Do Nation States Seek to Maximize Wealth or Power - Essay Example

Do nation s seek to maximize wealth or power? Do nation s seek to maximize wealth or power? The world is divided intosemi- peripheral and core states. Each nation outlines its plans based on the current state of the county. Conflicting nation tends to use two concepts as the source of their conflicts. The scarce resources within the human space prompt countries to innovate measures to attain these resources. Conflict arises between semi-peripheral states and core states. Conflict may arise between two core states or between cores states and semi- peripheral states. The core state would tend stamp their political and economic strength over other states and would deploy several models to aid in the process. Core states would fight to control the international in an effort to stamp their wealth dominance over givens states. In an event a political based conflict arises, the states would deploy methods that will ensure their political and power dominance over other states. The essay will focus on power and wealth enjoyed by states and will determine the magnitude of each in enhancing dominancy. Humans are unique thus set their goals based on their needs at a specific period. The nature in which they satisfy their needs may vary. Those satisfied by their needs will tend to seek surplus dominance over the others. The concept applies to states in that core states seek more control of the world thus deploy various means to ensure they attain their goals. The satisfaction of citizen is measure by the economic growth and other government indicators. Peripheral and semi peripheral state tend to focus more in attain the basic needs, as there exist a gap between the wealth and the poor. Closing the gap would mean more resources are channelled towards social issues. The struggle to attain a specific economic status prompt these countries to depend on aid from the core states to enable them substantiate their limited resources (Dunne & Schmidt , 2008) Economic strength enables a country to dominate the world in matters decision making. Countries would stamp their authority after they dominate the world trade. Krasner (2000) attributes the concept of dominance to hegemony effect where a state proves its economic prowess over a group of other states. Countries try to dominate the market by creating supply to meet the global demand. The amount of activities by a given country will determine its economic supremacy. Core countries pull out resources in effort of ensuring their supremacy in the global economy. Trade is a determinant when evaluating the global economy. Country will tend to focus on increasing their levels of exports to the international market (Strange, 1988). Models are then designed to enable a continuous flow of good into the market. The semi peripheral and peripheral states tend to adapt a consumer characteristic in the global scenes. The trade imbalance thus prompts the peripheral countries to develop systems that will enhance GDP growth and other macroeconomic growths. Countries relate to each other both economically and politically. The global economy gives room for each state to participate based on their capacity. Countries would tend to focus in dominating the market more than their other trading partners dominate. Maximizing on revenue would be the target of each nation engaging into the global market (Strange, 1988). The core states would tend to draw the labour form the peripheral states. Skilled labour would tend to move from the peripheral states to the core states. The immigration is brought about by efforts by the core state to satisfy the local demands and thus offer surplus in terms of labour to other states ( Cohen, 2009) Maximizing wealth in this scenario would mean reduced cost of operation and availability of labour. The attraction of people towards the country indicates how a country should focus in maximizing on wealth rather than on power. Power only deters a nation for freely engaging with other states. In an effort of ensuring wealth maximization, security is essential. Countries invest heavily in security as a means of ensuring world dominance. World dominance entails having enough military power to counter attacks from other states. Military strength correlates with the level of wealth a country possesses. Core countries tend to enjoy a stronger military power as compared to other states. The available resources should be able to cater for a strong and large military and other security programs. Failure to ensure a balance between available resources and military powers will escalate into internal conflicts caused by citizens who feel dissatisfied by their government (Gilpin, 2001). The peripheral states allocated more fund in infrastructure thus has limited resources to be channelled towards security. The vulnerability of an insecure state towards attack prompts nation to focus in ensuring economic growth through local mechanism and global collaborations. Conflict results when the sovereignty and states interest are put to test. Countries will tend to react to any threat by deploying its military prowess to safeguard its territory. Core states tend to have interest beyond their geographical boundaries. In an event a conflict of interest arises between two core countries, the level of wealth will ensure determine the