Professional Documents
Culture Documents
One can better define International Relations if one clarifies in which aspect it is required
to be defined. International Relations is beyond a comprehensive definition because of
its multidimensional approaches. Scholars however devised their own kinds of definitions
depicting the sense in which they take IR. As Palmer and Perkins used these words to
define IR;
"International Relations is the objective and systematic study of international life in all its
aspects."
This is a relatively general definition yet beyond the width of International Relations as a
discipline.
Central Point of all Efforts made to define International Relations
In nearly all definitions proposed for International Relations, scholars share one point in
common that works as the central idea behind this discipline. That idea is of 'nation
states' and the relationships between them.
IR in its very first sense name of the relationships between the nation states of the
world. The internationality is subject matter of the discipline. Modern nation state system
evolved from the Peace of Westphalia Treaty signed in 1648. Today, in the complex
structure of world states working on varying ideologies, International Relations helps to
study them in a unanimity of thought.
Scope of International Relations
Another merit as well as demerit of this discipline is that it has no boundaries of its
scope. It is merit in the sense of provision of absolute opportunity to man to make
research on the daily changing international relations. It is demerit as the discipline fails
to give itself a concrete shape and outline. But still keeping in view the aspects studied
in the International Relations till now, we will try to elaborate its scope. Following points
will prove helpful in this regard;
IR studies relations between states in their political and economic prospects primarily.
IR covers the realm of 'foreign affairs' in all its dimensions.
IR deals with the recording and studying of International History with the aim to find
out the basis of states' relations in the past.
IR studies International Law in the context of how international rules define and
govern the relations between states.
IR embodies its scope with the inclusion of not only states but also the non-state
actors in international relations.
IR deals with the international events of;
War
Peace
Nuclear world
International political economy
Globalization
International institutions
Conflicts among states
Foreign policy and decision making
National powers and interests
Conclusion
International Relations has a wider scope. The points elaborated above as its scope are
not final. This discipline broadens its scope with the changing events of the world and
new dynamics of international relations. It is a subject along with being a practical
course adopted by nations of the world and the international institutions.
The Nation State System
Modern world is the world hosting nation state system. This system in its very basic
sense ensures the origin of states on the world map. And the relationships among these
states are to be regulated by internationally agreed set of rules. This nation state system
is child of political and social evolution of the world that commenced with the birth of
social animal on this planet.
What is Nation State System?
Palmer defines nation state system in these words; "Nation State System is a pattern of
political life which organizes people separately into sovereign states".
Elements of a Nation State
Every nation state of the world is to possess four essential elements in order to prove its
recognition. These elements are;
Population as a nation
Definite territory for that population to live in
A government to govern that population with the defined territory
Sovereignty of that nation state
Origin of Nation State System
Origin of the modern nation state system can be traced back into 1648 when the Peace
Treaty of Westphalia was signed. This treaty was actually an agreement to end the
'Thirty Years of War' from 1618 to 1648 between various religio - political factions of the
landmass Europe.
Prior to signing of this treaty various religious sects of Christian Europe were at daggers
drawn at one hand and there was dreadful clash between the Church and the Throne on
the other hand.
With the Peace of Westphalia drawn in 1648, for the first time in human history,
independent sovereign territories were defined to be ruled by the nations living in them.
This was a way to end the long war and it proved quite effective.
Modern Nation State System
Europe became the birthplace of the contemporary nation state system. Though it was
not in this position at that time but with the time passing it evolved. Today, the nation
state system shapes an international community to discuss and deal with the affairs
between them.
Today, the nation state system is complex than ever. Not only the states are the
prominent actors as in the past but also the non-state actors occupy their place. Nation
state system of present day is however more concrete but still victim of various
international problems.
Future of Nation State System
There can never be one state of the whole world as nations hesitate to lose their distinct
identities. Nation state system will continue in the future of this world with any rare
chance of being replaced. It is system that if not perfect then at least better than its
previous versions.
Further, nations have learned to govern themselves and their states. They have
established international community, international peace making institution and
international law as well. Thus, it is a relatively better system.
Conclusion
Nation state system is the framework in which modern political world acts. It has more
evolved and developed mechanisms of conduct with each other. Nation states become
the basis of studying International Relations as well both in terms of a discipline as well
as in terms of a mechanism.
