THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

A theory is simply a mental construction of a phenomenon with

which a researcher confronts the reality of a certain row much of
it is captured in his mental map. A theory can be defined as
“abstractions of the reality and unique form of explanation”
(Sesay 2011:11). Hoffman (1960) has equally given his own
definition. For him, a theory is understood as “a set of interrelated
questions capable of guiding a researcher both of the imperial and
/or normative variety” (1960:80) Coplin (1971) gives his own
definition of a theory as “a set of propositions and / or hypotheses
that are logically related to each other”(Coplin, 1971:9).
Therefore, a theory can be seen as a collection of statements about
relationships especially of variables that have been tested and can
be further tested to ascertain its relevance as a guide in
conducting a scientific study. It may also be looked at as the
connection of variables that can be further tested.

A theory is also seen as a condensed view of the reality. What a

theory does in its essential form is to construct an image of
reality. In the process, it might exaggerate some aspect of the
reality. The ultimate goal of a theory construction is to mimic the
reality and later test how far the assumption and its construct
affect the real world.

1
In International Relations, a good theory must have some
qualities. One of these is that:

i. It must contain statements that can be verified or tested

irrespective of location or distance. Any theory that does
not contain testable variables is not a good theory.
ii. As much as possible, a good theory must show
consistency and also a tendency towards idealism. In
other words, a good theory must be corrective in a way,
and it cannot do this unless it flows from the deal world.
iii. A good theory should be able to make some prediction
i.e. if this happens, then, this will follow. This is
necessary, if the goal of scientific-ism is to be realized.

In International Relations, there exist different perspective,

approaches, paradigms or school of thoughts, each of them
explains the nature, character and dynamism of the international
system. Some of them corroborates while other conflicting or
contending.

The International Approach

The international approaches simply defined international

relations rather narrowly as inter-state relations in which they
conceive those relations in terms of national interests, defined in
terms of power relations among the states. The traditional

2
approach is also commonly referred to as classical theories or
approaches. To the traditional approach, the place of the state is
central in understanding and critically analyse the international
system. As such, the interpretation and analysis of the
international system and the state led to the emergence of two
conflicting opinions, paradigm or camps. There are the:

i. The Realist perspective and

ii. The idealist perspective

Both of them agreed that the existence of the state as major or

principal actors in the international system and the necessity of
contacts between or among them. However, they differ in their
analysis of the nature of the state and the character of the contacts
or the international system.

The Realist Perspective

The realist perspective begins by looing at the nature of human

being. That man by nature is selfish and wicked and take
advantage of others. That man always want to influence or
dominate rather tor even have full control of others.

Secondly, the realist argue that, state are nor monolithic entities
(cannot ) decide for itself, rather it is the political leadership or
man that decide for the state, as such, the state cannot escape from
the influence of the nature of man.

3
Thirdly, that the state is sovereign and is not just sovereign, but
that the sovereignty has to be defended, and to the defend it, states
must have adequate power to defend it against external
aggression. As such the struggle for power preponderance in the
system is perpetual. This leads to the next argument. Fourthly, the
international system is basically anarchic, since there is no any
supranational authority that can make and enforce laws over the
actors in the international system.

The Idealist Perspective

The idealist posits that, man by nature is not wicked and evil or
self serving. They argued that man is a social being, mean man
cannot live outside human society. Secondly, man through the
social contrast theory has surrendered some of his personal
liberties to the state.

Secondly, that the state are sovereign just to exercise legal or

legitimate right to control the affairs of the state. And that the
states can also subscribe to international authority such as the
United Nations as a world body that can set morale code of
conduct which can be codified into international law.

Thirdly, that the state can cooperate and work together by ways of
respecting individual sovereignty and that it is not anarchical,
rather reciprocal relationship among the major actors (state). That,

4
the relations among state was conducted through diplomacy rather
than military preparedness or through the struggle for power,
influence and dominance.

