Emotions and Powerful Nations - Essay Example

Emotions and Powerful Nations Introduction: This paper shall discuss the emotional perspective prevalent with the people of dominant countries. Among the dominant countries the paper shall focus on USA, France, United Kingdom and others. The paper has been divided into an introduction, arguments and conclusion. The arguments section shall focus on how perceptions are framed of the people living in such dominant countries. “Individuals from Japan, France, Germany, and the United States participated in the present study. As noted above, we chose not to construct a priori groupings. In fact, different such groupings can be predicted from the extant literature. Notably, the four countries differ regarding their cultural values, which in turn are suggestive of the prevalent beliefs regarding power. Specifically, the two European countries and the United States are typically categorized as individualistic cultures and Japan is categorized as a collectivistic culture.” (2005) Different cultures deal with different sort of dominant emotions which are prevalent in their societal background. This paper shall analyse the emotions and the role they play in shaping international politics. Emotions play a very important role in international politics. The dominant emotions play a huge role in governing internal and external politics. Emotions have played an omnipresent role in international world politics. There have not been many studies which have recorded the impact of emotions in international politics, but that does not goes to say that emotions have not played any role in shaping and defining world politics. In fact, emotions have been at the forefront shaping the geo dynamics of international politics. During the terrorist’s attacks on the twin towers, a lot of emotional rounds were doing in the USA and other European countries with regard to the reaction of such attacks. The Government of USA was emotionally charged after the 9/11 attacks took place. The Government understood the emotions of the people who were extremely outrageous at that moment and the people of USA wanted revenge with respect to the attacks in Afghanistan. “Many of the subsequent political actions, from the swift US-led wars of response in Afghanistan and Iraq to the suspension of basic civil rights and the legitimization of torture, would not have been possible without the highly emotional impact of 11 September and the equally emotional governmental appeal to defend the world of good against the forces of evil.”(2007) People over the world have neglected the impact dominant emotions have had on nations, but it is pertinent to understand that emotions have played a major role in shaping international politics. Security as a Dominant Emotion: Many people throughout the world are afraid of their security. This is an emotion which drives the internal policies of many different nations. If we look at the USA and the Russia for example, security plays a different role in these countries with different outcomes. In the USA, security is a major emotion which has driven the attack on Afghanistan, Iraq and now the threat to Iran. Culture of Fear: “Numerous modern philosophers have long drawn attention to the key role that fear plays in projects of political renewal. Politicians have, indeed, always used fear to manipulate the population in the manner that served their particular interests. Hobbes even went a step further. Fear, he believed, not only leaves strong marks on public debates and policy-making; it can also serve as an important source for collective political and moral foundations.”(2008) Fear has played a crucial role in determining the standards of international politics. It is the idea which the politicians have built in the minds of the people and then they have responded by providing the answers sought by the people of the country when thrown into the sea of fear and scepticism. It is often discussed that fear has been at the centre stone of decision making of different nations. Many times the State has indicted fear in the minds of the people to rally them towards a particular movement, a movement which they perceived to be fundamental in shaping the future of the nation and the people as well. The USA and George W. Bush used the concept of fear in the best possible manner by indulging in State sponsored violence against Afghanistan. After the 9/11 attacks it became legitimate for the USA to deal with Afghanistan in such a manner, something which it had planned to do earlier but couldn't get the nod of the people. Confidence Building Measures used by various countries, particularly India and Pakistan in order to improve relations was seen as an emotional comeback by the two nations which was also supported by their own people. This was in stark contrast to what the nations had gone through earlier in the century where tumultuous relations were the calling of the day. However, as the sentiments of the people changed, so did the flavour of the Governments. These decisions made by the Government turned out to be driven by positive emotional impact rather than negative emotional impacts, as seen in the case of USA. Fear and paranoia has been quite instrumental shaping the foreign policy of many countries. It has been a dominant emotion in the West, with particular reference to terrorism, and therefore needed careful analyses with respect to having an understanding of the opinion of the people. Logic vs. Emotions: It has been a long drawn argument among the psychologists and international relations expert as to the impact of emotions and rational logic in the field of foreign policy decision making. Many countries have had a long drawn battle amongst its own people in the will to rationalize a particular thought process whose seeds have been born out of emotional unrest. “The attempt to separate emotion and rationality is, of course, part of a long modern tradition. Emotions were thought to be feelings or bodily sensations that overtook us, distorting thought and the ability to make rational and ethical judgement. Justice must be free of passion, it was believed, because emotion impels people to perform irrational acts of violence and harm.” (2007). The works of Jervis, Lebow and Janice tried to garner data as to how rationality has been at the receiving end with respect to emotions when ti came to the factor of decision making for various countries. Happiness and Government: “The degree to which an individual judges the overall quality of his or her life-as-a-whole favourably’; in other words ‘how much one likes the life one lives.” (2007, Veenhoven) Happiness and Government do not really go hand in hand when looked at from a direct angle. But,on the other hand, it cannot be denied that Government does play a significant role in the process of manufacturing happiness for its citizens. Implementation of policy plays a significant role