Evolution of International Society
Nation state system provided the fundamental unity for giving this world an international
society. This society of states faced various phases of peace and war to evolve into its
contemporary shape. Today, international society is more powerful and strong under the
shadow of international law than it was ever before in the past. Conflicts and frictions in
the relations among states however undermine the concreteness of international society
at different levels of interaction.
What is International Society?
International society can be defined as 'community of world states gathered under an
agenda that may be in the shape of international law at a universal organization in order
to sort out the ways for achieving common goals and averting common threats thus
primarily fulfilling the aim of a peaceful world'.
Elements shaping International Society
The definition carries following elements that establish an international society;
Nation states
International organization
International law
Common Agenda
Aim for world peace
Origin of International Society
Evolution of international community can be studied after knowing its origin. It was the
Peace of Westphalia of 1648 that actually laid the formal structure of nation states.
Establishment of an international community was possible not before that. Thus, nation
states became the first element of international community.
Nation states of the world plunged into the First World War in 1914. At the end of this
war, the first ever time came in history when the idea of an international community was
materialized. Following the proposition of the then American President Wilson, the
League of Nations was established as an apparent body of international society.
Evolution of International Society
Evolution of international society began with the birth of the League of Nations after the
First World War. The league became the first platform where the member states could
debate over the international problems. But soon after the Great Depression of 1930s,
the League became the victim of nationalism and state - centrism. This undermined the
evolution of international society. World put itself into another Great War from 1939 to
1945. This was a period which might or might not be taken as evolutionary phase of
international community. But in a compact view, World War Two ended bringing the
nation states closer again in order to revive this interrupted evolution of international
society. At that moment another international organization with the name of the 'United
Nations' (UN) was established.
UN survives even today after having passed through the bumpy decades of the Cold War
between the US and the USSR. The organization represents an international society with
the gathering of 192 states as its members.
Realism
Realism is the approach of International Relations that works as anti - thesis to
Liberalism. Realism focuses on the more realistic, power oriented and state centric
principles that play important role in international relations. Realism lays emphasis upon
gaining national power to pursue national interests at all costs.
Proponents of Realism Approach
Among the classic proponents of Realism, also regarded as its founders, following names
fall;
Nicolo Machiavelli
Thomas Hobbes
Clausewitz
Modern scholars that favor Realism as a better approach in International Relations are;
Hans Morgenthau
George F. Kenan
E. H. Carr
Origin of Realism as Approach of International Relations
Formal origin and incorporation of Realism as an approach in the International Relations
was seen at the end of the Second World War. Liberalism failed in all its utopian
schemes to bring peace to the world. States fought another Total War. Following that the
approach of Realism sought grounds. If seen in the distant past, Realism finds its origin
in writings of Machiavelli as well as Thomas Hobbes.
Fundamental Postulates of Realism
Following were the fundamental postulates drafted by various scholars under the
umbrella of Realism;
There exists international anarchy.
States are the principal actors in international relations.
States pursue national interests.
States tend to accumulate national power.
States strengthen the means of their survivals.
National power and national interests determine the relations between states.
States need to compete each other for seeking relative gains in the international
realm.
War is an option in the international relations.
Realism and Six Principles of Hans Morgenthau
Hans Morgenthau's Six principles of Realism are taken as eminent work in this field of
International Relations. His six principles give the ideas of;
National power
State centrism
National interests
Autonomy
Survival
Beyond morality approach of state
Criticism on Realism as Theoretical Approach of International Relations
Realism is criticized for its extreme emphasis on state centrism, power grabbing and
national interests at the costs of world peace. The theory is realistic but leads the world
states into an anarchic position where everyone is at war against the other. It does not
eliminate war as an option in the international relations.
Conclusion
International Relations seeks Realism as among the influential classical approaches.
Realism talks about the aboriginal and realistic basis of international relations. It is
criticized for its extreme version but the theory completely rejects the utopian postulates
of idealism. Realism does not take cooperation as an option because according to its
proponents, world is anarchic where intense competition is inevitable to maintain
national power.
Neo-Realism
'Neo' means new or the latest. Neo-Realism is more refined and advanced strand of
Realism. Neo-Realism unlike the original Realism is more moderate form in International
Relations.
Origin of Neo-Realism
Neo-Realism originated in latter part of 1970s. It was the reactionary product of Neo-
Liberalism which once again posed serious threat to the Realist idea of state centrism. It
was the work of Kenneth Waltz with the title of 'Theory of International Politics' which
gave birth to neo-realism.
