikh, Khalid Mehmood. (2007). Foreign Policy of Pakistan Emporium Publishers Lahore Pakistan Talbot, Ian. (1998). Pakistan: A Modern History Palgrave Macmillan Tiryakian, Edward A. (1962). Early Reviews of The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. Journal of Classical Sociology, 12 (3-4), 513-525. Sage. Waltz, Kenneth (1988). Theory of International Politics Harvard University Wisse, Ruth R. (2007). Jews & Power Random House Inc. New York Woods, John E. (1998). The Good man of Nanking, the Diaries of John Rabe. Zaidi, Mujtaba Haider. (2012, Sep 1). Court Verdict in Rachel Corrie Murder Case The Frontier Post p. 6 Zurbriggen, Eileen L. (2008). Sexualized Torture and Abuse at Abu Ghraib Prison: Feminist Psychological Analyses Retrieved from http://people.ucsc.edu/~zurbrigg/pdf/Zurbriggen2008.pdf The Time Magazine. (1969). Mai Lai Massacre Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,840403,00.html#ixzz15FTV197C Read More