Anarchy in the International System - Essay Example

Anarchy in the International System Introduction Anarchy is described as the absence of government or political authority over or between the units in relation to political systems. Anarchy has been used in broad to emphasize on the international system where states are viewed as units of analysis with sovereignty, over and above, been perceived as equal. In light of this, anarchy divides the international system from other political domain to render it as a discrete file of inquiry with diverse rules and patterns of interactions. Anarchism is a political and social ideology that is alleged to have two distinct origins. On one end, anarchism is seen as an ultimate imitation of liberalism while, on the other hand, it is described as an end to socialism (Ward, 1996). Anarchy in the International System Most political scholars in relation to the international system argue that, anarchy dictates that the concerned states must depend on their own resources and abilities. This practise has widely been referred to as a principle of self help. The lack of authority in states calls for protection and aid compels states to solely depend on themselves in terms of their effort and knowledge. In addition to this, agreement made between states ought to be self –enforcing or in the interest of the concerned parties particularly when they are called upon (Ward, 1996). Apparently, the international system had broadly been argued as anarchic. In essence, realists argue that anarchy brings out a competitive struggle between states. Political realists argue that anarchy in the international system was not properly demonstrated hence, did not have much impact. On the hand, neo-realists perceive anarchy as being among those characters that define the international system. According to Ward 1996, the neo-realism theory has two schools of thoughts; the defensive realists, and the offensive realists. The school of defensive realists articulate that anarchy is needed particularly when concerned states seek for security, expansion, power for specific reasons. However, these scholars argue that some states might have an aggressive nature, a situation that other states must be prepared to handle diligently especially when there is a possibility of war. Conversely, the school of offensive realists believe that anarchy is a concept that can only be handled when concerned parties pursue power continuously. Needless to mention that, most states are toiled by insecurity concept, which gives them fear of exploitation from other states, thus the advantage of one state in terms of power automatically becomes a disadvantage of another. In this view, anarchy denotes that politics in the international stage are extreme struggle for domination (Ward, 1996). Scholars belonging to neoliberal institution view anarchy as a condition that can be resolved by states that are willing to come up with institutions that do not subordinate themselves to one central authority. Such institution will assist in making a commitment and or providing information to concerned states. In the view of constructivists, anarchy is a flexible condition that incorporates social states purposes, made from interpreted roles and norms fluctuate over time and space with regard to discrete theories that revolve around them. The Condition of Anarchy that Underpins the International System None the less, anarchy has continuously underpinned the international system, a condition that has deterred cooperation with other states globally. Basically, the nature of international politics has always been that of anarchy. This means that there is no hierarchal authority in the whole world that is capable of maintaining and or regulating international affairs. Simply, anarchical condition is present since the most sovereign states are major players in global politics as autonomous and independent. Thus, international players will automatically act in line with their interest (Ward, 1996). In light with this, it is worth noting that, the anarchical nature of the international system inherently posses numerous unpleasant military capabilities. Moreover, the states cannot be assured of the intentions of other states because they are motivated to continue surviving, over and above, being rational actors who are presumed to think strategically. For instance, realist assert that anarchy in the international system mandates states to handle security as the most crucial aspect, since other states look for chances to take advantages over each other even through military force. They also view the callousness practise by various states as an effect for the continuous struggle of power in the international system. One most obvious instance in which a dilemma in security came up was during the rivalry between the United States and Soviet Union at the time of the cold war in relation to nuclear contest. These two states have continuously built up their nuclear arsenals even after each has acquired secure second strike capability. One of the characteristics in the anarchical system is the common purpose for survival as states behaviour. For this to be achievable there has to be accumulative power in terms of military strength or other aspects that fall in relation to it such as human power and or economic power. It is worth noting that, the power struggle depends on individual states and their capability. Power occupation also differs with time as states pursue power and competes with each other. For instance, after world war II, the United States and Soviet union emerged as the principal winners (Ward, 1996). War as an element has greatly contributed to anarchy in the international system. Essentially, the concept of war is brought about by states as they try to compete with each other, insinuating the presence of an unpleasant struggle. In fact, scholars argue that war occurs due to the fact that it is not preventable. Hence, it is a necessary evil in the global politics at it remains as a sole determinant in relation to shaping the international system. Through war, it is easier to establish whether specific states survive or are eliminated. Additionally, it is easier to verify the formation of great power in terms of rising or falling. This automatically means that war occupies an inconsistency position in the world system. Basically, war is a manifestation of disorder, over and above, being a means of enforcing international law and the preservation of power balance to sustain order (Ward, 1996). Another element that has enormously contribution in relation to anarchical international system is diplomacy. Scholars articulate that diplomacy act as a pillar that creates international order in the centre of anarchy. It is believed that along with other institutions in the world of diplomacy, professional diplomacy had continuously served the international order through its principal functions which include communication between political leaders between states, agreement negotiation, and information gathering about foreign states among other functions (Ward, 1996). Assessment of the Anarchy in relation to impossible cooperation In light to the underlying issue, anarchy in the international system has continually led to non-cooperation between states in the entire world especially with regard the elements of anarchy. For instance, the struggle for power and security by individual states clearly denotes that states are entirely concerned with their own interest and hence they are not willing to cooperate with other states in the international systems. It is to argue that they have diverse interests that are not easily combined. Moreover, some states have continually held open competition especially in economic power. Ideally, the presence of sovereignty, allows concerned states to exercise self rule, a situation that discourages them from associating with a central power especially one that entails international law. Ward 1996 argues that, international scholars articulate the assessment of the anarchy to impossible cooperation due to the fact that anarchy shapes the international politics through the dictation of states behaviour as the primary unit of the system. For instance, if human beings are egoistic in nature and the international system is anarchical, states will not attempt to give in to the power of a higher authority, and hence the risk of war among the states will be higher, making it difficult to sustain and preserve peace globally. Hence, international cooperation, collective security, interdependence, globalization, and free trade are present where anarchy dominates the international system. Classical realists argue that power politics is the cause of human nature that is evil while neorealist emphasizes that anarchy is the cause of international conflict. Hence, states may have multiple identities based on their institutional roles, and the relationships that they have with other states. In essence, these identities are based on interests and this is determined by international interactions and not the structure of the international system. Of importance to note is that, for a peaceful world to be realistic, cooperation must constantly be an option for states to trail, with the assistance of the international institutions which ought to play a part in encouraging and prolonging peace globally(Ward, 1996). Conclusion Anarchy is described as the absence of government or political authority over or between the units in relation to political systems. Anarchy has been used in broad to emphasize on the international system where states are viewed as units of analysis with sovereignty, over and above, been perceived as equal. Most political scholars in relation to the international system argue that, anarchy dictates that the concerned states must depend on their own resources and abilities. This practise has widely been referred to as a principle of self help. None the less, anarchy has continuously underpinned the international system, a situation that had made it impossible to cooperate with other states globally. Bibliography: Ward, C., 1996. Anarchy in Action. London Freedom Press. Read More