Essay Available:
Pages:
6 pages/≈1650 words
Sources:
9
Style:
APA
Subject:
Social Sciences
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 29.16
Topic:
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORIES
Essay Instructions:
This is the assignment to learn as much as possible about the key theories in international relations, why they are important, and how if at all they are related to policymaking. Among the three most important for you in this assignment are realism, liberalism, and constructivism, though you may discover many other important theories like dependency theory, Marxist theory, radical theory (These three theories overlap in places as do the others). It is useful to gain a grasp of what the theories imply or assume about the behavior of states and sometimes citizens as international actors and begin to understand both the usefulness and limits of theory as instruments of policymaking. Whatever sources you use, make use of the article, “International Relations: One World, Many Theories” (Walt, 1998), and be able to explain how you believe to what extent theory relates to policymaking. Clearly, knowing the diversity and contested nature of theories will help you answer questions related to other assignments in the course as well as the three-part question below. Whenever possible, be sure to provide examples in supporting your arguments.
INSTRUCTIONS
In 5-7 double spaced pages in current APA format, answer the following 3 prompts below separately in a single document. At least 8 sources must be used and use scholarly articles.
What is the relationship of theory to actual policy? Are theories pre-packaged conceptual tools policymakers then apply to the interpretation of actual events? Expressed differently, is there a 1/1 correspondence between a particular event and a theory that explains it? If so, how do you explain two ‘realist’ (or liberals or constructivists, etc.) policymakers who both call for completely opposite policies in the same case, one opting for military intervention for example, while the other prefers a policy of restraint? What does this say about the relationship between theory and actual policy?
Can you identify a particular IR theory that appeals to you as the better explanation of human behavior than others? Or would you say that the existence of multiple theories is an indication that perhaps all of them are plausible as possible interpretations of the same or different human events? Be clear and use examples to make your case.
Consider the structure of the US government as reflected in the Constitution (i.e., institutional checks and balances, power-sharing among federal and state authority, etc.) Does this structure reflect a realist, liberal, or some other theory of human behavior? In effect, is the ‘more perfect union’ of 1787 infused with a more realist or more liberal spirit, or maybe a bit of both. Explain the possibilities concisely yet clearly with examples.
Link to “International Relations: One World, Many Theories” https://edisciplinas(dot)usp(dot)br/pluginfile.php/4886653/mod_resource/content/1/Stephen%20Walt%201998.pdf
Essay Sample Content Preview:
Discussion, Analysis, and Application of International Relations Theories
Author’s Name
The Institutional Affiliation
Course Number and Name
Instructor Name
Assignment Due Date
1 Relationship of Theory to Actual Policy
There is a complex link between the theory of international relations and the policymaking process in practice. The theory does not enforce a preset policy conclusion but provides conceptual frameworks for understanding and interpreting events (Walt, 1998). The government does not impose theories. Even though they utilize the same theoretical framework, different policymakers may arrive at different conclusions on policy because of their different values, interests, and subjective appraisals. In international relations, realism is a school of thinking that has gained significant influence. This school of thought believes that nation-states operate in their self-interest, seek power, and emphasize security.
For politicians who adhere to the realist ideology to support military action, there must be a clear and immediate threat to the state’s security (Kröger, 2020). Nevertheless, two politicians grounded in reality might arrive at opposite conclusions depending on their evaluations of the circumstances. Others emphasize caution and draw attention to such actions’ and unintended effects (Foulon & Meibauer, 2020). In contrast, others maintain that military participation is necessary to demonstrate power and discourage future opponents. Still, others think that military intervention is necessary.
One particular example is the invasion of Iraq by the United States in 2003. It was pragmatic leaders inside the United States administration, such as Vice President Dick Cheney, who advocated for proactive military action to eliminate threats to the security of the United States. On the other hand, realists were cautious; they emphasized the importance of multilateralism and the potential consequences of unilateral military action. Realists were against unilateral military intervention (Xuetong, 2023). This demonstrates that theory does not impose a single, predetermined policy conclusion, as evidenced by many realism frameworks offering various policy options.
Liberalism, a key ideology in international relations, places a significant emphasis on the importance of collaboration, institutions, and the participation of non-state players. Liberal policies can push for a diplomatic solution, economic sanctions, or the intervention of global organizations during times of crisis. Despite this, there is the possibility that various policy preferences exist even within the liberal framework (Richmond, 2020). Liberal leaders, such as former President of the United States Bill Clinton, advocated for military intervention in Kosovo during NATO’s 1999 participation to prevent humanitarian problems from occurring. On the other hand, some liberals thought that diplomatic negotiations and other tactics that did not include armed forces were more advisable.
When constructivism, a theoretical framework that emphasizes the role of concepts, standards, and identities in defining international relations, is considered, the interaction between theory and policy becomes even more complicated. To exert influence over the acts of the government, constructivist politicians may emphasize altering the perspectives and feelings of self-held by the general public (Walt, 1998). Concerning the Iran Nuclear Deal of 2015, officials who hold constructivist beliefs argued that recasting Iran’s reputation worldwide and engaging in diplomatic engagement might alleviate concerns about nuclear proliferation while simultaneously strengthening relations (Jackson & Sørensen, 2019). On the other hand, constructivists opposed this engagement, citing Iran’s previous actions and expressing skepticism over the potential of a significant shift in Iran’s behavior.
2 Application of a Particular IR Theory
In my opinion, the scope of IR is wider, and a single IR theory cannot satisfy the extensive features of this discipline. However, based on my research and analysis, I believe there are three IR theories: i-e. Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism theories are closely linked to the IR discipline and even o...
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now: