Introduction:
What is study of international relations? In this article, we will give you a clear concept about the study of international relations. Let’s discuss:
Nowadays the study of international relations is of immense importance in the advancement of world civilization and the creation of world peace, harmony, and amity. Since international relations deals with both cooperation and conflict, the study of international relations is known to be a complex subject.
There are several theories and methods in the study of international relations. Classical methods emphasize traditional aspects of political science, economics, and law. However current scholars and observers have begun to follow the perspective provided in the behavioral sciences and are attempting to develop a more comprehensive theory of international relations through systems analysis, and have already been quite successful in this regard. These theories are currently considered important in the study of international relations.
what is study of international relations?
Methods of Studying International Relations:
Methods of studying international relations are mainly two. Namely:
- Traditional methods;
- Modern scientific method.
Generally, the following methods are followed in the study of international relations.
- Historical method;
- Structured approach;
- Ethical approach;
- Strategic approach;
- Scientific method;
- Peace research;
- Medium Range Theory;
- Balance method; and
- Pragmatic approach.
The two methods are discussed below:
1. Historical Approach:
The historical approach is an ancient approach to international relations. Contemporary foreign policy is strongly governed by perspectives and precedents derived from the past. Current policy towards inter-state relations is largely influenced by past conflicts etc. In this regard, history can help by finding some general clues.
From diplomatic history, we learn how politicians have succeeded or failed in the past, what they considered good and necessary, and what they considered fatal and misguided.
Diplomatic history serves as an essential medium to understand the evolution of international relations. It is used as a useful tool to analyze various political processes, programs, projects, and activities. History also helps us to understand the various inputs and outputs of the decision-making process in decision-making on important issues in state life.
History also plays a special role in examining the relationship between cause and effect in world politics. But history cannot fully tell politicians how to deal with relations with other states in a new environment and a changing world.
While history cannot precisely teach decision-makers how to make decisions in a particular environment, it can help by looking at past events, characteristics, and proven interests to find roughly feasible courses of action. It is sometimes said that every nation writes its history. This means that many events in the present are based on ideas from the past.
Acting against historical truth often leads to great loss. For example, it can be said that when the German chancellor Bethmann Holvet ignored Britain’s historical interests and described the Belgium Treaty as a scrap of paper, he did not realize how big a mistake he was going to make. Hitler also ignored the lessons of history and realized the consequences of invading the Soviet Union. History emphasizes two important aspects of international relations.
First, there will always be a change and
Second, adapt yourself to changing circumstances; because there are no permanent friends or enemies in politics. Hence, although historiography is necessary, it is an insufficient method in the study of international relations.
2. Systemic Approach:
It is undeniable that there is a degree of harmony and order in international affairs and activities. But when, why, and in which direction international relations will turn, there is primary debate among scholars regarding the general classification. However, three ideas or models of how the state system can be organized and function are discussed below:
Balance of Power:
The concept of balance of power is the most enduring of the systems that frame international relations in the modern state system. This system arose out of several independent states each striving for the good of the state according to their ability and strength.
In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, centralized state systems in Europe were dominated by the balance of power system. Among the advantages that this system brings to them, the uninterrupted existence of small states and the absence of large-scale wars are particularly notable.
Bipolar Power:
The international system that emerged in the post-war world is commonly referred to as bipolar power. At that time, the ultimate power was concentrated in two special places, Washington and Moscow. As a result, those two power centers began to strongly control international relations.
The bipolar energy system is a special version of the energy-equilibrium system. Its notable feature is that the balance of power here depends on the actions of the two dominant parties and the other states tend to lean towards either side. In such a situation there is no opportunity for any third force to act as a balancer.
Universality:
According to the systemic approach, the third system through which international relations can be organized is globalization or international society. As Rome rose to the height of power in ancient times, it attempted to bring the known world under its system of law and order.
Various political theorists in the 20th century have expressed the view that chaotic state systems cannot continue to function only through cooperation, and are therefore incapable of meeting the needs of the people as a whole.
They are inspired by the ideals of Madison Monroe and Jefferson, the founders of the United States regime, and argue that just as a national government is necessary for the proper execution of the political functions of society, such a government in the international arena is also essential for the overall welfare of the people of the world. However, they are not willing to accept the United Nations as a full international government. Because it cannot make and enforce laws binding on different states.
Conclusion:
Finally, among the different approaches to studying international relations, both the historical approach and the systemic approach are very important. The use of each method is different depending on the context of different events. But comparatively, the universal acceptance of these two methods is the highest. Discuss any two methods concerning methods of study of international relations.