International relations essay PDF

Preview

Summary

Download International relations essay PDF

Description

How has Neo-realism shown itself in modern day Sino-American relations? Neo-realism is considered to be Kenneth waltz updated version of Morgenthau’s realism. Neo-realist thinkers claim the principal actors in the international arena to be states, which are concerned with their own security, act in pursuit of their own national interests, and struggle for power. Thereby, Anarchy of the international system is an order in itself. Thucydides is not considered a realist however his writings inspired others and his account of the Peloponnesian war correlates with the rise in tensions between America -the main hegemonand china -the rising power-. Due to this scholars such as graham Allison predict sinoamerican relations are in danger of falling into Thucydides trap. Thucydides trap is the notion that conflict is exceedingly likely when a rising power approaches parity with an established power. (The diplomat 2018) Since the decline of the Ussr we have seen aspects and characteristics of the neo-realism theory demonstrated through sino-american relations. Brzezinski and Mearsheimer argued Sino-American relation’s future, which will end with a war according to, latter similarly to how Sparta and Athens relations resulted in war.

The basic tenets of neorealism enable the systematic approach to studying shifts in state behaviour. In brief there appears to be six fundamental neorealist concepts, which are; anarchy, structure, capability, the distribution of power, polarity and national interest. (Dibek 2012) The concept of anarchy has been shown through sino-american relations as America has constantly tried to maintain a top position in our current unipolar world system. As there is no formal world government America has tried to act as this government and the mergence of china has threatened their position. China could be more technologically innovative and economically robust, with consequently more talent and money to lavish on its military. (Kaplan 2018) It is known that China is a rising potential regional hegemon in Asia therefore US exhibited balancing behavior towards China. This was first demonstrated in the Taiwan strait crisis (1954) in which president Eisenhower entered mutual defence agreement Placing Taiwan under American protection was a sign of alliance against china and In the year

2010, the United States approved the selling of $6.4 billion worth of weapons to Taiwan. It could be argued this demonstrated neo-realism in modern day politics as America is using military source as a force of power against the Chinese. This exemplifies how the USA has attempted to remain the only regional hegemon. This coincides with realist theorist’s john mearsheimer idea that the reality of the anarchic international system forces countries to behave according to their own interests.

Another aspect, which is important in the neorealism theory, is the notion of balance of power. "Balance-of-power politics prevail wherever two, and only two requirements are met: that the order be anarchic and that it be populated by units wishing to survive". (Waltz 1979, p. 121.) Throughout sino-american relations both sides have become aggressive at times to maintain the balance of power. For instance, Sino- Russian cooperation in Central Asia largely based on a mutual desire to balance against the US. U.S. presence is threatening the geo-political influence of China and Russia. Russia has recently become more aware of Central Asia’s importance as a buffer zone and the country’s attempts to strengthen their position in the region are not facilitated by the presence of American troops. (Bergfeldt 2008) thereby china continuously takes action such as support the North Korean regime to maintain equilibrium of power. As a response the USA has to keep on investing in its defence, which was announced in Dec 2018 to have spent $874.4 billion. However neo-realism has been criticised by other theories. Liberals insist China will not be allowed to rise as a militarily powerful, non- democracy because Western traders and investors will lose interest if the Chinese do not politically reform (Russet and O’Neal 2001). Thereby arguing that neo-realists assume the worst when in liberal perspective china and America are trying to achieve a balance if power to become equals rather than to overpower one another.

One potential weakness in neo-realism is the aspect of polarity. Waltz theory applies to the bipolar system in which he founded neorealism however we are no longer in that bipolar state. We have moved into a state of unipolarity in which Balance Of Power logic also

explains the closer relationship developing between Beijing and Moscow (as mentioned in previous paragraph). Waltz maintained that the unstable systems were those with only one power (unipolarity) however others have claimed since the collapse of the Ussr; the world system is more stable than ever. (National interest 2013) However, the theory can be considered as too parsimonious when describing the effects of unipolarity. Offensive realist Mearsheimer argues that the USA is the regional hegemony which is threatened that china is also becoming the regional hegemony therefore they will compete with one another in the Pacific region at least. Here mearsheimer is able to make a prediction on where sino-american relations may go whereas neo-realism at times lacks direction as Waltz wrote in a time of bipolarity. Now that we are not in a bipolar system should we reconsider how applicable the neo-realism theory is to sino-american relations?

Waltz and other realists argued that other powers would emerge to balance against the United States, thus re-establishing an equilibrium balance of power and rightly so. Wohlforth argues that in a unipolar world, the balance of power would promote peace since capabilities are concentrated. Liberalists would claim, the chance for uncertainty is reduced in a unipolar world and thus the chance for conflict is as well. It could be claimed that this helps us understand why America and china have never fallen down Thucydides trap of going into war better than neorealism has.

Others argue that neo-realism has its weaknesses due to “lack emphasis on the importance of the role of foreign policy elites or leadership structures” (Erdem, 2004) the democratic peace theory (liberalism) believes in state preference and permits plurality in state action. However when writing his book “the theory of international politics” Waltz continuously looked at states as actors rather than diving into the domestic affairs within the states. Due to this, it is evident that unlike theories such as liberalism, classical realism and Marxism, neo-realism has failed to look at the states human nature. Classical realists argue Neorealism, in the view of its more severe critics, ignores both history and human subjectivity. 1 For example, lliberals do

1

not share the realist assumption that power is the means by which a state’s security is guaranteed, that states are the primary units of international politics. States do not fight all others at all times and places where the realist constraints are weak (Dunne et al., 2010: p 96). Neorealists often argue countries act in their own interests first but is vague about that these special interests may be. Are these influenced by public opinion, the government, history? Tensions have increased due to president trump’s anti-trade agenda however neo-realists focus on the state rather than what internal affairs are happening within the states which makes them behave this way. Barma and Ratner (2006) argue that the real threat of China isn’t economic or military – it’s ideological. Whilst neorealists touch on this, neorealists scholars prioritise economic and security threats over ideological. Liberals would also argue that international institutions and economic interdependence play a significant role in prolonging peace in not only the East Asia region, but the international system overall. (Whyte 2013).

To conclude, structures clearly encourage different behaviours. Our current unipolar system has relaxed the great powers of the world however tensions still lye in sino-american relations, throughout the essay, it has become evident that neo-realism has been demonstrated through sino-american relations but not always. History already foretold how the US policymakers will react in the event that China maintains its economic growth by 2020 (Baylis et al., 2008: p 105). If powerful states such as the US and china maintain this “every man for themselves” policy, realism will continue to be the most applicable theory to understanding international politics.

By Tari Chidavaenzi

Bibliograghy Chance, A. (2018). Is Thucydides Helpful in Explaining Sino-US Relations? The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2015/05/is-thucydides-helpful-in-explaining-sino-us-relations/

Joseph, J. (2010). Is Waltz a Realist?. International Relations, 24(4), pp.478-493.

Kaplan, R. (2018). The return of Marco Polo's world. 1st ed. new york: random house.

Kumar, P. (2018). https://www.studocu.com/en/document/university-of-delhi/theories-of-internationalrelations-and-world-history/lecture-notes/neo-realism-lecture-notes-1/1211991/view

Mearsheimer, John (2001), The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton

Morgenthau, H (1967) Politics Among Nations: The struggle for Power and Peace: Fourth Edition (New York: Knofp).

Waltz, K N. (1979), Theory of International Politics, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

Wohlforth, W.C.; Little, R.; Kaufman, S.J.; et al. (2007), "Testing Balance-Of-Power Theory in World History", European Journal of International Relations, 13: 155–185...