success a country would have in case war is inevitable. The power struggle would be enhanced by other factors beyond the control of peripheral and other states. In most cases, the conflict of interest arises when two states have personal interest within a semi peripheral state. This may be in terms of wealth and ensuring both the market and supplies available within the states (Ashley, 1984) The core country would either engage directly or support a section of people within the areas of interest. To enhance the power struggle, the country needs to be wealth. The cost used during a conflict should not affect the manner in which the country operates development projects. Countries tend to seek wealth through their political strength and influence. In some instances, the struggle for power may result negatively to one of the countries under conflict. Country may gain the much-needed power but may affect the economy negatively to an extent of imminent collapse. The power may have been gained but the amount of wealth channelled toward the conflict more than the estimate. The country is then forced to burn out their reserves. Countries may then tend to ignore power and focus in wealth maximization. Wealth determines the levels at which each country operates and is a determinant when setting limits. A wealth nation can impose sanctions that would negativity affect countries engaging with it through conflicts. Power may be gain through maximisation of wealth but wealth cannot be maximized through power struggle (Ashley, 1984). Core countries have the power to control activities of other states through their sanction and other restrictions but the peripheral states tend to play spectator in matters economic wars. Other states may prioritize power over. According to Gilpin (2002), power provides a platform in which a state may plan and execute its strategy. The domination of a given state according to Gilpin (2002) is determine by the levels of power a country enjoys within a given region. However, power is essential only if the sovereignty of a state is at stake. Countries will engage in the power struggle once their wealth targets have been attained. Wealth is determined by the amount of economic growth and the improved living standards. The relationship of a nation is based on bilateral trade and economic agreements rather than political relations. Countries that tend to focus on wealth maximization would engage freely with the market and develop good relationship with a number of states. Countries will tend to gear towards positively engaging with the global market and thus avoiding conflicts. The stability of a country is measured by the levels of security and the amount of resources. Resources are obtained once a country realises the need to involve other nations. During the 20th century the number of victories a state enjoyed determined world domination. In the 21st century, dominance is based on economic growth. The world creates societies within itself (Gilpin, 1987). Each society is unique thus makes independent decisions. These decisions would determine whether a state attains its wealth maximization goals. Wealth maximization will attract investors while ensuring. In conclusion, states tend to focus on maximizing their wealth rather than gaining power. Wealth determines a states position in matters global policy making. The undeveloped nations tend to engage economically with core states. This will enable economic benefits to both countries. In the struggle for power, only few countries engage and their main aim usually is to obtain market for their products while at the same time safeguarding their personal interest. Power is obtain once a state realises its wealth. Power is secondary to wealth thus, security can be enhanced once a state realises its economic obligation. The existing power struggles are motivated by the fact that the available resources are inadequate and hence need to acquire more. Sometimes the geographical boundary does not offer enough hence, countries extend their search to other countries thus conflict arises. Power negatively affects countries it limits the manner in which countries relates. Wealth maximization enhances relationship between states as every country is given a role in the model. Reference Ashley R.1984. The Poverty of Neorealism .International Organization, 38, (2): pp. 225-261 Cohen, B. 2009. Sovereign Wealth Funds; the great trade-off, International Affairs, 85(4): pp 713-731 Dunne T. & Schmidt B.C.2008 Realism in, Baylis, J. Smith, S. Owens. P. (eds), The globalization of world politics: an introduction to international relations, 5th edition. Oxford: Oxford Press University. ch5 Gilpin, R. 2001. Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order .New Jersey: Princeton University Press Gilpin, R. 2002. A realist perspective on international governance in Held. In D. McGrew, A. (eds.) Governing Globalization:power authority and global governance . Oxford: OUP.Ch 11 Gilpin, R.1987. The Political Economy of International Relations. New Jersey: Princeton University Press Krasner, S. 2000. State power and the structure of international trade. In Frieden & Lake (eds), International Political Economy: perspectives on global power and wealth London: Routledge. ch1 Strange, S. 1988. States and Markets : the conflict of values and theories .London: Pinter Read More