Exponent of Neo-Realism
Among the modern exponents of neo-realism the name of Kenneth Waltz echoes. He is
regarded as founder of this theoretical approach in the International Relations. Waltz
sticking to the traditional ideas of Realism, infuses a new spirit in this approach by not
utterly rejecting the possibilities of cooperation among the states of the world.
Postulates of Neo-Realism
Postulates of new-realism are the same as that of realism. They differ in a few points
which are explained as following;
There exists international anarchy which serves as basis of international relations
rather than the Human nature of violence.
World states follow the idea of self - help to empower themselves and act in
international relations.
There exists Security Dilemma in international relations. States accumulate power for
their security and survival which leads most of them into a race of armament and
militarization.
Possibilities of cooperation between the states need not to be overlooked when they
are serving the interests of a state.
It is not the cooperation however but the 'Balance of Power' that actually prevent the
states from large scale war.
Criticism on Neo-Realism Theory of International Relations
Neo-Realism is criticized on the account of following points;
Still the theory is extreme and regards state as the sole actors of international
relations.
It admits cooperation now but it has not yet rejected war as an option.
Focuses on national power and national interests of a state which actually undermine
the possibilities for cooperation.
The theory of Neo-Realism gives a mixed vision not a clear cut one. It is not inclined
on a single side.
Conclusion
Neo-Realism is actually the reaction to the action posed by Neo-Liberalism. The theory
has not given up the basic postulates of Realism but it is still moderate as compared to
its original version. Neo-Realism is brainchild of Kenneth Waltz who believed neither in
extreme liberalism not in extreme realism. As a consequence, he devised a middle way
to meet the ideals in international relations.
Neo-Liberalism
Neo-liberalism emerged to be the modern strand of liberalism in the realm of theoretical
International Relations. This approach just like its previous aboriginal strand believes in
rationality of human nature and international cooperation. But unlike its aboriginal form,
neo-liberalism is moderate and less extreme.
Origin of Neo-Liberalism as Theoretical Approach in IR
Origin of neo-liberalism in International Relations was both the result of changing world
circumstances and need of the evolving discipline of International Relations. Even more
than these two points, neo-liberalism originated to revive the dead approach of
liberalism.
It was 1960s which is seen as the decade when neo-liberalism took birth. Its origin was
catalyzed by the declining oomph of realism.
Since after the collapse of liberalism as first hand approach of international relations,
realism was holding firm grip on the world order. Neo-Liberalism defied the system of
state centrism and intense competition bringing forth cooperation as the best option in
economic and political terms.
Various Aspects of Neo - Liberalism
Neo-Liberalism can be understood in various aspects it brought. These are explained
below;
A. Neo Liberal Internationalism
The core assumption of this aspect of neo-liberalism is that the liberal democratic states
of the world don't war against each other. This ensures peace and prosperity at global
level.
B. Neo-Liberal Institutionalism
This strand of neo-liberal institutionalism though believes in cooperation but in one
aspect it shares commonality with the Realism. It concurs to the point of realism that
states are the principal actors and institutions in the international relations.
But instead of seeing this thing in terms of competition in anarchic world, neo-liberal
institutionalism focuses on ensuring prospects of cooperation.
Neo-Liberalism and Idealism
Neo-Liberalism gives a different scheme to regulate the international affairs as compared
to idealism. The theory of idealism that took birth after the First World War was taken as
utopian way to deal with international relations. It was impracticable.
Neo-Liberalism does not represent utopian and impracticable schemes. It accepts the
primary role of states in world affairs but suggests them to work with cooperation.
Criticism on Neo-Liberalism
Realists attack neo-liberalism again with the traditional mantra of not being a realistic
approach in understanding the global affairs. For the proponents of Feminism this is
again among the theories that carry nothing remarkable to ensure women
empowerment. Marxists consider it as a tool of the Western powers being exploited to
deal both the developing and the developed states under the same but unfair
mechanisms.
Feminist Theory
Feminism is a non-traditional and modern theory of International Relations. The theory
highlighted the aspects of international relations from the point of view of women of the
world. The theory propounds how this gender has been sidelined in deciding international
relations despite being its direct victim every time. Feminism is the broadest example of
an effort for women empowerment.
