NAME: Anand Raj CLASS:B.A.B.Ed.

Semester:4th Roll number:04 Subject : Political science

Exam:1st internal test.

Question : Discuss the Concept and Development of International Relations.

Introduction

Answer: Before discussion on concept and development of international relations we must know what
this international relation is? So I will first discuss a little about Meaning of International Relations.

MEANING AND DEFINITION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: International relations is an important

branch of Social Science. The Scope of International relations is the complex relations existing law the
sovereign states of the world. It is mainly concerned, among other things, with the study in depth of all
events and situations affecting more than one state. The great Greek Philosopher, Aristotle said that
man by nature is a social animal. Being a social animal, man can’t live in isolation. His basic nature and
his basic needs make him to satisfy his numerous needs in association with others. Moreover no man is
self sufficient even in his daily needs and therefore, he has to depend upon his fellow man for
existences. Just as no individual can live in isolation, no state can afford to live in isolation. Like the
individual no state is self sufficient. Naturally, it has to cultivate relations between states. These relations
are the subject matter of International Politics. International relations can be defined as political
activities and other kinds and aspects of interactions among two or more states. The academic field of
international relations is a branch of political science that is concerned with the study of relations
between states, the foreign policy of nation-states, and the mechanisms and institutions (such as
international organisations, inter-governmental organisations, international and national non-
governmental organisations and multinational corporations) through which states interact. The study of
international relations involves many subjects such as international and regional peace and security,
international organisations, nuclear proliferation, globalisation, human rights, economic development,
intervention, international financial relations, and international trade relations.

International relations attempts to explain the interactions of states in the global interstate system,
and it also attempts to explain the interactions of others whose behavior originates within one
country and is targeted toward members of other countries. In short, the study of international
relations is an attempt to explain behavior that occurs across the boundaries of states, the broader
relationships of which such behavior is a part, and the institutions (private, state, nongovernmental,
and intergovernmental) that oversee those interactions.

Definitions: Since its inception, international relations has been defined in many ways. Writers differ
greatly upon the definition of the subject. It appears quite natural.

AS Stanley Hoffman says, "How could one agree once and for all upon the definition of a field whose
scope is in constant flux, indeed, a field whose fluctuation is one of its principal characteristics”. As
such, international relations cannot be defined in any generally acceptable way.

Prof. Charles Schleicher defines international relations as the relation among States. Quincy Wright
defines international relations as "relations between groups of major importance in the life of the
world at any period of history.”

According to Prof. Hans Morgenthau: International relations is a struggle for power among nations.
Norman Podelford and George Lincoln defines International relations as the interaction of State
politics with the changing pattern of power relationships.

Padelford and Lincoin :“Interactions of state policies within the changing patterns of power
relationships”. However, a good working definition of international relations is given

Harold and Margaret Sprout defines international relations as "those aspects of interactions and
relations of independent political communities in which some element of opposition, resistance or
conflict of purpose or interest is present.”

Hartman defines “International Relations as a field of study is focused upon the process by which
states adjust their national interest to those of other states”.

Palmer and Perkins says that: International politics is essentially concerned with state system. Sprout
and Sprout also defined international politics as those aspects of the interactions and relations of
independent political communities in which some element of opposition, resistance and conflict.

Concepts involved in International relations:

1.State:It a large social system with a set of rules that are enforced by a permanent administrative body
(government). That body claims and tries to enforce sovereignty. That is, the state claims to be the
highest source of decision-making of the social system within its jurisdiction, and it rejects outside
interference in making or enforcing its set of rules. The many smaller systems within the state are not
sovereign, nor are large international organizations like the United Nations, since states routinely reject
their authority. The state is a political concept that refers to the exercise of power or the ability to
make and enforce rules.The concept of the state plays a central role in international relations,
particularly in realist and neo-realist approaches. Yet, the meaning of the state is persistently taken to
be self-evident by both advocates of the sovereign state and its critics.

2 .“Governance: It is the sum of many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their
common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be
accommodated and co-operative action taken. It includes formal institutions and regimes empowered to
enforce compliance, as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either have agreed to
or perceive to be in their interest” This widely used definition from a key document of the governance
debate makes two things clear: governance affects an enormous variety of actors and policies, and it is
a vague concept. It is always been at the core of international relations (IR): studying international
cooperation and institutions. The terms individuals, private, informal, and people, however, indicate
that an equal amount of attention is paid to nongovernmental actors and non-institutionalized practices.

