History and Political Science - Essay Example

?History and Political Science - Midterm Questions Question a) The relations of US with China are currently characterized by strong turbulences. There are periods during which signs of strengthening of the two countries’ relations appear. However, strong crises have not avoided. Reference can be made, as an example, to the recent opposition between US and China in regard to the latter’s rights on islands that belong to Japan. In addition, the two countries have a common interest: they both want to have a decisive role in critical international issues, especially in regard to economy and geopolitics. The potential improvement of the US-China relations in the future would be achieved using the neoliberal approach of international relations theory. The specific approach is based on the idea that international relations can be promoted through international institutions (Van de Haar 2009). These institutions would set as a priority the achievement of peace between the states involved in the relevant plan (Van de Haar 2009). Still, allowing these institutions to develop critical initiatives is not always easy. In the case of US-China relations the above view would be explained as follows: China is a country based on a centralized political system, meaning that the government has a non-controllable power to define the terms related to the country’s social, political and economic life. In this context, it would be rather difficult for the country’s government to agree to the use of an international institution for improving its relations with US. For the Chinese government providing its consent to such plan could be possibly interpreted as a partial resignation from its rights. This perspective could prevent the Chinese government to agree to the use of the neoliberalism approach for resolving its relations with US. For the US government also the case of resigning from sovereign powers, such as the power to negotiate with a particular state, would be an obstacle in following such practice for improving its relations with China. However, the neoliberalism approach is quite wide; no limits or conditions are set in regard to the characteristics of the international institutions On the other hand, alternatives could be possibly reviewed. More specifically, the governments of the two countries would choose an international institution that it is commonly used for such plans, i.e. for improving states’ relations in the context of the international community: the WTO (World Trade Organization) is an example. The above organization is quite expanded globally and has critical experience in managing such issues. WTO could suggest schemes of cooperation between the two countries, in addition to existing ones, so that the US-China relations are improved. For example, a scheme of lower taxation in imported goods or a scheme for the exchange of knowledge on new products. US and China are already members of this organization for promoting their trade interests. This means that the two countries would not have to set their powers as critical players of global politics and economy. It should be noted that the use of such plan by US for improving its relation with China would be aligned with another approach, the commercial liberalism, a view that it is presented below. (b) The measure suggested above, i.e. the use of an international institution, for preventing conflict can be characterized as quite effective. This view is verified using another approach, the commercial liberalism. In fact, this approach could be combined with the one mentioned above, i.e. the neoliberalism, for securing that the conflict between US and China will be prevented. The commercial liberalism is based on the idea that freedom in commerce can secure peace (Ralston 2013). This means that the delete of any trade restrictions between US and China could lead to long-term peace between the two countries. In practice, this approach could be considered as non-applicable, taking into consideration the strong competition that already characterizes the US market. Still, the US market is quite dynamic, meaning that the spending power of consumers remains at high levels, at least compared to other countries. This means that supporting such scheme could be feasible for both US and China; in both countries, the introduction of certain conditions for preventing the development of monopolies would be necessary so that national interests are not threatened. Question 2 Realism, as a concept of the international relations theory, emphasizes on the real criteria on which international relations are based (Crawford 2013). These criteria can be related either to the political influence, the defense or the economic superiority (Crawford 2013). In the case of EU a specific mode of realism would be most appropriate for explaining the Union’s performance since the end of the World War II: the classical realism. Classical realism promotes the idea that the increase of power, both political and economic, can be the actual motive for developing a specific international relations plan (Crawford 2013). The use of classical realism could help to understand the general criterion on which the establishment and the development of EU have been based. However, an additional theoretical approach would be necessary in order to identify the exact terms on which the evaluation of the Union’s performance should be based; the modified Realist theory would be such theory. The particular theory is based on the view that the creators of a regime, Union in the case of EU, are usually able to explain the criteria on which the establishment of the regime was based but they are not able to monitor the regime’s development or the implication of regime’s initiatives/ decisions (Crawford 