Idealist drew their inspiration from liberal school of
thought. They are sometimes referred to as liberal idealists. After World War
1, they became known simple as ‘idealists”.
Idealism assumes that people were by nature not sinful or wicked, but
that harmful behaviour was the result of structural arrangement motivating
individual to act.10
The basic assumption of realism after the world war
includes: `
a. War is an international problem requiring collective
or multi-lateral rather than national efforts to contain.
b. War is not inevitable and its frequency can be
reduced by eradicating the
institutional arrangement that encourage it.
c. Violence is the
result of evil institutions which make people to act in selfish manner
d. Human nature is essentially “good” or altruistic.
e. International society must strive to eliminate
institution that promotes war.
f.
States must
reform political/democratic institution/framework to smoothen relations among
states.
It must be emphasized, however, that in as much as all
idealists share a naturalistic optimism and universalistic image of
international society, not all idealist believe fully in each of the above
assumptions.
Idealist attitude towards international society differ
significantly and these differences can be seen in three different strands.
First, they subscribe to creating international institution to defend the
weaker ones. Idealists sought to create a new world order based on collective
security. This is aimed at collective attack on the aggressor.
The second group places emphasis on legal framework
like mediation, arbitration and conciliation of settle disputes. In addition,
the legal process stipulates measures to prevent war. This category of
idealists worked towards the creation of permanent court of international
justice in 1921 to adjudicate on international conflicts. In the same vein, the
Brain Kellog Pact of 1928 outlawed war as an instrument of foreign policy.
The third group believes in development of the state
with funds which would have been channeled into war. (Swords into
plowshare). They worked towards securing
disarmament and arms control agreements. In the main, idealists encourage
global cooperation though international law, institution and disarmament. Thus,
they seek more peaceful world. Idealists believe that president Woodrow
Wilson’s call for democratic institution will make the world safe for
democracy. Wilson’s 14-point speech delivered in 1981 proposed the creation of
League of Nations. This speech better than any other expressed the basic
assumption of idealist world view. They believe passionately in the capacity of mankind to overcome the
scourge of war.
Summary of the 14-Point
a. Open covenant
of peace, openly arrived at,
international diplomacy to be carried on
publicly,
b. Disarmament undertaken and guaranteed by the lowest point
consistent with domestic safety.
c. Absolute
freedom of navigation on the seas
d. The removal, as far as possible, of all economic
barriers.
e. A free, open-minded and impartial adjustment of all
colonial claims, based on the principle that the interest of the population
concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government
whose title is to be determined.
f.
The evacuation f all Russian territory and settlement of questions affecting Russia.11
Idealism
Idealism was greatly challenged by circumstances which
ultimately led to the outbreak of World War II.
Critics argue that the war came as a result of idealists’ native
legalistic and moralistic assumptions about the possibility of peace and progress through human aspiration. The critics
drew lessons from the inter war
years. These experiences formed new set
of beliefs and perceptions about world
politics. In the ensuring confrontations, realism or real politic
emerged.
Realism is a political theory which traces its
intellectual roots in Thueydides, a Greek
historian, Thomas Hobbes, an English philosopher, and Niccoli Machiavelli, an
Italian theorist.12 Realism maintains that the state is
the most important actor on the world
stage since it is subject to no higher
authority. It equally believes that the purpose of statecraft is national survival in a hostile environment. The states, therefore, seek to acquire power and
states sovereignty which is the
bedrock of international law,
gives heads of state the freedom
and responsibility to advance states interest
and survival. There is no
moral/ethical consideration of issues because they are simply wasteful and dangerous.
Basic Assumption of Realist
Argument
a. Statism is the
centerpiece of realism. The state
is the highest actor and all actors in international affairs are of lesser importance. The state’s
sovereignty signifies the
existence of an independent political community which has juridical authority over its population.
b. History teaches that
man by nature is selfish and no amount of improvement can make man free
from this deficiency.
c. Man has quest for power and a great quest to dominate others. This lead to what Thomas Hobbes calls
a struggle for power “ a war of
all against all”.
d. No other state can be relied upon to guarantee
your survival, and in international politic, the structure of the system does not permit friendship, trust and honour. Allies might increase a state’s ability to defend itself
but their loyalty and reliability
may not be assured.13
Criticism of realist approach
1. C. Beithz (1979)
the analogy between individuals in a state of nature and the states in international arena
is misplaced in four ways:
i.
States are not
the only actors.
ii.
The powers of the
states are massively unequal.
iii.
States are not
independent of each other.
iv.
Pattern of
cooperation exist despite the absence of
a global government capable of enforcing rule.
2. K. Booth (1995)
realism cannot speak to our world. Survival for the majority of
individuals in global politics is threatened not by armies of “foreign’
states but more often by their own
government or more broadly, structures
of global capitalism which produce and
reproduce the daily rounds of human wrongs such as malnutrition. Death from preventable diseases,
slavery, prostitution and
exploitation.
3. C. Brown
(1992) the strongest argument against
realisms moral skepticism is that
states employ a moral language of
rights and duties on their
relations with each other.
4. R. Cox (1986) realism is problem-solving theory. It
accepts the prevailing order, and seeks only to isolate aspects of the system
in order to understand how it works. The
idea of theory serving an emancipatory purpose(alternative world order) is not
in structural realist vocabulary.
5. M. Hollis and
S. Smith (1990) realism assumes that the method of the natural sciences can
be employed to explain the social world.
Realism can therefore be equated with a
form of positivism which seeks
to uncover causal laws that can
both explain and predict the recurrence of events in world politics
Despite the
flaws notices in realism, its
theorists continue to think about
international politics in its
terms. In the
1950s , realism enjoyed great
boost as the could war entered a new
phase which military power in world
politics emphasized. Apart from that, the
blood-letting in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s
also helped to rekindle
faith/enthusiasm for realism.
The Place of Realism In
International Relations:
Realism has been the dominate theory of international relations since the second world war . Though
there are dissenters and radicals within this school of thought, all agree that realism is one and liberalism another. Realism is not
an ideological position but it has remained central within international relation, despite series of
criticisms because it has succeeded in revising , reinventing and establishing
an indispensable relevance for its
perspective within other paradigms.
Idealism has lost some of its major
criticisms against realism. Marxist thinking
now accepts some aspects of realist
views. The state, vis-avis the class analysis, has been accepted.
The
continuing relevance of realism can be seen in “neo-realism” or “structural
realism” which recognizes the
anarchical nature of world politics and the dominance of the nation-state in
the global political arena.