3 . state of and Non state actors : State actors: state actor is a person who is acting on behalf of a
governmental body, and is therefore subject to limitations imposed on government by the United
States Constitution, including the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments, which prohibit the federal
and state governments from. for example, over whether private companies that run towns (the
"company-town") and prisons (traditionally a state function) can be held liable as state actors when
they violate fundamental civil rights. They are the duty bearers of a state's obligation to respect,
protect and fulfil human rights. They remain the main actors in the ongoing dialogue and
cooperation with supra-national human rights mechanisms at regional and global levels. Non-state
actors include organizations and individuals that are not affiliated with, directed by, or funded
through the government. These include corporations, private financial institutions, and NGOs, as well
as paramilitary and armed resistance groups.At the International scene, there are many players
engaged in what is regarded as the game of international Politics. One of the oldest and universally
acknowledged actors on the modern world stage is the state. A state is a type of polity that is an
organized political community living under a single system of government. A Political community is
referred to as a government responsible for the citizens under the government. It has been earlier
assumed that international relations are made up of the relations between states. International
relations can be likened to a series of actions that promote interactions between states. Actors are
entities that participate in or promote international relations.

4.Globlisation:International relations have used globalization to reach its goal: of cultures.

International relations focus on how countries, people and organizations interact and globalization is
making a profound effect on International relations.Understanding culture, globalization, and
international relations is critical for the future of not only governments, people, and businesses, but
for the survival of the human race. IN today’s increasingly interdependent and turbulent world, many
of the leading issues in the news concern international affairs. Whether it is the continuing mpact of
globalization, From the other hand Globalization is a popular term used by governments, business,
academic and a range of diverse non-governmental organizations. It also, however, signifies a new
paradigm within world politics and economic relations. While national governments for many years
dictated the international political and economic scene, international organizations such as the
World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization have now become
significant role players.

5.forign policies: Foreign policy is the rational pursuit of a set of national objectives. ... The ultimate
goal is to maximize greater advantage for the country. To this end, the foreign policy of a developing
country like Nigeria should be geared towards national economic development to get better leverage
in international politics. it  is a set of political goals that seeks to outline how a particular
country will interact with the other countries of the world.Foreign policies generally are
designed to help protect a country's national interests, national security, ideological
goals, and economic prosperity. This can occur as a result of peaceful cooperation with
other nations, or through aggression, war, and exploitation.
The 20th century saw a rapid rise in the importance of foreign policy, with virtually every
nation in the world now being able to interact with one another in
some diplomatic form.Creating It is usually the job of the head of government and the
foreign minister (or equivalent). However, in the United States, Congress also has
considerable power and influence, and is able to pass Foreign Relations Authorization
bill's.Foreign policies are generally formulated to protect a country’s core values and
interest, national security, ideological goals, as well as economic prosperity. ... Foreign
Policy aims at achieving economic prosperity so as to play more assertive role in
international politics.
6.SECURITY:To be secure is to be safe from harm. Of course, no one is or can be
Perfectly secure. Accidents happen, resources become scarce, individuals
lose their jobs, and wars start. What is indisputable is that the
Need to feel secure is a core human value and a prerequisite for being
Able to live a decent life. What is also generally true is that individuals
Living in the world are far more secure than those living in the
Third World, where conflict and resource scarcity are far more
Prevalent. Security studies is a key area of inquiry within the field of international
relations. During the cold war, the realist view dominated. For realists, the most
important actors in the international system are not individuals per se but states, whose
primary motive is to protect their sovereignty. Because, according to realists, states are
worried about the prospect of going to war, security is a primary concern. Achieving it,
however, is not an easy matter. The fact of anarchy means that states cannot totally rely
on other states to protect them.
7.Diplomacy:In a broad sense, diplomacy is the entire process through which states
Conduct their foreign relations. It is the means for allies to cooperate
And for adversaries to resolve conflicts without force. States communicate, bargain,
influence one another, and adjust their differences
Through diplomacy. It is interesting to note that serious confrontations
Between the great powers since 1815 have ended in force only about
10 per cent of the time. The routine business of international affairs is
Conducted through the peaceful instrument of diplomacy.
In a more narrow sense, diplomacy is the implementation of foreign
Policy, as distinct from the process of policy formation. Diplomats may
Influence policy, but their main task is to negotiate with the representatives of other
countries. Ambassadors, ministers, and envoys are official Spokespersons for their
country abroad and the instruments through Which states maintain regular direct
contact.
8.Concept of war and peace: The conventional understanding of war and peace in international
relations is that nation A is either at "war" or at "peace" with nation B. War as a legal condition is
usually viewed as an aberration from the norm, a malfunction of an organism whose normal
condition is one of peace. Recent theoretical developments question the rigid adherence to this old
dichotomous approach of defining contemporary relations between nations. This study, therefore,
raises a general question as to the juxtaposition of the legal and political nature of war and peace
since the end of World War II. Three dyadic relations--U.S. and U.S.S.R. from a global perspective,
Israel and some selected Arab neighbours from a regional perspective, and Algeria and France from
a national perspective--were used as case studies. With data from the Conflict and Peace Data
Bank (COPDAB) and using a simple frequency distribution, the researcher analyzed dyadic events
that may have led to cooperation and conflict from 1948 to 1978 on a 15-point conflict and
cooperation scale. Findings suggested that the either-war-or-peace paradigm does not apply to the
characterization of the behavior of the selected actors in the period the data covered. It was found
that the conventional use of the terms "war" and "peace" gives an unrealistic image of the
characterization of how nations behave in contemporary international relations because these
conditions were found to be in a state of flux and constantly evolving. Therefore, the conclusion was
that nations are neither at war nor at peace. Their affairs are conducted in a state of intermediacy.
These findings further suggested that the conditions of war and peace in today's international
relations should be seen from a holistic point of view in which war and peace are interdependent,
interconnected, and interrelated, and simply different aspects of the same phenomenon. The
difference between them is relative within an all-embracing unity. Such pair of opposites constitute a
polar relationship where each of the two poles is dynamically linked to the other.
9..BALANCE OF POWER: No concept in the study of international relations has been discussed
More often than this one. It has been defined in so many ways, however, that it has become an
ambiguous idea. Used objectively or descriptively, the term indicates the relative distribution of
power among states into equal or unequal shares. Traditionally, it refers to a State of affairs in which
no one state predominates over others. Prescriptively, it refers to a policy of promoting a power
equilibrium on the assumption that unbalanced power is dangerous. Prudent states that are at a
disadvantage in the balance of power will form an alliance against a potentially hegemonic state or
take other measures to enhance their ability to restrain a possible aggressor. Also,One state may opt
for a self-conscious balancing role, changing sides as necessary to preserve the equilibrium. A
balance of power policy requires that a state moderate its independent quest for power, since too
much power for one state may bring about self-defeating reactions Of fear and hostility from other
states. All balance of power systems have certain conditions in common:

1 a multiplicity of sovereign states unconstrained by any legitimate central authority;

2 continuous but controlled competition over scarce resources or conflicting values;

3 an unequal distribution of status, wealth, and power potential among the political actors that make
up the system.

Inequality and the everpresent threat of violence combine to give the dominant and the subordinate
states a shared but unequal interest in preserving the order of the system, whose equilibrium
protects their sovereignty. The balance of power is a kind of compromise among states that find its
order preferable to absolute chaos, even though it is a system that favours the stronger and more
prosperous states at the expense of sovereign equality for all of them.Great powers play the leading
roles in balance of power systems because of their preponderant military force and their control of
key technologies.

10.International laws: International law is a set of rules intended to bind states in their
relationships with each other. Its largely designed to apply to states, both to constrain (the laws
of war) and to empower them (law of sovereignty). Increasingly, international law has been
codified, so that today most international obligations are contained in treaty form, although
historically customary international law played a relatively more important role than it does
today. The role of international law in informing foreign policy decision making has waxed and
waned over the course of the past century. It has also varied significantly across countries. It is
striking the extent to which international interactions have become reflected in and regulated by
formal state-to-state agreements. This article examines international law and international
relations, multilateral treaties, political theories of international law (realism, rational/functionalist
theories, constructivist approaches), and legal agreements. It also discusses the
implementation, compliance, and effectiveness of international law.
Stages of development of international relations
International relations, according to Kenneth Thompson, has undergone four stages of
development since World War I. This development was surveyed by Thompson in late
fifties.Approaches as depicted by him, are essentially classical nature. In the sixties, there
developed what is termed as the scientific approach. But at present international relations is
passing through the sixth stage of development.