Origin of Feminism as Theory of International Relations
Origin of Feminism is actually the consequence of several world conferences convened to
empower women across the globe. Some of the prominent conferences that played role
in this regard are;
Mexico Women's Conference 1975
Copenhagen Women's Conference 1980
Nairobi Women's Conference 1985
Convention on Elimination of All Kinds of Discriminations against Women 1979
These conferences highlighted the rights of women along with the need to empower
them and give them a share in deciding international affairs.
International Endorsement of Women's Rights
Following the conferences mentioned above, international community endorsed the
rightful demands of women. The United Nations declared the years from 1976 to 1985 as
'Decade for Women'. Similarly, the year 1975 was marked as the 'International Women's
Year'.
Core Points of Feminism as a Theory
Feminism laid down following reservations upon the contemporary world order;
World order is in fact male dominated.
National interest is always multi-dimensional but is defined by masculinity.
Women have always remained hidden in international relations.
Women are direct victims of male dominated decision making in international
relations.
War is decided by men but women suffer.
Efficacy of Feminism
Feminism is right in its reservations but it is utopian scheme. It is not practicable to
secure the share for women in international relations in a way as demanded. Feminism
just like World System Theory explains one dimensional aspect of international relations.
Though there is a vast change observable today in the status of women in world. They
have been empowered greatly. But there are cultural, social and historical barriers to
enhance their role in international relations that are difficult to overcome.
Another point which proves that women are now more active in international relations
more than they were in the past is that they can be seen as heads of the states, chief
diplomats, ambassadors, head of delegations at UN.
Conclusion
Feminist theory is more a reservation than an explanation how international relations are
regulated. It rarely gives any clear cut mechanism to regulate international relations. It
has however helped in empowering women.
National Interest
National interest is a tricky topic of modern International Relations. It is something taken
as an impetus behind every state action relative to another state. National Interest
serves as the determinant of state's foreign policy along with depicting the nature and
policies of political government ruling the state.
Defining National Interest
It is a common perception that national interest has no concrete and definite words that
can define it absolutely. It is a fluid aspect of International Relations. The definition of
national interest lacks universality because the national interest is not shared common
by all states. Secondly, there are the factors which determine national interest of a state
for a specific period of time. These factors also vary from state to state.
But in a very safe and simplest attempt to define national interest following words can
be used; "National Interest is the name of those goals and objectives of a state which
are pursued to seek the maximum benefit in a given set of circumstances".
Fluidity of National Interest
National interest lacks definite outlook. The variables which prevent national interest
from seeking a concrete shape are following;
Varying circumstances
Different state ideologies
Major changes in the World Order
These variables make states to review their national interests from time to time and
alter their course of action then.
Link Between National Interest and Foreign Policy
National interest is closely linked to the foreign policy of a state. As foreign policy is
determined and drafted keeping in view the national interest. Relations of one state with
another state are nothing more than their interests attached to each other's. In Foreign
policy a state pursues its national interest.
Determinants of National Interest
Along with the variables mentioned above, national interest is determined by following
elements;
State's geo - strategic position
Political traditions
Goals and manifestoes of political parties
History of the state
Survival - The Chief Aim of National Interest
Among the several aims and goals of the national interest of a state, survival stands to
be the first one. All other interests come after a state has ensured survival. Other aims
of national interest can be economic, political and diplomatic oriented.
Ways to Pursue National Interest
National interest is pursued through different ways. In the modern world of the nation -
state system, national interest is pursued chiefly by 'Diplomacy'. It is the legitimate art
of forwarding state's foreign policy towards other states. In this way actually national
interest is pursued.
Ways to pursue other than diplomacy can be use of influence, making alliances,
concluding agreements and treaties. Illegitimate ways might include the use of force
against the other state or interfering in its internal matters with the help of non - state
actors.
Conclusion
National interest is understood in wider sense. It is mostly long term policy. The reason
behind the presence of complexity in understanding national interest is also that we take
it in shorter term as something imminently achievable and based on unchangeable
principles. But in fact it is contrary to that.
Sovereignty
Sovereignty is a modern day aspect of the International Relations. It is actually linked
with the aboriginal concept of the nation - state system. Before the origin of the nation
state system, the idea of sovereignty was vague. Later it evolved gradually to assume
the contemporary manifestation.
