The Theory of Constructivism in International Relations - Assignment Example

8 April Does The Theory Of Constructivism In International Relations Adequately Account For The EmergenceOf Multiple Competing Norms? 1. Introduction Constructivism is a theory proposing that learning involves observation. It is one of the theories of in the study of international relations. The others include realism, liberalism, idealism and Marxism. The proponents of constructivism theory elucidate that acquiring knowledge comprises of active construction of ideas based on what is encountered. This relates to the assertions of Wendt about constructivism. He asserts that people act towards objects, including other actors, on the basis of the meanings that the objects have for them (P 396, Anarchy is What States Make of it, Wendt). In other words, the daily life experiences form grounds for learning. International relation refers to the existing external links between countries or governments. Constructivism theory is significant in international relation because of its critical role in streamlining complex matters. As Wendt further says that sometimes situations are unprecedented in our experience, and in these cases we have to construct their meaning, and thus our interests, by analogy or invent them de novo (P 398, Anarchy is What States Makes of it, Wendt). This is because actors acquire information by participating in meaningful collective decisions. This paper discusses how constructivism in international relational accounts for the emergence of multiple competing norms. 2. The Current State of International Relations The contemporary history has been associated with a lot of impunity. This is evidenced by many reported cases of atrocities like violence and war crimes. These heinous acts abuse human rights for example the 1993 Yugoslav and 1994 Rwanda genocide cases. Apart from human rights abuse, the mayhems result into a state of anarchy. Wendt defines anarchy as the absence of centralized authority. He asserts that anarchy poses a distinctive and important problem of order for international politics, to which a constructivist approach suggests some new solutions (P 247, Social theory of International Politics, Wendt). The absence of a governing authority is dangerous to any society because certain individuals may misuse their freedom and cause disorder and chaos. Wendt also defines anarchy as a condition of possibility for or permissive cause of war arguing that wars occur because there is nothing to prevent them (P 395, Anarchy is What States Make of it, Wendt). The presence of governing authorities is to ensure order, harmony and peaceful coexistence. Hence lack of it results in high rise of conflicts which is very disastrous. Anarchy affects international systems since it may involve political power rivalry. This kind of rivalry may lead to military competition and wars. As such the level of security and interaction becomes compromised. But as time rolls by, certain transformations are beginning to take shape due to the measures being laid curb anarchic situations. This is evident with the steady rise of national and international justice systems. This is anticipated that the pre-existing pattern of impunity will finally end. The adoption of the International Criminal Court (ICC) treaty by world governments has a greater landmark in this. This is because it is hoped that through the treaty justice will be feasible both at national and international levels. However, Kissinger, a former US Secretary of State has a contrary opinion about a concept in this treaty that suspects can be tried in from wherever they are. He says the notion of having a universal jurisdiction is new even acceptable in America but there were no plans of its approval. This argument is viewed as leeway of allowing impunity to continue torturing people. The ICC treaty allows for indicting torturers in their countries or to be extradited to a country that will do so. These laws state that every country must bring to book any suspect indicted with crimes regardless of their nationality. Therefore the readiness of governments to cooperate shows the willingness to end impunity and ensure justice for all. 3. Constructivism and the Emergence of Multiple Competing Norms Constructivism as a learning theory is significant in international relations because of observation techniques. This section is intended to find out if and how this theory accounts for the emergence of multiple competing norms. From the given articles, the evident competing norms are human rights, political systems, justice systems and socio-cultural norms. 3.1 Judicial systems and constructivism Impunity has largely taken toll in national courts as many reported criminal cases go scot free. The adoption of a universal legal system becomes an attempt to make international justice is feasible. A collective support of this replicates the willingness to end impunity. Wendt says that a state may have multiple identities as “sovereign,” “leader of the free world,” “imperial power” and so on (P 398, Anarchy, Wendt). This means judicial systems take action on defining situations of which there might be failure of roles in such moments. As such it proves difficult due to confusion that may arise. Therefore constructivism account for emerging trend in judicial systems as things are set into action when a situation arise. In his complaints against the new judicial concepts, Kissinger argued that the ICC treaty on crimes is an ambiguous one hence would be vulnerable to political manipulation. This is in spite of it resembling the statute in Pentagon’s manual. Similarly, he says that the ICC genocide treaty is a borrowed one which many governments uphold. Kissinger also says the ICC treaty is a borrowed one and so claims that its prosecutor will make decision lacking accountability. As such any misconduct can send the prosecutor packing. Kissinger further claims that ICC signatories will not enjoy the full process as compared to the US. The absence of a bench