More Subjects
Compare (classical Realism And Marxism) To International Security
Political Science
[Name of the Writer]
[Name of the Institution]
Comparison of Classical realism and Marxism to international security
Introduction
International security is also known as global security and is an essential element of international relations. It is concerned with the measures or steps that nation-states and international organizations take to ensure safety and endurance in the world. In the political arena, there are different frameworks through which the concept of international security can be understood. These frameworks aid in determining the best possible solution for carting the issues of international security in the contemporary world. The two prominent theories of the international relations which are related to international or global security are classical realism and Marxism. These two approaches explain how nation-states interact or how they should deal with each other. Including this, these theories are the analytical tool for understanding the balance of power and the national interests of the nations. Hence the research question for this paper is how classical realism and Marxism established the concept of balance of power. A detailed analysis of secondary sources like books and articles has opted as a method or approach to answering the research question. And under the light of this research question, the thesis statement is that the concept of balance of power in classical realism and Marxism helps in establishing global peace.
Literature review
Classical realism
The theory of classical realism was established in the post-World War 11 epoch. This theory aims to elucidate the fact that political interaction among states is the consequence of human nature. The founders of classical realism are Han's Morgenthau and Kenneth Waltz. The central focus of classical realism is order in society. The theorists of this school of thought place an argument that order and stability in society is weak and fragile and there remains a constant tension among the nation states ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"krbYt2zf","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Behr & Williams, 2017)","plainCitation":"(Behr & Williams, 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":29,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/Tqq4tlqy/items/TGFW3ZNJ"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/Tqq4tlqy/items/TGFW3ZNJ"],"itemData":{"id":29,"type":"article-journal","title":"Interlocuting classical realism and critical theory: Negotiating ‘divides’ in international relations theory","container-title":"Journal of International Political Theory","page":"3-17","volume":"13","issue":"1","author":[{"family":"Behr","given":"Hartmut"},{"family":"Williams","given":"Michael C."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Behr & Williams, 2017). Another argument placed by this school of thought is that it is human nature to struggle for power and because of this reason, the states are in a constant state of conflict. Every state is determined to fulfill its own national interest over the national interest of the weaker nations; thus a win-lose situation is present which creates anarchy in the international world. Classical realism was a response to idealism who presents a vision of how a society should interact and what should be the objectives for international relations. On the contrary classical realism opines that states are the only important actors in the international relations and their actions and decisions determine the relationships among the states.
According to an article by Booth Ken and Toni Erskine, the theoretical approach of classical realism was a dominant approach during the cold war because it discusses how the two superpowers: USA and USSR were trying to establish a balance of power ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"Etbl8Sqw","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Bharadwaj & Schefold, 2017)","plainCitation":"(Bharadwaj & Schefold, 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":31,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/Tqq4tlqy/items/DD3MM25F"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/Tqq4tlqy/items/DD3MM25F"],"itemData":{"id":31,"type":"book","title":"Essays on Piero Sraffa: Critical perspectives on the revival of classical theory","publisher":"Routledge","ISBN":"1-315-38692-5","author":[{"family":"Bharadwaj","given":"Krishna"},{"family":"Schefold","given":"Bertram"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Bharadwaj & Schefold, 2017). Thus with this fact under consideration, it is apparent that the strength of classical realism is that it clarifies the concept of balance of power in the contemporary world. However, the weakness of this theoretical approach is that it ignores important non-state actors like international organization.
Marxism
Marxism is a theoretical approach which views international politics from a different perspective. According to this school of thought for a better understanding of world politics it is essential to understand the whole social structure of the world ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"RCMSkOqg","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Soguk & Nelson, 2016)","plainCitation":"(Soguk & Nelson, 2016)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":27,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/Tqq4tlqy/items/R6CG5WEK"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/Tqq4tlqy/items/R6CG5WEK"],"itemData":{"id":27,"type":"chapter","title":"No International Theory, but What about Transformation? A Critical Reading of Martin Wight and Raya Dunayevskaya","container-title":"The Ashgate Research Companion to Modern Theory, Modern Power, World Politics","publisher":"Routledge","page":"91-108","author":[{"family":"Soguk","given":"Nevzat"},{"family":"Nelson","given":"Scott G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Soguk & Nelson, 2016). The theory of Marxism is inspired by Karl Marx who divided the society into three segments. Thus influenced by Karl Marx the theorists of the Marxism believes that stability in international politics can only be maintained in a classless society which can be termed as the strongest point of this theoretical approach. However, the weak point is that there is a lack of evidence in the international world of classless nations which can validate the claims made by Marxism.
Methodology
To answer the research question the methods or the approach used is the detailed analysis of the concepts and fundamental elements of Classical Realism and Marxism and their connection with international security.
Discussion
International security in the world politics can best be understood through a comprehensive understating of the concept of balance of power and anarchy in the world and the role of states and non-state actors in the political arena. According to the theoretical approach of Classical realism, states are the only cardinal actors and interaction between the countries to determine international security. On the contrary, Marxism takes people as the essential actors in world politics and believe that stability in society is possible with low interference of the government and equality in the people. Nevertheless, the common aspect in both the theoretical approach is that the contemporary world is a dangerous and uncertain place. It means that according to both the theories there is anarchy in international relations and it is difficult to maintain international security because of human nature who create inequality and instability in the society. Thus it is apparent that both the theoretical frameworks establish the concept of balance of power which determines international security.
For Classical Realism, the absence of international government creates anarchy, and due to this fact, the states must ensure to maintain the balance of power by creating an alliance. In this self-help world the weaker states should create strong links with the powerful states, so to protect its national interests. One of the greatest examples of this is the alliance between American and Afghanistan to counter the power of China. Hence this shows how the concept of balance of power is explained in Classical Realism. This theory can further be improved if it takes into consideration the importance of non-state actor like international organizations and terrorist groups.
On the other hand, power is held by the upper-class of society, as per the views of Marxism. In international politics the economically stable nations hold power over the weak states and manipulate them. Because of this reason, in the international society to maintain the balance of power, it is essential to eliminate classes among the states so that all the weak and powerful states can enjoy equal power and privileges. Henceforth the explanation of power and how to maintain the balance of power under this theoretical framework makes it evident that it also considers the balance of powers as an essential concept in international security. The framework can further be improved if it gives particular examples of a classless society.
Both these theories are helpful in the understanding of how peace is to be maintained in the international society. In addition to this Classical realism and Marxism are helpful in understanding the importance of international security. A detailed analysis of both the theory highlights the fact that without international security world is a dangerous place where people are exploited on different levels.
Conclusion
To cap it all, Classical Realism and Marxism views the notion of balance of power and international security from different perspectives. While Classical realism talks about global security on global or macro-level, the Marxist theory takes the concept of power from micro-level and believes that people hold more power. The above discussion makes it clear the concept of balance of power is equally important in both the theories but these theories takes different positions to maintain international security
References
ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Behr, H., & Williams, M. C. (2017). Interlocuting classical realism and critical theory: Negotiating ‘divides’ in international relations theory. Journal of International Political Theory, 13(1), 3–17.
Bharadwaj, K., & Schefold, B. (2017). Essays on Piero Sraffa: Critical perspectives on the revival of classical theory. Routledge.
Soguk, N., & Nelson, S. G. (2016). No International Theory, but What about Transformation? A Critical Reading of Martin Wight and Raya Dunayevskaya. In The Ashgate Research Companion to Modern Theory, Modern Power, World Politics (pp. 91–108). Routledge.
More Subjects
Join our mailing list
© All Rights Reserved 2024