2013). The above two approaches, the classical realism and the modified realist theory, as parts of realism, are used below for evaluating the success and failures of EU since the end of WWII. The creation of the EU is considered as a result of a particular US plan: by creating a union of the countries of Western Europe US could easily control the potential expansion of the Soviet Union in the West (Flint 2006). Also, it was easier for US to promote its interests in Europe if there was a representative body with which the negotiations would take place (Flint 2006). In other words, the EU was established in order to secure the economic and geopolitical interests of US in the European region (Flint 2006). However, in order to become a strong supporter of the US’ interests, the EU had to increase its power in all sectors: politics, economy and social ethics. The development of initiatives for increasing power is a characteristic of classical realism, as explained above. Still, through the years the EU was proved unable to control all its activities/ decisions (Flint 2006). At this point, the modified realist theory would apply. Reference could be made to the case of Yugoslavia conflict: EU authorities tried to ensure that they could control the expansion of the crisis (Flint 2006); finally, it was necessary for US to intervene so that the crisis is ended (Flint 2006). The Union was proved unable to handle the crisis even if EU officials and regulators tried to convince international authorities that the problem is under control. Another failure of EU could be identified in the following case: EU has developed its own military force: the EuroCorps. The key criterion for this initiative has been the support of the Union’s allies (Flint 2006). The decision of EU to support the military missions of US worldwide, in countries such as Iraq, often leads to important losses. This fact proves the inability of the Union to monitor effectively its sectors/ activities, as the modified realist theory notes. The failure of member states to develop common actions in regard to immigration and work is another proof of the Union’s inability to secure cooperation and communication between its members. However, the cases of the Union’s success should not be ignored. For example, the development of a common Economic zone is considered as an important achievement of the Union (Flint 2006). Using its influence in global economy the EU can keep its power at high levels, as the classical realism accepts. Another important success of the EU has been its significant geographical expansion (Flint 2006). By expanding its territory the Union has been also able to strengthen its global influence, a fact that also promotes the Union’s power as a key player in world economy and politics (Flint 2006). The success of the EU since the end of the WWII could be also identified at the following fact: today the Euro, the Union’s currency, represents a critical part of the global wealth, being second after the US dollar. This achievement is another indicator of the Union’s ability to fight for the increase of its power, a term set by the classical realism. Question 3 The constructivist theory can be critical in order to explain the decisions of states in the context of international relations. Indeed, when evaluating the necessity of a critical decision a government has to take into consideration all the decision’s implications, both in the short and the long term. Using the constructivist theory a government would focus on the idea on which the actions of another state have been based and not so much on the actions themselves (Rousseau 2006). For example, it is possible for the weapons of a country to of different importance, in terms of international relations, from those of another country, even if these weapons have the same technical characteristics (Rousseau 2006). The case of nuclear weapons, which is particular popular today, is an example. The nuclear weapons of North Korea are evaluated differently from those of France; the former are considered as being a threat for the international peace while the latter are not related to such risk. The question that should be set at this point is the following: can constructivism being used, in its general form, for showing the potential harm of US interests by the decisions taken by the US government for fighting terrorism? The answer seems to be negative. In its general form, constructivism would be rather supportive towards the initiatives of US for fighting terrorism: using as a basis the ideas used by states for developing their military forces or for taking specific political decisions, the practice of US to engage military forces for controlling terrorism could be considered as justified. For example, the statement of a country’s governor that he is intended to increase the funds invested on research related to the military could be considered as hiding a threat for neighbouring states. In addition, US is a world player in regard to politics and economy. Using the constructivist theory the US leaders could justify their decisions in regard to the ‘war on terror’ on the basis that these decisions are aligned with the idea to which US is related, i.e. a state that plays a key role in the definition and promotion of politics and economics worldwide. For the above reasons, a narrowed form of constructivism could be chosen for highlighting the negative effects of US practices in the context of the ‘war on terror’: the Domestic Constructivism of Johnston (1995) could be an appropriate framework (Rousseau 2006). The above theory is based on the view that the decisions of a state can be based on its own preferences, as developed domestically (Rousseau 2006). In the case of the ‘war on terror’ as developed by US, the assumptions