BASICS OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS- I

“In a scientific sense theory means a set of propositions allowing us to generalize- thoughts providing explanation (establishing a casual relationship between the variables) serving as a source of explanatory concepts or a source of ways of evaluating the point or use of meaning of such concepts.”

                                   Austin Harrington, Modern Social Theory: An Introduction

Defining international relation sciences is a vital approach to understanding the burgeoning need to understand the gauge the importance of studying international relations. Broad definition indicates that international relation sciences focusses on a certain field of social relationship- the relationship between nations and states. It is, by no means, mellifluous. Social relationships are dictated by the ebb and flow of time, reason and emotions. In some ways, understanding all these social contracts might seem drab, and a dull affair. However, a hugely attractive prospect of studying international relations, is, by extension, the fact that it manages to encompass philosophy, history, economics and geography, while also enabling us to understand the Machiavellian instinct that seems to be prevalent inside of all of us. Nations and states are run by humans, humans with agendas and motivations. Understanding this is of importance, not just for us, but for the future generations as well. Looking back, they will see what we did right, and what we did wrong.

There are two traditions of IR theory, as defined by experts; the classical, or the ancient tradition, and the so-called Christian tradition.

The Christian tradition is formulated upon the idea of “Kingdom of Heavens”,- that there will be eternal peace, and the end of interstate wars. Liberalism and Marxism fall under the umbrella of the Christian tradition.

On the other hand, the classical tradition is rooted into the concept of Realism. Classical traditionalists believe that there is no way to bring eternal peace, that the nature of international politics is such that it is unchangeable.

It is important to understand the above-mentioned concepts, as the very fundamentals of IR begin from here. These two traditions are the gateway to the world of the international relations sciences, and the clear bifurcation between the two ideologies, polar opposites in nature, will pave the way for the construction of monolithic building of IR. A brief understanding of the two traditions is important in order for us to understand the future concepts.

“History is philosophy teaching by examples.”

                                                                Thucydides

Thucydides was an Athenian historian and general who is popular for the Thucydides trap, a concept, which according to Thucydides, explained war itself.

“The real cause I consider to be the one which was formally most kept out of sight. The growth of the power of Athens, and the alarm which this inspired in Lacedaemon, made war inevitable.”

                        Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Volume I, II, II

The Peloponnesian War occurred between the two major powers of Ancient Greece- Athens and Sparta. The war resulted in Athens, the strongest city-state in Greece prior to the war, losing its power, and Sparta becoming the leading power of Greece. A bipolar system was thus transformed into a unipolar one.

According to Thucydides, the initial stage of the war was driven by fear, associated with a shift in the balance of power. Sparta, afraid of losing its position in the Hellenic world took counter measures to build up military strengths. Fear makes states suspect others of betrayal and power for self-defense.

Thus, Thucydides trap is the trap of fear and compensation. Whenever there is fear that there has been a shift in the balance of power, there comes a need and an urge to compensate for it, to counter against the rising power of the opposition. Wars, according to Thucydides, began because of this need to counter, the necessary to show power and strength.

However, the rise of the Roman Empire brought in Pax Romana, the idea of universal state civilization. After the collapse of the Roman Empire, Christian Universalism dominated Europe for nearly two centuries. It was believed that the final destination of mankind is the end of history; the purported Kingdom of Heavens.

“In all times kings, and persons of sovereign authority, because of their independence are in continuous jealousies, and in the state and posture of gladiators; having their weapons pointing, and their eyes fixed on one another; that, their forts, garrisons and guns upon the frontier of their kingdoms; and continual spies upon their neighbors; which is a posture of war.”

                               Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, Chapter 13

Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher who suggested the idea of Leviathan. Leviathan would be a state authority or a supreme power that would maintain order and end anarchy. However, it is believed that Leviathans are doomed to fight war against everyone, because of eagerness of power, wealth and glory. It is thus, impossible to establish a Leviathan over Leviathans; for states will never give up their sovereignty.

The Thirty-year War (1618-1648) ended with the Peace of Westphalia.

Signed in 1648, the Peace of Westphalia formed the first well-structured international order, based on a realist understanding of politics.

There were three principles of Westphalian sovereignty.

1.     “Whose realm, his religion.”

2.     “Every king is the emperor in his kingdom.”

3.     “No one can be stronger than the others.”

“They who have waged war in obedience to the divine command, or in conformity of His laws, have represented in their persons the public justice or the wealth of the government, and in the capacity have put to death wicked men; such persons have by no means violated the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill”.”

                                            Saint Augustine, The City of God, 1470

Christianity brought a new moral doctrine, proposing peace and humanity as a fundamental value.

St. Augustine (354-430)- was a Christian philosopher and theologian, often considered to be one of the father founders of the Church. As noticeable from the above-mentioned quote, Christianity ushered in a new form of war; just wars. It was, according to Christian thinkers, based on morals and God’s commandments.

“War is delightful to those who have no experience of it.”

                                                   Erasmus of Rotterdam

Renaissance and the Protestant Reformation (1300s-1500s) sparked a belief in the importance of the individual. Thus, it began the rebirth of the classical tradition, bringing back an individual-centered school of thought. This period also saw the emergence and the growth of a wealthy middle class, which in turn saw the beginning of the erosion and the subsequent demise of the aristocracy. There was more importance placed on the rationality of the individual rather than the religious power of the Roman Catholic Church.

“The law of nations is based on the law of nature, which has received its obligatory force from the will of all nations or of many nations.”

                                                      Hugo Grotius, The Law of War and Peace, 1625

Hugo Grotius was a Dutch humanist, diplomat, theologist and lawyer. He established three cases for the concept of just war.

1.     Self defense

2.     Protection of property

3.     Revenge or compensation

Hugo Grotius also developed a complex doctrine of international law. He pointed out that the creation and the subsequent maintenance of laws and rules are natural for human beings. Therefore, it should be a similar case for the states.

John Locke, the English philosopher and physician, furthered Grotius’s points. He stated that all individuals have rights, freedom, the right of property and the right to live. A government is responsible for protecting these rights and have to serve its citizens, instead of suppressing them.