in shaping the lives of the people, and that has an impact on the happiness index of the citizens. The World Bank defines Governance as following: “Governance consists of the traditions and institutions by which authority in a country is exercised. This includes the process by which governments are selected, monitored and replaced; the capacity of the government to effectively formulate and implement sound policies; and the respect of citizens and the state for the institutions that govern economic and social interactions among them” (2011) Happiness of an individual is a direct result of the societal situation prevalent in the natural habitat. In any economy the Government and its policies sway the emotional factor of the people. Through different factors the Government has been able to be in the eyes of the people, and through this factor they have played a part in determining the level of happiness achieved by the people. Different countries have different happiness index, and ones which are the most happy reside in the Scandinavian countries. The Finns are considered to be the happiest people in the world, and it’s quite ironic to see how and why they are so happy. One of the factors which boils down in their favour is that they are generally, instinctively lively people and do not bother for what is beyond them. This way, they are able to program their mind according to certain specific needs and accordingly they deal with the factors crucial to their survival. Fear and happiness are two distinct and separate emotions which play a very dominant role in shaping the policy of the Government. The people who are part of such policy do recall that inherently it has been a tough act to follow for the Government to neglect public opinion, but in most of the cases public opinion is different to the dominant emotions prevailing in the society. Let us look at the example of the United Kingdom and Finland, two different countries based in Europe, but the way they handled in post 9/11 issues and other problems were completely different to each other. The United Kingdom reacted with fury because the people were emotionally very charged and cagey about the entire situation. The West was in deep fear, but that changed nothing for the ever so relaxed Finns, who did condemn the attacks but could not be bothered more by launching attacks on the Afghanis and other Middle Eastern nations. The Americans, typically, are people who perceive themselves to be on top of the world and maintain a percept of being able to engage in strict dialogue with other countries. This comes naturally for them since the people are emotionally very particular in peeping into other man's doors. The Finns on the other hand are inherently not at all bothered, and that has shown in their Government which is unsurprisingly private affairs oriented. Make no mistake, when it comes to solving their issues and matter which affects them directly, they will never leave any stone unturned. Countries such as Pakistan and Israel are driven by a different breed of emotional outburst. The Government is just a mirror of reflection of the people's thoughts, and it is true that it essentially boils down to how these countries' Governments have translated such thoughts into actions. Ironically, while Pakistan is geared up to be a Muslim State where one has to do everything t maintain his word with the God, Israel goes on the offensive by demarcating them as an anti- Muslim establishment which has threats from different Muslim states. “We people are but one small part of the planet's ecosystem, but we have done more than any other part of this system to harm and destroy its health. We are today killing both biodiversity and linguistic and cultural diversity, and through this forced homogenisation ruining the planet.” (1918) In Israel the people are very much aware of what is happening in their country, and the Government acts accordingly to the whims and fancies of the people. Though both Pakistan and Israel are nations where people are generally scared of the outcomes and war is perceived to be a genuine threat, there is no doubt that the way these two nations deal with their dominant emotions is entirely different. Pakistan remains on the offensive, while Israel is strong on the defensive. Ethnic violence is a major issue in many nations, primarily India and Sri Lanka, and certain segment of the people who are concerned with such violence talk very sharply with a view to end it. India on hand keeps trying to negotiate with the Naxals and other rebel groups, while Sri Lanka on the other hand has whitewashed the entire population of Tamils who used to live there and who demanded certain rights and freedoms. It is a startling contrast if two different countries dealing with the same dominant emotions of the rebel groups prevalent inside their territory. Conclusion: To conclude, it is fair to assume that emotions have shaped international politic to a great extent. In fact, it is fair to say that it is emotions which come before the rational and logical decision making conducted by the head of the states in matters determining the internal and external policy especially foreign policy of different States. Having understood he examples from different countries, we can fairly conclude by saying that emotions are the final straw in the blade of the decision making power of the State, whereas rationality and logic gives it a tapered surface to run on which in the eventuality of the whole situation is a beautiful and reasonable way of putting a reason behind the actions of a particular State. References Ahall, L. (2009) Images, Popular Culture, Aesthetics, Emotions The Future of International Politics?.Political Perspectives, 3 (1). Bellamy, A. (2008) Security and the War on Terror. Bleiker, R. and Hutchison, E. (2007) Understanding emotions in world politics: reflections on method.Working paper (Australian National University, Dept. of International Relations, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies : Online, (5). Chomsky.info (2004) The Culture of Fear, by Noam Chomsky. [online] Available at: http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199607--.htm [Accessed: 8 May 2012]. Commondreams.org (2000) The Loss of Happiness in Market Democracies. [online] Available at: http://www.commondreams.org/views/052800-105.htm [Accessed: 8 May 2012]. Linguapax.org (1918) World congress on language policies. [online] Available at: http://www.linguapax.org/congres/plenaries/skutnabb.html [Accessed: 9 May 2012]. Mondillon, L. et al. (2005) Beliefs About Power and Its Relation to Emotional Experience: A Comparison of Japan, France, Germany, and the United States. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8 (31). Ott, J. (2011) Government and happiness in 130 nations. . Young, R. (2000) The loss of Hapiness in Market Democracies. Veenhoven, R. (2007) Measures of Gross National Happiness. Read More