made using the Johnston’s theory could be the following: a) US, as a state, is based on the idea of liberty; in fact, liberty has been the critical principle on which the efforts for the country’s independency from Britain have been based; b) the initiatives developed by US in regard to the ‘war on terror’ are mostly characterized by military missions, of various forms. The specific initiatives, however, are opposed to the international law which supports the independency and sovereignty of states around the world. This means that the international law does not accept the violation of a state’s borders unless there are clear indications that the global security is threatened. Developing such initiatives US comes to opposition with the principle on which its creation has been based, i.e. liberty. In other words, the excessive use of military force for fighting terrorism destroys the idea that world has for US: a country that respects and supports liberty and justice. According to the above, the Johnston’s theory on constructivism is quite effective for showing that the decisions of US presidents for fighting terrorism are, actually, counter productive to the interests of US, as they destroy the country’s image as a vital member of the international community. Question 4 (a) The collapse of the Soviet Union has resulted to the creation of a series of states that were considered as independent, at least in terms of their political control. However, these states had to face a series of important problems: the allocation of financial resources for funding important activities and plans, such as those related to health and education, has been the most common problem for the states that were up to then members of the Soviet Union. The private sector of these countries should be also supported, at least for an initial period, so that it is able to become competent in the global market. Up to the collapse of the Soviet Union, its members did not have to focus on such issues, at the level that these problems were addressed by the central government, meaning the Russian government. By becoming independent, the states of the former Soviet Union had also to face the challenge of social conflicts. These conflicts could easily expand in case of the government’s failure to respond to the basic needs of citizens, such as the need for food, housing and health. However, these needs could not be addressed unless funds for supporting the relevant governmental plans would be available. The failure to locate such funds would lead to severe conflicts, even threatening the political system of the state involved. It is at this point that the use of international relations theory would become inevitable. Reference is made to a specific IR theory: realism. In the context of realism the decisions of states are based on actual needs rather than on hypothetical conditions, such as in the case of liberalism (Ganesan 2005). In the specific case realism fully explains the practice of these states to emphasize on their relations with US after the collapse of the Soviet Union. After the above event, these states had the need for a strong supporter, so that their economic, political and social stability is secured. US was considered as the most appropriate ally not only because of the strength of its economy but also because of its political influence within the international community. (b) An alternative theory for explaining the strong relations between the US and the states of the former Soviet Union is the Social Constructivism theory. The above theory promotes the idea that the decisions of people are likely to be ‘strongly influenced by their social environment’ (Orjinta 6). At that period, i.e. after the collapse of the Union, US was regarded as a world leader in defining politics. States worldwide were trying to become ally to US so that they are protected by potential threats. At the same time, after the collapse of the Soviet Union US was considered as an ideal state in terms of its social and political structure. Being an ally of US would help a state to face effectively social conflicts and to secure its political stability. In other words, for social constructivism, the effort of the countries of the former Soviet Union to keep their relations with US at excellent level can be fully justified. The above effort, as explained using the Social Constructivism, reveals a critical fact: the potential of a state to face effectively social conflicts and to stabilize its economy can highly enhance its power within the international community: the specific state is expected to be welcomed as an ally and to be more able to support its geopolitical interests, compared to other states that are unable to keep peace at the level of society. Works Cited Crawford, Robert. Idealism and Realism in International Relations. London: Routledge, 2013. Dorman, Andrew and Joyce, Kaufman. The Future of Transatlantic Relations: Perceptions, Policy and Practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010. Flint, Colin. Introduction to Geopolitics. London: Routledge, 2006. Ganesan, N. Realism and Interdependence in Siagapore's Foreeign Policy. London: Routledge, 2005. Orjinta, Ikechukwu. Social Constructivism in International Relations and the Gender Dimension: International Relations and Gender Made Simple. Santa Cruz: GRIN Verlag, 2010. Ralston, Shane. Philosophical Pragmatism and International Relations: Essays for a Bold New World. Plymouth: Lexington Books, 2013. Rousseau, David. Identifying Threats and Threatening Identities: The Social Construction of Realism and Liberalism. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006. Van de Haar, Edwin. Classical Liberalism and International Relations Theory. Oxford: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Read More