Behaviouralist Perspective

This perspective is also known as the scientific school or

scientific approach. It is basically concern about the methodology
in the study and analysis of the international system. They argued
that, the early scholars of international relations were lawyers,
diplomat, historians and journalist. That, they followed a
humanistic approach to the study of international relations. And
that, they relied on exercise or judgement which is basically
normative and largely depends on moral questions. These early
perspectives of international relations is referred to as traditional
or classical approach.

After the Second World War, the field of International relations

as an academic discipline expanded rapidly. There was support
for more research in the field. The scientific approach is a product
of the support. The approach adopts a rigorous methodological
approach in the study of international relations.

Just as the scholars in natural science are able to formulate

objective and verifiable laws to explain the physical world, the
ambition of the behaviouralist in international relations is to do

5
the same for the world of international relations. The
methodology is to collect empirical data about international
relations which can then be used for measurement, classification,
generalization n ultimately, the validation of hypothesis.
Behaviourism is more interested in observable facts and
measurable data in precise calculation and the collection of data
in order to find recurring behavioural patterns in the international
system.

The International Political Economy Perspective

This perspective posits that, the previous perspectives only

concentrated on international politics while relegating the
economic affairs of states in the international system. Under this
perspectives, there are three dominant views,

i. The liberal view

ii. The classical Marxist view and
iii. The Neo-Marxist and Dependency and
Underdevelopment view.

1. The Liberal View

This view originated from the work of Adam Smith. It posits that,
since no state is an Island entirely and to itself, meaning all states
in the international system interrelates and interdependent on one
another, it will be more mutual if states trade among themselves,

6
and secondly, states should specialized in the production of those
goods that they have comparative advantage.

Scholars in the liberal view argue that human prosperity can be

achieved by the free expression of market economy (capitalism)
beyond the boundaries of the sovereign state, and the significance
of these boundaries (free movement of goods and services). That
free markets together with private property and individual
freedom create the basis or self-sustaining economic progress for
everybody involved.

2. Classical Marxist View

This view originated from the philosophical postulates of Karl

Marx and Engel Marxist focus on the development of capitalism
in Europe. They argued that human society is divided into two
distinct classes, the haves and the have not or simply the
bourgeoise and the proletariat. In other words the capitalists and
the working class. That the capitalist are the owner of the means
of production (capital) in human society, and they employ the
proletariat (working class) as labourers and pay them wages or
salary. That the relationship in the production process is
essentially exploitative, because, the workers actually produce the
surplus value in the production process, while the capitalist
appropriate the added value and pay the workers very little as take

7
home or wages and salaries. That, this system, according to the
Marxist oppressive to the proletariats.

3. The Neo-Marxist or Dependency and Underdevelopment

View

The Neo-Marxist or Dependency and Underdevelopment View is

an offshoot of the classical Marxist position. Scholars in this view
argue that most analysis of international system have not given
attention on the economic relations between the advanced,
developed, state and the weak, poor and disadvantaged states of
the third world or the developing states, most of them had
suffered the deadly process of colonial exploitation and
subjugation as well as domination by the western Europe states.

The Post World War II witnessed the period of decolonization of

countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America as sovereign states
and actors in the international system. These states are largely
economically poor, technologically backward and are at the
bottom of the global economic hierarchy. In early 1970s, these
state started pressing for changes in the international economic
system to improve their economic conditions and relations with
the developed world. It was in this period the Neo-Marxist school
emerged as an attempt to theories about economic inequality and
underdevelopment of the third world states.

8
The neo-Marxist school is basically concern about who gets what
in the international economic and political system. They argue
that, the global capitalist economy controlled by the wealthy
capitalist states is used to exploit and impoverish the third world
state. Dependence and dependency are the key or core concepts of
the school.. that the countries of the third world are inherently
poor because of the unequal exchange in the international
economic relations. That the poor states sells their raw materials
at a cheap price and buy the finished goods of the same raw
materials at a very high price. Secondly, due to their technological
backwardness, they cannot competently compete with
technologically advanced well developed states.

Scholars such as Samir Amin, Walter Rodney, Gunder Frank,

Johand Galling to mention just a few, in this school or perspective
maintained that, so long as the existing unequal economic
relations between the poor, weak and underdeveloped states and
the advanced capitalist states continue as it is, there would be
perpetual underdevelopment in the third world countries.