Defining Sovereignty
Sovereignty is defined in terms of 'unrestricted and unlimited authority of a state within
its territory and on its population'. In another meaning of sovereignty, it is taken as the
supremacy of state. This supremacy is meant to control and command everything
inferior to it.
Sovereignty as Element of State
Modern nation state has four essential elements as defined in the 'Montevideo
Convention on Duties and Rights of States';
Population
Territory
Government
Sovereignty
Sovereignty as an element of state is the most important one in abstract sense. Without
sovereignty the idea of population and territory can be perceived but the idea of
government control on both these things remains impossible. So, sovereignty is actually
the name of that control as well which government being the working agency of state
exercise over its people.
Various Dimensions of Sovereignty
Sovereignty is understood in different dimensions or types. Some are explained below;
A. Domestic Sovereignty
Domestic sovereignty means that the state is sovereign to rule over and decide for all
the internal matters within its territory or related to its population.
B. Interdependence Sovereignty
Interdependence sovereignty means that state shall have control the international
boundaries it shares with the neighboring states. No one is permitted to cross the
borders of the state without due permission.
C. International Legal Sovereignty
This sovereignty is linked to the recognition of other sovereign states which have fulfilled
the criteria of being the nation states.
Exclusivity and Absoluteness in Sovereignty
Exclusiveness and Absoluteness are two important features of sovereignty. Exclusivity
means that the state is sovereign excluding all other agents that may tend to exercise
control. In simple terms it excludes these agents from sharing state's sovereignty.
Absoluteness of sovereignty of state means that the supremacy and authority of state is
absolute and final. It will govern not only all the geographical parts of the country but
also decide for the people. This feature makes the modern nation state as central
institute of power.
Internal & External Sovereignty
Internal sovereignty deals with the internal affairs of a state. This idea is most of the
time also linked with the concept of legitimacy of government. The way in which a
government is elected to exercise internal sovereignty is an important aspect.
External sovereignty is the name of maintaining relations of a sovereign power with the
other states of the world. It is not the supremacy of one state over another but the way
in which relations between states are to be maintained on equal footing.
Conclusion
Sovereignty is an abstract element of state which is also the most important one.
Sovereignty is the actual thing which works as the soul of modern nation state.
Balance of Power
Balance of power is the classical realist concept that preserved peace of the pre - world
wars world. It is concept that marks its practical implementation in 18th century. In the
contemporary world, balance of power theory has little role to play but it cannot be
ignored utterly due to its historic role. Even during the Cold War, a balance of power was
present between the two Super Powers which prevented from escalation of any conflict
to the total war.
Defining Balance of Power
It has been noted that unlike most of the topics of international relations which lack
concrete definitions, 'Balance of Power' is actually the one which has multiple
interpretations. In simple terms, Balance of Power refers to 'the mechanism which the
states adopt in order to maintain a certain level of equilibrium in their relative powers'.
Balance of Power as a General Social Principle
International Relations' Realist Morgenthau see the 'Balance of Power' as a general social
principle. According to this perspective, 'Balance of Power' exists among states just as it
exists among individuals in society to maintain the social peace and equilibrium.
Pre - Requisites of 'Balance of Power'
Balance of power requires following essentials;
Multiple nation states
International anarchy
Varying degrees of powers distributed among the states
Requirement for bringing an equilibrium
Tools of 'Balance of Power'
Balance of power is not naturally present in the world order. It has to be achieved by the
world states utilizing one or the other method. Some major tools or techniques of
achieving balance of power are elaborated as following;
A. Alliances & Counter Alliances
This is the chief way to maintain or bring balance of power. In the 18th century world
and also during the Cold War, balance of power was kept by establishing Alliances. A
common example is 'NATO' & 'Warsaw' during the Cold War. Both the alliances, each led
by rival superpower, maintained a level of balance between them.
B. Buffer States
These are the states which geographically work as barrier between two or more rivals.
For instance, Afghanistan has been a buffer state between British held Indian colony and
the Soviet Union. Similarly, Tibet served as buffer states between India and China.
C. Armament and Militarization
Armament and militarization by one nation leads the rival states to do the same. This
maintains balance of power between them. India and Pakistan present this type of case.
Both the states maintain a level of deterrence through militarization and nuclear
armament.
D. Disarmament
During Cold War, particularly in its later part, rapid disarmament agreements were
concluded between the US and the USSR. These agreements were like SALT, NPT at
global level, etc. These helped to restore balance of power by reducing dreadful arms.