1.Descriptive—Historical Approach (First Stage):The first stage of development lasted up to the end
of the First World War. It was dominate by diplomatic historians. In this phase of development,
emphasis was laid on diplomatic history. The present phenomenon in international relations was
explained with the help of what had happened in the past. In this stage, international relations were
presented only on a descriptive and chronological (date-wise) manner without reference to how
various events and situations fitted into the general pattern of international behaviour.It was after
the War that the first chair of International Relations was founded at the University of Wales in 1919.
But it is interesting to note that the first two occupants of the chair were two eminent historians—Sir
Alfred Zimmern and C.K. Webster.The diplomatic historians generally avoided the study of current
events and avoided reaching any universal principles from their descriptive study of facts. Thus, their
study only provided help in gaining the knowledge of facts and not a key to the understanding of
either the present or the future of international relations. Hence it was not much useful in developing
a general perspective or theory of international relations. Moreover, it did not provide a total picture
of international relations.

2.Current Events Approach (Second Stage):The outbreak of the First World War focused attention
on the inadequacy of diplomatic history approach. Two distinct and new approaches were put
forward during the inter-war period (1920-1939). Both of them developed simultaneously. One of
them was the Current Event approach. Scholars of this approach advocated that a proper study of
current events would provide necessary understanding of the causes of conflicts started among
States.So, during the second stage, which may be taken as having after the end of the First World
War, the scholars in the field of international relations emphasized the study of current events.The
concerned themselves with the interpretation of the immediate significance of current developments
and problems. They began to interpret the immediate importance of current developments and
problems. This approach to the study of international relations was, in fact, an attempt to achieve
what’ had been ignored by diplomatic historians. But even this approach lacked an integral view of
international relations. It stressed only the study of the present without much reference to the past.
No attempt was made to relate the post-war political problems with comparable problems of the
past.Thus, the current events approach corrected a failing of the approach of diplomatic history
without retaining its useful aspects. The result was that no well-conceived theoretical or
methodological foundation could emerge by which the significance of current events could be
understood in the context of the totality of history and the future of international conduct. If the first
stage was defective in laying stress upon history and ignoring the current events, the second stage
was equally defective in laying stress on current events while ignoring the historical aspect.

3.Institutional, Normative or Idealist Approach (Third Stage):Simultaneously with the second stage
of the development of the study of international relations, emerged the third stage.Both the second
and third stages began after the First World War and continued to exist throughout the inter-war
years and even after. The approach adopted during the third stage stressed on the
institutionalization of international relations through law and organization. This stress was inspired
by the belief that international community would be able to create institutions by which all inter-
national problems would be automatically solved.Attempts were, therefore, made to search goals
and values towards which international community should progress as also to create institutions
through which those goals and values could be realized.This approach to the study of international
relations was given special emphasis because of the establishment of the League of Nations. One of
the important consequences of this. Approach was that it infused in the students of international
relations an element of emotional and visionary reformism, so much so that the concern of scholars
became the creation of an ideal international society. There was a tendency during the inter-war
period to hold that a peaceful world was possible only through law and international institutions. It
was increasingly felt that the traditional techniques of international relations, like balance of power,
were no longer relevant. AS Hans Morgenthau has rightly observed, the main concern during this
period was “not with understanding the nature of international relations, but with developing legal
institutions “and organizational devices which would supersede the type of international relations
then existing”.In other words, the inter-war period saw the concentration of research and academic
interest in the field of international law and organization. However, it is difficult to accept the
soundness of this approach in view of the hard realities of international life during the period
intervening the two World Wars. With such a narrow focus as on law and organization, the study of
international relations could not proceed along with the dynamics of international relationships.
Moreover, the challenge thrown to the League of Nations by Hitler, Mussolini etc. Brought the end of
this approach.This approach is known as institutional because it laid stress on institutions such as
international organization. It is also known as organizational approach. It is normative also in the
sense that it fixed peace as the norm to be achieved.It is idealist in so far as it aimed at the creation
of an ideal world where there will be no war. Rather, a peaceful and just world-order would come into
being. The prominent scholars of this approach were Alfred Zimmern, S.H. Bailey, Philip Novel Baker
etc. All of them directed their efforts at the institutionalization of international relations on the basis
of law and organization. They were of the opinion that the ideal of peace could be translated into
reality if sincere efforts are made.

4.Theoretical Approach (Fourth Stage):The above discussion would show that the three main
corner-stones of international relations from the establishment of a Chair of International Politics at
the University of Wales in 1919 to the beginning of the Second World War had been diplomatic
history, international law and organization, and political reform. But the deterioration of international
situation ending in the outbreak of the Second World War threw a challenge to all the approaches of
the inter-war period and necessitated search of a new approach to the study of international
relations.After the end of the Second World War, therefore, a new tendency came to the forefront.
With that began the fourth phase of the development of the study of international relations. The
fourth stage is the realist stage. The advocates of approach discarded utopianism of peaceful world
order as was amply shown by the Second World War. E.H. Carr in his book ‘Twenty Years, Crisis’
advocated realistic analysis on the basis of the concept of power.Within a decade, many books were
published laying emphasis on realist approach. These books included ‘Power Relations’ (1941) by
George Schwargenberger. ‘Power Polities’ (1945) by Martin, ‘Christianity, Diplomacy and War’
(1953) by Hubert Butterfields, ‘American Strategies in World Polities’ (1942) by Nicholas
Spykeman.The children of Light and “fie Children of Darkness’ by Reinhold Niehbus. ‘Politics
Among Nations’ (1948) by Hans J. Morgenthau ‘American Diplomacy’ (1952) by George Kennan.
The Realist approach devotes itself to investigate as to what are the elemental facts of activity of
States. What are the driving forces which lie at the back of foreign policy of all States? It is agreed by
all that power as a concept is the most satisfactory analysis of international relations. ,So, in this
stage, emphasis shifted from international law and organization to forces and influences which
shape and condition the behaviour of States. No longer do we concern ourselves only with what has
been the course of diplomatic history or with the form and structure of international organization.
Instead, our main concern now is threefold : motivating factors of foreign policies everywhere,
techniques of the conduct of foreign policies, and mode of resolution of international conflicts. While
during the inter-war years the League of Nations had been at the centre of international studies, now
world politics is the setting in which international relations are studied.Even the functions and
purposes of the United Nations are now studied in a political rather than in a constitutional context.
Under the realist influence, the United Nations is seen as “Political organization designed not as
substitute of power politics but as appropriate mechanism within which the direct national rivalries
are compromised through normal processes”.

5.Scientific Approach. (Fifth Stage):Behavioural Revolution in Political Science changed the

traditional or classical approaches and methods. Behavioral Revolution had its effect upon
international politics also.So, in the late fifties, the scholars began working in the sphere of
international relations also on the basis of the tools and techniques developed in other disciplines- It
was under the impact of behavioural revolution that a need for building op theories and models
which can explain with a considerable degree of accuracy the patterns of behaviour of political units
and systems, was felt. Naturally, scholars in international relations also developed tools and
techniques for a scientific analysis Prominent among these are the Systems Theory of Mortan
Kaplan, Equilibrium Theory of George Liska, Decision-making theory of Snyder and Frankel, Theory of
Games of Osker Morgenstern, Bargaining Theory of Thomas C. Schelling, and the Theory of
Communication of Karl Deutsch.These are some of the most important theories. Otherwise, to say in
the words of Abdul Saeed, “Today the prominent students of international relations are all theorists
(and) there are as many theories as is the number of theorists”.

The salient feature of scientific approach is the urge for sophistication of analytical tools and
methods. This led to borrowings from other disciplines making international politics as inter-
disciplinary. Moreover, the advocates of scientific approach hail from different disciplines
including natural and biological sciences. For example, Thomas Schelling and Kenneth Boulding
came from Economics, Herman Kahn from Physics, Anatol Roppopost from Biology and Albert
Wholstter from Mathematics.

6. Issues of International (sixth stage):The sixth or the contemporary stage through which
international relations is passing today, presents an effort at modernizing the classical and scientific
approaches. It emphasizes the urgency for the study of substantive issue of international relations.
The advocates of the scientific approaches gave undue importance to the sophistication of methods
and tools of analysis In fact, they ignored the real subject of study. Naturally the traditionalist
pointed out that the substance of politics is being totally ignored i favour of methodological concern
resulting in losing sight of to achievement of peace and eradication of areas of conflict and
disagreement. Consequently, there developed a scientific traditionalist debate helping to bring back
the relevant issues of politics among nations. Currently, emphasis is, therefore, put not only on
sophistication in methods and tools of study but also on relevant and current problems o
international relations.

Conclusion: In this way, we find that there has been a change in the nature and scope of
international relations over the years. Palmer and Perkins refer to it as “the world-community in
transition”. In the realist stage, the focus of study changed from relations to the attainment of
national power. With the coming of scientific revolution, the content of international relations started
growing in different directions. So, during the course of the last two decades, progress towards
systematization of the subject of study has grown very much. Emphasis in study changed from
State to actual processes and environment. Now, international relation is studied at national,
regional, and world level. Notice is taken not only of the working of the United Nations but also of the
EEC, NATO, COMECON, ASEAN etc. In this way, the scope of international relations has widened to a
considerable extent.