The Neo-Marxist drawing from the class analysis of the classical

Marxist theory argued that, in the international system, there are
two classes of state, the economically and technologically
advanced and developed such as the USA, France, United
Kingdom, Russia, Germany, Italy to mention a few and the

9
economically militarily and technologically weak and backward,
always sitting on back bench in the rough game of the
international system. The third world countries are the largest
producers of the most needed raw materials to feed the industries
in the advanced countries, yet, there share of the benefits from
their raw materials is very minimal and always insignificant in
promoting developmental objectives of these countries.

Walter Rodney in his book “How Europe Under-develop Africa”

argued that the process of development in the capitalist country
produces the process of underdevelopment in the third world
countries. Gunder Frank posits that, the “unequal exchange and
appropriation of economic surplus by the few at the expense of
the many is responsible for the underdevelopment of the third
world countries. Johand Galting explains this process in his
“Structural Theory of Imperialism”. He posits that, the
relationship between the developed countries is directly tied to the
underdevelopment in the third world countries. He stated that in
the international system, those states in the centre and those in the
periphery. That there is capitalist in the centre and of the
periphery and the periphery of the periphery. There is alliance
between the centre of the centre and the centre of the periphery,
while, there is no alliance between the periphery of the centre and
the periphery of the periphery. As such, the global capitalist

10
system is sustaining underdevelopment in the third world through
the activities of the centre of the periphery.

11
SYSTEM THEORY /APPROACH

System theory is a service of statement about relationships among

independent and dependent variables in which changes in one or
more variables are allowed by changes in other variables or
combination of variables. Daugherty and Pfaltzgraff).

A system is a whole which function as whole by virtue of the

interdependence of its component parts (Anatol Rapoport).

System connotes a relationship between units that forms the

whole system. Daugherty argued that, a system can be described
in its successive state. It may be loosely or tightly organized. It
may be stable or unstable.

That every system seeks to establish, maintain and return to

stability after some sort of disturbance.

 Every system has boundaries which distinguish it from it

operating environment
 Every sytem is in some sense of communication network
which permits the flow of information leading to a sel-
adjusting process.
 Every system has inputs and outputs, an outputs of a system
may reinter that system as an input or what is called
feedback.

1
Closely, selected to system is what is commonly referred to as
interdependence used to characterize relationship in the
international or global system.

It should be noted that in system theory, the concept interaction

which means, the greater the level of interdependence, the greater
the amount of interaction.

David Easton, A political scientist states that, system theory is

based on the idea of political life as a boundary maintaining set of
interactions imbedded in and surrendered by other social system
which consistently influence it. And it is focused on wards the
“authoritative allocation of values for a society”.

Herbert Spiro argued that a political system exist wherever people

either cooperate or engage in conflict to solve a common
problems. It has the capacity of processing its issues, by
identifying problems through disagreement and attempts to solve
that problem.

A political system coverts inputs into outputs. To Easton, inputs

are the demand and supports, whereas outputs are the decisions
allocating system benefits. Output
Decision
Input demand
Making Decision Made
Centre
Support

Feedback
2
GABRIEL ALMOND MODEL

Gabriel Almond argued that a political system engaged in

political socialisation, interests articulation and aggregation and
political communication. Almond is particularly concerned with
system output functions such as rule making, rule application and
rule adjudication.

The survival of a political system largely depends on its capacity

to adopt to its environment. Demands may arise either in the
environment outside the system or within the system itself. David
Easton maintains that at the international level, it is possible to
find sets of relationship through which values are authoritatively
allocated.

It should be noted here system theory that unlike in national

system, international system lacks universal or even strongly held
feelings of legitimacy. Nevertheless, members of the international
system make demands with the expectation they would be
converted into outputs. For examples. The United Nations is
considered to as the converter of demands into outputs at the
global level

Other regional or sub-regional organization such as European

Union, African Union, West African Economic Community and

3
others. Each an every organization receives demands from its
members, processes them and outputs.