trial in the court to merge the civil and common law contributes to this. America is not a signatory to the treaty, but it can prosecute other citizens who trespass in its soil even without their governments’ consent. Kissinger therefore criticizes any attempt by the ICC to indict American citizens though they can be subjected to the ICC trial if they trespass in a country which is its signatory. This is to provide the due process for adhering to the international fair-trial standards. Therefore, constructivism theory account for the emerging issues in judicial systems. Kissinger’s article proves this as he cites the experience of Yugoslav and Rwandan courts when international jurists had to be forced to decide on their cases. Unfortunately, no fair trial exists in such instances since it is done with detestable regard. For example, granting of the Yugoslav tribunal by the UN Security Council and US consent with no time limits over human rights crimes. Kissinger criticizes national courts for universal jurisdiction because of extension over a wide range of suspects. This is due to interference by the international justice which compromises on the democracy of a government. This is a worrying situation because no due process in courts is guaranteed. That is why if an American is to be charged by an unreliable court foreign, America would certainly pressurize the court for his or her release. If this does not work, it would apply for the transfer of the suspect to the ICC where full justice is ensured. This is because America is a nation that embraces international system of justice hence its commitment to human rights and the rule of law (Kissinger). 3.2 Human rights and constructivism Any nation that respects the rule of law shows its commitment to protecting the human rights. Human rights are highly upheld by many governments because they are closely tied to the nature of human beings. The rights are constituted by a domestic society for survival before being integrated with international systems. Since actors do not have a self-prior to interaction with an other; how they view the meaning and requirements of this survival therefore depends on the processes by which conceptions of self evolve (P 402, Anarchy is What States Make of it, Wendt). This is a proof that human rights have been abused despite being a valuable component to any society. Kissinger says that the United Nation Declaration of Human Rights should have been granted the power to exercise its mandate so that whoever breaks this law is subjected to the due process. This is because the ICC clearly defines such provision for court processes for it is a requirement to abide by the complementary international fair-trial standards. There should be a means to shape a respectful culture in regard to human rights hence cooperation is needed at all levels. As the Human Rights Watch suggests, international humanitarian law should be respected. Donnelly argues that human rights should be logical and clearly stated because they are not determined by social values (P 404, Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights). But if all rights rested solely on culturally determined social rules, as radical cultural relativism holds, then there could be no human rights, no rights one has simply as a human being (P 404, Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights, Donnelly). Traditional societies failed to recognize human rights. However, it no longer exists in the current world since it denies the existence of humanity. Denying humanity puts human beings into a state of anarchy because it lacks moral human significance. Constructivists agree that certain things cannot be done to legitimate human beings because they grossly infringe on the dignity of people. Donnelly says that some modern states especially developing countries are still characterized by moral constraints (P 412, Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights). This is a threat to the human rights since it is a necessity. Constructivists further agree that great considerations should be put in place regarding the extent to which rights are listed. This must include all categories of rights i.e. civil, economic, political, and social rights. Human rights are inherently “individualistic”; they are rights held by individuals in relation to, even against the state and society (P 412, Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights, Donnelly). Therefore every human should know his or her rights they are entitled to so as to escape any abuses. 3.3 Political systems and constructivism Political systems construct states hence the behavior of a nation is defined by the existing structural system. Wendt says that actors whose interests are constituted by a structure will have a stake in it which will make it more stable than would otherwise be the case (P 248, Social theory in International Politics, Wendt). This is because states are self-regarding by nature and so are security seeking. Furthermore, political culture forms an essential basis in regard to international systems which are built on structural roles. It is worth noting that any political shake up easily results into a state of anarchy which is the absence of centralized authority. Since in anarchy there is no such authority states must assume the worst about each other’s intentions, that others will violate norms as soon as it is in their interests to do so, which forces peace-loving states to play power politics. Any ideas that emerge will be fragile and fleeting, subject to potentially violent change with changes in the distribution of power. The only shared idea that can be stable under such conditions is that “war may at any moment occur” (P 252, Social theory in International Politics, Wendt). Cooperation amongst states must therefore be highly regarded in order to move from conflict characterized society to a peaceful existence. In short, states must desist from any heinous acts to make war. Wendt says that organized and meaningful actions are the