Realism, Structuralism, and Regional Organisations: From Trade Agreement to Political Union - Report Example

Realism, Structuralism and Regional Organisations: From Trade Agreement to Political Union Student’s Name: Course: Tutor’s Name: Date: In a world where countries are employing immeasurable efforts to forge peace amongst them, it is possible that unions forged to serve economic or trade interests could end up becoming political unions. Such unions would be akin to centralised political systems as exemplified by the formation of the European Union (EU), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and Mercosur, which is a trade agreement formed by Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay. Interestingly, the same countries, which champion the sovereignty, appear to be applying double standards when they engage in discussions that lead to such trade agreements. Like everything undertaken by politicians however, the decisions are quickly justified using realism, and structuralism theories. This report dwells on realism, structuralism and regional organisations. The three identified areas are explored in relation to their effect on trade agreements, which in some instances has the potential of paving way for full-fledged political unions. The study of International Relations (IR) reveals that countries are usually motivated into action by different things. Realism emphasises that the nation-states disguise their national interests (i.e. territorial integrity and political autonomy) as moral concerns for other countries. After securing territorial integrity and political autonomy, the nation-state may then expand her interests into securing resources and/or power beyond their domestic realm (Ferraro, 2010). Using the US-China example, it is worth noting that the United States may be stronger than China politically, militarily, socially and even economically. However, being a fast-developing country, there is no way that the US can guarantee that China will not surpass it in terms of economic growth in the future. This explains why the US is bent on enhancing its trade relations with the latter, because as Sanger (2000) observes, key decision-makers in the Clinton administration felt that the emergence of China as an economic and world power would pose a security threat to the US. As such, they advocated for the China’s admission to the World Trade Organisation as one the way of restraining it, and making it a better actor in world trade. Sanger (2000) observes that the Clinton administration argued that granting China a permanent trading status would not only serve the US’s economic interests of the latter, but would also serve the country’s national security. According to Ferguson (2004), realism focuses on the actual situations in the world often concentrating on both the negative and positive aspects. Further, it stresses the importance of power and its augmentation in the international arena. In realism, the state is considered the main actor in IR, while national interests are considered as motivational sources of leadership. Additionally, realism proposes that actions and outcomes are better indicators of the real social, political or economic climate rather than any ideas or opinions expressed about the same. Regardless of all these, perhaps the most revealing aspect of realism is the belief that human nature is inherently self-seeking. Putting the EU case into context, one can argue that realism played a major role in the formation of the regional organisation, which has assumed social and economic significance as the EU member countries integrate some more with each passing year. As Ocana (2003) observes, the origin of the EU can be traced back to post World War II Europe, when a few truths became apparent in continent. To start with, countries in Europe became aware that the European hegemony was over and that the US and Soviet Union had more military, political and economic might that the divided European states. Secondly, it became apparent that the only way to gain on some of the lost economic and social gains was by fostering European integration. Thirdly, the Europeans realised that the only way to create a free, fair and prosperous continent was by embracing integration amongst different European countries. Winston Churchill captured these opinions in a 1946 speech when he proposed a “kind of United States of Europe” (Ocana, 2003). As Ocana (2003) observes, the 1948 formation of the Organisation for the European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) was the first major indicator that Europe was ready to implement its post-war ideas. True to realism, the actions by the European countries were proof that they were ready to rebuild their continent. When OEEC came into place, it liberalised trade among member countries, in addition to introducing monetary agreements that served to enhance the economic cooperation in the region (Ocana, 2003). EU member countries have experienced immense gains since the union was enacted. Specifically, the region has seen enhanced movement of capital, people, goods and services among the member countries. As a result, member countries have managed to fight nationalistic and protectionist tendencies, which had crippled trade in the region earlier. The lack of a political union is however a major shortcoming in the region because despite the Euro being a common currency in all member countries, the region lacks joint fiscal or monetary policies, which means that the countries do not have a common decision-making approach. As Bergmann (2009) aptly puts it, the political deficit may end up rolling back the gains that the EU has achieved over the years. But why is there dithering among regional