International Relations in Future - Essay Example

The worldquarter of a century later From the rapid growth in every conceivable domain that man has achieved only in the past decade, it seems bizarrethe extent to which the limits may have transgressed in 25 years. Referring to international relations in particular, the world map never seizes to evolve, and the elements of history and geography both seem consistently challenged. Subsequently, the shape which the world might take can be anybody's guess. Simply one factor: either a lethal weapon in the wrong hands, a computer or biological virus, a natural calamity or a meteor shower can change the political makeup of this world in incredible ways. Yet, it is projected, that the basic construct of the international relations will have the same foundations, as it has today. Concepts of realism, liberalism and constructivism are among the most popular in the world of politics today. Understanding the future of the world in line of the same concepts would seem apposite, henceforth. Viewing the world in 2031, the first thing that may come to mind would be the national interest of the countries. Although the total number of countries may well have changed drastically, yet the basic reason why they keep forming and breaking would be the same - the primary interest of each and every one of them. The power struggle would nonetheless still be there, although in quite a different from. Countries would probably take form as 'cyber-states', wherein the interest of the countries would not be till the geographical/political borders, but actually to every nook and corner of the universe till where their electronic influence is involved. This would involve the extensive use of satellite warfare, and even wars over the territory in space! Not gold, not uranium, but the silicon chip will be the most sought after resource, and instead of weapons of mass destructions, a fatal electronic bug would be able to wipe out the entire defenses of the enemy. The concept of liberalism would also be very much in vogue. Individual would be masters of their own destiny, and would be free to join any power block they want. Media would become the primal political driving force, and simply by means of a click, the masses would have the power to make or break a leader. The sense of accountability would be far more, wherein a great deal of international processes would become transparent. Though people would still have the right to express themselves, the great fear would be not to implore into the domain of the other person. With everyone having a diverse array of personal options available at hand, the exact paradigm of individual preference would be very difficult to determine, and hence the political leaders of every country would have a very difficult time to control the people according to the interest of the country. Constructivism would also have its say 25 years down the line. Establishing goals, ideals and ambitions in conformity with the rest of thee world would be an impossible task. Every person would be a potential friend and a probable terrorist. Transformation in such a time would be very difficult. Political reform would hence only be a consequence of scientific reform. People would only follow what has been conclusively ordained by the wise, and not the mighty. Religious theologies would still grow further apart, with death and destruction happening basically at the onset of intolerance. The political line of reasoning for the present time may seem old-fashioned or even too ambitious for the future - the exact combination of political theories may never be known. However, the reality is that even in Caesar's time, the primary constructs of politics were derived from realism, liberalism and constructivism. Therefore, there is every probability that in the next 25 years as well, the drastic changes in international relations will not be able to change the very foundations upon which the politics are played. Technology cannot change a politician's mind, only interests can. Hence, the changing time will provide changing circumstances, and a possible alluring of the politicians into various realms of political systems. In the future, the picture for international relations would not be bleak, but very different. Empowerment would finally be with the people, but not through democracy, rather through technology. This would make a famine drenched person in Ethiopia as influential as a free citizen of the United States. People would be stronger than the state, and the sense of loyalty will be more with humanity and less with the political elements. This does not imply depoliticizing of the political systems, but actually self-actualization of the political masses. Though it may well be a time more turbulent than ours, yet it would be an era where people would be politically empowered - thereby accomplishing the essence of politics. The Political Prospects of China One of the biggest regrets which the strategists of the Western civilization of the 20th century will have, would be against the policy of population control. Though every economic, political and social clause of sanity would support the clause for control in population, yet the future of international relations and global politics would revolve around the greatest conceivable power - human resource. The world of today is slowly coming to terms with the sheer might and potency of a huge mass of 1 billion people - the effect it can have on the rest of the world. China is here to stay! Communism or democracy, dictatorship or monarchy, the system of government will not matter for China in the future. It has gotten the forward acceleration it needed in the past half a century. An economic might, a military contemporary, and a geographically advantageous entity, China is sure to be a formidable state of the world. Whatever the case might be, the world can't simply ignore 1/6th of its population, in whatever context. Right now, China is docile in many political matters, and is only concentrating on mustering up its economic forte. However, the time is not far away, when the yearning for political might shall knock at the door of China, and it would find it very hard to resist. Realism here would come up in play for this state. China is one of the few countries in the recent political history, which has successfully been able to take care and nurture its national interests. Even the US or UK cannot boast of this feat in the current world. China has shown beyond doubt, that despite living in a highly volatile region of the world, it is very much possible to excel in every domain if the political standing is strong. Therefore, it has never compromised on what it deems as essential for its people. Though liberalism might not seem quite evident in the political structuring of China, it may well be present in more ways than one. It is believed that they have essentially changed the concept of liberalization. Being socialist by default, the nature of the state is to mould the people's priorities into that of the state, thereby channelizing all the feelings for liberty into one major point - the development of the state. The definition of freedom for the people has been striving for the country. Though humanists may argue that this may seem contrary to the true spirit of the notion, yet it has worked well for the political future of China, and therefore would have little reason to lose it now. Perhaps the greatest reason why China has emerged into what it is now is strongly upholding the values of constructivism. While states with democracy kept on whining about rights and responsibilities, China was the one that actually made it possible in a communist state. The objectives were clear to the leadership, and they have been determined in their endeavor to achieve the same for their country. People's needs were fulfilled, and national goals were satisfied. This is indeed a political achievement for any country of the world, something which the leaders throughout civilization have been yearning to achieve. The litmus test is simple: can any nation of the world today attempt to undertake China as an enemy The answer is simple, and resultantly ratifies her political supremacy. China was once criticized for human rights, piracy and trade policies. Ironically, while the conditions on ground have not changed, the critics from the developed world have been silenced - they dare not speak ill this emerging power. Practically every developing economy has its roots somewhere in an industry in suburban Beijing; the steaks to create conflict are much too high. Americans may not like Chinese, but paradoxically, they can't hate them as well! China has made itself indispensable for the world. It has entered practically all urban households of the world through its products, and will soon enter the political dungeons of each nation in due course. Not agreeing with Chinese interests will not be an option one decade from now, and that is a huge compliment for the political standing of any nation. To add, due to the definitive difference in culture from the rest of the world, Chinese will not only be strong, they will be exclusive as well. In all, there is no doubt that the future seems optimistic insofar as the interest of China is concerned. It has now come to a position where it can command and demand respect from the world. It pretty much has its finger on the economic artery of the world, and very soon would have its control over its political one as well. The time is not far away, when the world would be dictated terms by China, and the loyalties of many countries would shift with the tide. Though much may not change for the rest of the world, but the time may well be near when learning Chinese would become an inevitable undertaking. Read More