result of interaction. This being said, however, the situation facing states as they encounter one another for the first time may be such that only self-regarding conceptions of identity can survive; if so, even if these conceptions are socially constructed, neorealists may be right in in holding identities and interests constant and thus in privileging one particular meaning of anarchic structure over process (P 403, Anarchy is What States Make of it, Wendt). It is in human nature to be possessed by inherent desire for power and as such, anarchic situations are likely to arise due to divisive politics. This results from competition in power politics which chaotic influences. The fact that worlds of power politics are socially constructed, in other words, does not guarantee they are malleable (P 411, Anarchy is What States Make of it, Wendt). Social systems objectively provoke its members in order to strengthen the rightly acceptable behavior. This is done in anticipation for a positive change. Also systematic change can be undermined by actors’ interests. Such interests are instituted to reduce uncertainties and anxieties. It also helps in ensuring fulfillment to commitments made to others. This is a justification for the constructivism theory because it makes learning is involved. The sovereignty of a state can change existing situations that pose challenges to its security. It changes the existing mentality of security and power politics. Sovereignty is an institution, and so it exists only in virtue of certain intersubjective understandings and expectations; there is no sovereignty without an other (P 412, Anarchy is What States Make of it, Wendt). This therefore constitutes communities with relational identities. And the essence of this community is a mutual recognition of one another’s right to exercise exclusive political authority within territorial limits (P 412, Anarchy is What States Make of it, Wendt). This means states must act on any incidence which is threatening their citizens to avoid losing their identity. And this must be regularly practiced because it is not a one thing event. Constructivists attest to this saying this ongoing process may not be politically problematic in particular historical contexts and, indeed, once a community of mutual recognition is constituted, its members-even the disadvantaged ones- may have a vested interest in reproducing it (P 412, Anarchy is What States make of it, Wendt). 3.4 Socio-culturalism and constructivist theory Constructivists argue that learning arises out of existing interaction. The interaction is socially constructed basing on behavioral conceptions within a specified institution. An institution is a relatively stable set or “structure” identities and interests. Such structures are often codified in formal rules and norms, but these have motivational force only in virtue of actor’s socialization to and participation in collective knowledge. Institutions are fundamentally cognitive entities that do not exist apart from actors’ ideas about how the world works (P 399, Anarchy is What States Make of it, Wendt). Within these institutions are underlying decisions made basing on possibilities and produced by interaction at various levels. In the social set ups, there are individual rights and basic protection obtained from the family or community. The cultural life of a community is dependent on the social set ups. Donnelly asserts that strong cultural relativism holds that culture is the principal source of the validity of moral right or rule (P 401, Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights). In other words the presumption is that rights (and other social practices, values and moral rules) are culturally determined, but the universality of human nature and rights serves as a check on the potential excesses of relativism (P 401, Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights, Donnelly). This means culture and social practices hold a very significant place in human nature. Communities are in state of shifting in a bid to adapt to the upcoming way of life. This involves learning because it comes with cultural diversities. This is in line with what constructivism theory is about because people learn to adapt to life as it observingly changes. The impact of culture on the shaping of individuals is systematic and may lead to the predominance of distinctive social types in different cultures (P 403 Social theory, Wendt). The presence of cross-cultural agreement provides a basis for learning. This is because the culture affects all four kinds of identities that the “individual” of international politics can have-corporate, type, collective, and role (P 291, Social theory in International Politics, Wendt). Therefore, individuals should adapt fully to their cultures because this defines them hence portraying their loyalty and obligation to the particular group. 4. Conclusion Constructivism theory accounts for the emerging multiple competing norms in many ways because it involves learning. From all spheres of politics, justice systems, human rights and socio-cultures, constructivism is greatly significant. In politics, anarchy affects states identities and interests as well as human rights, justice and culture. The commitment to and salience of particular identities vary, but each identity is an inherently social definition of the actor grounded in the theories which actors collectively hold about themselves and one another and which constitute the structure of the social world (P 398, Anarchy is What States Make of it, Wendt). Works Cited Donnelly, Jack. Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Right. JSTOR Vol. 6. No. 4 (Nov 1984): 400-419. Print. Kissinger, Henry. The Pitfalls of Universal Jurisdiction. (July/August, 2001). Wendt, Alexander. Anarchy Is What States Make Of It: The Social Construction Of Power Politics. JSTOR. Vol. 46. No. 2 (1992): 391-425. Print. Wendt, Alexander. Social Theory in International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Print. Read More