leaders about the formation of a political union? Well, most of the theory explaining how EU was formed indicates that the agreements between member countries were based on realist thoughts. However, one cannot dismiss the possibility that narrow political interests by an elite group of people who wish to hold onto power could explain the indecisiveness in political issues. Should they give way, there is little doubt that the EU constitution would be enacted and a social, economic, political union attained. Unlike realism, structuralism posits that the economic structures have an undeniable impact on the social, political, economical and cultural aspects prevailing in different countries. The impression created by the structuralism theory is that countries could organise themselves within a regional structure such as the EU for purposes of fostering economic cooperation, a regional culture, and a common approach to addressing environmental or infrastructural issues. Unlike realism however, structuralism argues that the state interest is determined by the ruling elite, and hence should not be perceived as a representation of the real national interest. The structuralism theory further proposes that the more power a state has, the more influence it is has on international relations. For instance, the US hegemony gives the country more influence on IR than any other single country in the world. Interestingly, despite its powerful position in the world, the US cannot be a lone player in the world. Often, the country has to seek support from other countries while pursuing its interests abroad. While China’s admission to the WTO was strategically important to the US for example, the latter could not secure the former’s admission without supporting votes from other countries. As Jiang (2009) observes, it took the unanimous approval of 142 WTO member countries to admit China into the WTO in 2001. Although the US was just one out of the many countries that supported China’s admission, there is little doubt that the bilateral trade talks concluded in 1999 had an impact on the US and its willingness to mobilise support for China. China’s accession to the WTO can be perceived as a form of structuralism, where major economies did not want to sideline the country since it would pose a competitive risk on their ability to trade in the international markets. China’s economic growth attracted international attention to the point that it could not be ignored as just another ‘subordinate developing country’. As structuralism argues, the powerful states cluster together, while leaving out the less-powerful states on the periphery. Looking at how the developed (powerful) and developing (less powerful) countries relate, one can see aspects of both realism and structuralism in the bigger picture. For example, regional organisations such as NAFTA and the EU are a reflection of both the realism and structuralism concepts, while larger world organisations such as the United Nations and the WTO are a reflection of the realism concept. Attaining a political union however still remains a mileage for most such regional organisations, which were founded on the need to foster inter-regional trade, and perhaps concentrate power in one region. The debate on structuralism vs. realism will no doubt continue for many years to come. In fact, reflecting on the two leaves more questions than answers on just which of the two theories is more ‘real’. However, the realism concept seems more prevalent in the prevailing international relations especially concerning the formation of trade agreements, which have the potential of paving way for political unions. This is not to mean that structuralism is entirely absent; in fact, the accumulation of wealth among a small percentage of people in the developed countries, and the inability of poor countries to form or maintain their own trade agreements is proof that structuralism has an undeniable effect on IR. Regardless of this, it is worth noting that decision-makers who determine how a country relates with others may be oblivious of such theories. As such, their decisions may necessarily not fit any theoretical classification. References Bergmann, M. (2009) ‘The EU’s political deficit’, Huffington Post, viewed 31 May 2011, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-bergmann/the-eus-political-deficit_b_171959.html Ferguson, J. R. (2004) “Political realism, ideology and power: -A discussion and critique via Machiavelli, Morgenthau and Sun Tzu: Essays in history, Politics and culture”, viewed 31 May 2011, http://www.international-relations.com/History/Machiavelli.htm> Ferraro, V. (2010) “Political realism,” viewed 31 May 2011, http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/realism.htm Jiang, L. (2009) “Long march’s peak: China’s admission to WTO,” viewed 31 May 2011, http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://www.brighttrans.com/bbs/Thread.asp%3FThreadID%3D662&ei=e9zkTbiuK46yhAfG_ojqBw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CFEQ7gEwBw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dwhich%2Bcountries%2Bvoted%2Bfor%2BChina%2527s%2Badmission%2Binto%2BWTO%253F%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dgmail%26rls%3Dgm%26biw%3D1024%26bih%3D653%26prmd%3Divns Ocana, J.C. (2003) “The history of the European Union: the European citizenship,” historuasiglo20.org, viewed 31 May 2011, http://www.historiasiglo20.org/europe/anteceden2.htm Sanger, D. E. (2000) “The world; sometimes, national security says it all,” The New York Times- Washington, viewed 31 May 2011, < http://www.nytimes.com/2000/05/07/weekinreview/the-world-sometimes-national-security-says-it-all.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm> Read More