The international system is a complex make up of actors and structures that exist at the bequest of scholars to demonstrate how international society can be governed. Within this systemic analysis exists a topic of much debate: what governs the actions of a state?
IR theories, as with any other theoretical approaches, developed at certain times and for certain reasons. The western biases of IR scholarship and a lack of concern for history and the consequent focus on presentism are profoundly affecting the credibility of the discipline. Postcolonial theory can be a powerful means for IR to become less parochial.
The EU, by using non-normative means to diffuse norms and by not being able to detach itself from state self-interest, has regressed from being a normative power in the international system. This repositioning places the EU on a middle ground between ‘normative’ power and political realism.
Institutionalism rejects the realist assumption that international politics is a struggle for power in which military security issues are top priority and argues that instead, force is an ineffective instrument of policy. In order to understand the impact of internationalism on IR theory and its criticisms we must first look at its definition and how it differs from realist perspectives.
Islamic thought defies straight forward typological organisation. Nevertheless, efforts to do so have become an important part of Islamic studies and serve as a key point of reference for any student wishing to understand how writers organise the faith, culture and identity of Islam.
Despite the wide-ranging and largely valid critiques, Clash of Civilizations continues to affect the thinking of scholars and policymakers alike as the “triumph” of capitalism in the post-Cold War era and a movement towards liberal democracy on a global scale make cultural differences such as language, history, religion, and customs more important as a way to distinguish between different groups
Anarchy is a central concept in international relations theory. Both realism and constructivism, whilst divergent in nature, accept that the structure of the international system is anarchical. However, there is debate as to whether or not the effects of anarchy, such as self-help, can be overcome without fundamentally changing the structure of international politics.
Although they face extreme difficulties, international sanctions in foreign policies can still be ethical. This essay begins by stressing the two dimensional problem of ethics and gives the reasons why the existence of international ethics is still possible. The essay will then analyze the difficulties sanctions face, and under which conditions ethical international sanctions can be realized.
Even though globalization has many advantages and one of them is the opportunity for economic growth both at an individual and a national level. This means that governments now try and compete for foreign capital and design their policies to please global investors and firms, which results in them not necessarily acting in the best interest of its citizens and this disregards its primary purpose.
The reconciliation of war-torn, divided societies is a long and difficult process. It is incorrect to expect individuals to be healed within one, two or three years after the conflict as for some this might take a lifetime. The most important factor to bear in mind is the distinct differences between healing processes that take place at the societal level and those that concern individuals.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.
