The impact of decolonisation was greatly mitigated by the spread of informal empire through Britain’s rather selective approach to granting independence. This was a last attempt to turn global politics to Britain’s advantage.
This essay attempts to show how Waltz’s abandonment of the assumption of wicked human nature has led to the collapse of the Realist approach to international relations. In order to reveal this, a new concept of considerate/inconsiderate struggle for power is developed which enables us to understand the nature of power and relations of power in the theories of both Morgenthau and Waltz.
Whether international institutions can promote and achieve a more peaceful world is a question that is being examined more and more in the study of international relations. Literature about this issue has further developed over the last 50 years, as the world has seen the rise of new international organizations and the integration of old ones.
For the majority of states, offensive nuclear strategy is simply not feasible, and it is unlikely rogue states would implement a first-strike strategy due to fear of retaliation.
Multi-polarity will not only carry the risks entailed in the research of the balance of power among great powers, but will add a new wide-ranging nuclear threat into equations.
Due to the time that has elapsed since Huntington wrote his article it is easy to criticise any lack of foresight in terms of technological development. However, it is important to highlight the fundamentally erroneous assumptions of modern day diplomacy made in his article.
The limits of the international – of our political imagination – constitute a problem in that we have great difficulty in answering the question: what does it mean to go beyond the state system of Westphalia?
Examining public EU attitudes is so complex because of the diverse sources of the EU public opinion and the incomplete structure of the EU itself. There is no European polity, no holistic conception of what it means to be a European citizen and no European-level social culture.
‘For whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap’ took on a Dickensian invocation in Hard Times, Tennyson published his Maud as a portrayal of the widely-held belief that war could act as a rejuvenating force in corruptible industrial nations, and an alliance of Britain, France, the Ottoman Empire and Sardinia declared war against Russia in 1853; hastily preparing an expeditionary force for the Crimea. The cause célèbre of the war has been held as opportunistic Russian expansionism into the fragmenting territories of the Ottoman Empire, which antagonised Great Britain[1], causing anxiety toward continued British naval superiority.
The debate between “rationalists” and “reflectivists” has emerged as a central axis of contention in International Relations (IR) theory. Rationalists treat sovereign states as rational, self-regarding units, leading both Neorealists and Neoliberal Institutionalists to conclude that anarchic conditions create a “self-help” international system. Reflectivists, a broad church that includes postmodernists, critical theorists, and other anti-positivists, see no automatic link between anarchy and self-help.
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.