E. Intervention
Intervention is also an option to bring balance of power. The US & USSR' interventions in
Korean war, Vietnam war are its examples. Both the powers maintained balance of
power between them by fighting proxy wars at foreign lands.
Conceptualization of Security in 21st Century
Balance of Power is anachronism in the 21st century which is dominated by the nation
states that see their national interests and national powers as chief aims. Thus, intense
competition exists in anarchic world. Balance of power was not appropriate to bring
peace to the 21st century world. Due to its inadequacy and uncertainty it was needed to
be replaced by something more reliable.
Perceiving the Idea of Security in 21st Century
21st century is witnessing the nation states in their evolved shapes. International
community is stronger than ever before in the chaotic world history. But the risks of
conflicts among states are never eliminated absolutely. It is part of realistic world. In
21st century these risks might be less but dangerous than ever. This is because
international community is strong but several states have weaponized themselves with
weapons of mass destruction. Thus, maintaining peace in this scenario is critical and
needs proper mechanisms.
'Collective Security' as Core Concept of World Peace in 21st Century
The idea of 'Collective Security' replaced 'Balance of Power' in 21st century. This core
concept of security is different from its preceding formula.
A. What is Collective Security?
Collective Security can be defined as the 'the collective or joint mechanisms adopted and
pursued by the international community to fight aggression and the aggressor in order to
maintain international peace'.
B. Principle behind the Concept of Collective Security
The principle behind the concept of Collective Security is that 'all the states must be
joining hands to fight against the aggression. Attack against one states shall be taken as
an attack against all states'.
C. How to Achieve Collective Security?
Collective security can be achieved by pursuing the ways mentioned below;
Aggressor state is needed to be identified in a combat
All other states shall work jointly to contain or defeat the aggressor
Aggressor shall be either made to surrender or defeated
Arrangements shall be made in future to bring the aggressor state into mainstream
Effectiveness of Collective Security
Effectiveness of 'Collective Security' depends completely upon the eagerness of states to
play their respective roles in this regard. More the willing states would be the more
effective Collective Security can be perceived.
Collective Security & The League of Nations
League of Nations established on the principle of collective security failed in its mission
due to inappropriate and nationalistic approach of certain states like Germany, Italy,
France. It carried the principles to preserve the world peace which collapsed after the
Great Depression and finally led world to Second Great War of the century.
Rising China
Effective yet Peaceful Rise
Keeping itself abreast with the commandments of Mao Zedong and the necessities of the
transforming world, China is rising effectively yet peacefully.
Unipolar World
End of Cold War cemented a unipolar world with the USA as its sole hegemon who had
technological, economic and military powers not better than anyone else but everyone
else. Being the superpower of the world, the USA practiced influence in Europe, Middle
East and to some extent South East Asia.
Superpower in-Waiting
In the wake of rapid economic development and enhanced trade, the realists of
international arena began to call China as the 'superpower-in-waiting'. But this was not
the belief shared by all of them.
Former American Secretary of the State 'Henry Kissinger' calls the Chinese rise as
nothing more than a 'psychological impact'.
US-China Comparison
Militarily China has the world's largest number of soldiers but this in no way surpasses
the US military might. The tactics, weapons and aircraft technology and the experience
of unilaterally directing the world order make US superior even now. Regarding the
economy, US still has the GDP of over 17 trillion as compared to the Chinese GDP of 11
trillion according to the statics taken a previous year.
Transforming World and Chinese
The world is facing a change in alliances and interests. China though not overtake the
USA very soon but it's not far away as well. According to various predictions, China will
be the superpower within next 50 years or even a bit longer. The country has begun to
show its presence in South China Sea, South Asia and Africa either through trade or
other hegemonic designs.
Afghan War
9/11 & Invasion of Afghanistan
Following the September 11 Al-Qaeda led attacks on the Twin Towers in New York, the
then American President G. W. Bush launched the 'Operation Enduring Freedom' along
with its allies to root out the said militant organization which was then being hosted by
'Taliban Government' in Afghanistan.
Allies of Afghan War on Terror
Primarily the militarily powerful member states of NATO and then UN Security Council
sanctioned 'International Security Assistance Force' led all the war operations in
Afghanistan. The 'Northern Alliance' of Tajiks of Afghanistan backed the US operations. A
new government was also installed.