International Political Theory

IPC3701

1
 Contents
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY DECLARATION.......................................................................................2
QUESTION 3.......................................................................................................................................4
Introduction......................................................................................................................................4
Conceptualisation of the State......................................................................................................4
Liberal approach: Conceptualization of the State.......................................................................4
Realist approach: Conceptualisation of the State.......................................................................5
Critical discussion...........................................................................................................................6
Summary of key points...................................................................................................................7
QUESTION 7.......................................................................................................................................8
Introduction......................................................................................................................................8
Coloniality of power........................................................................................................................9
Coloniality of knowledge..............................................................................................................10
Coloniality of being.......................................................................................................................11
Summary of key points.................................................................................................................12
Bibliography.......................................................................................................................................13

2
QUESTION 3

Critically compare the conceptualisation of the State in Liberal and Realist

approaches to International Relations Theory.

Introduction
This particular question addresses the conceptualisation of the State in both the
Liberal and Realist approaches to International Relations Theory. The approach that
has been taken in addressing this question involves discussing first what is
conceptualisation of the State and then discussing how this has been handled as far
as Liberal and Realist approaches of International Relations Theory is concerned.
The essay will end with a summary of the key arguments that have been made by
the scholar with regard to these two approaches.

Conceptualisation of the State

The state has been defined as a community that is formed by people and it exercises
permanent power within a given specified territory (Ekins, 2021). A state can also be
described as political creation or formation which occupies a given territory which is
defined by frontiers (Brenner, Jessop, Jones & McLeod, 2003). According to Ekins
(2021), in order for a State to be described as operative it must have a set of
institutions and also be in a position to assert and to a certain degree be able to
exercise sovereignty. It must also be noted that the State is central to the study of
international relations theory and is also said to likely remain so into the foreseeable
future (Lake, 2007). According to Lake (2007), the state is of interest in international
relations theory because state-centric theories assume that states are the primary
actors in the world politics. The following subsections discusses how the state is
formed as far as the liberal and realist approaches are concerned. International
relations theory is basically concerned with the implications of human nature and
actions on international affairs (van de Haar, 2009). The two approaches: liberal and
realist, discuss the views of these two approaches on the state.

Liberal approach: Conceptualization of the State

The liberal approach views the state as being important actors in international
relations but they believe that there are other important actors such as
intergovernmental organisations, transnational actors as well as multinational
corporations (Ozkan & Cetin, 2016). The liberal state therefore believes

3
organisations such as the United Nations, World Trade Organization, African Union,
business organizations such as Microsoft are critical actors in the international
relations space. The international organizations have a purpose of shaping state
action by establishing best practices as well as articulating norms that describe what
is viewed as acceptable and legitimate state behaviour (Tallberg, Lundgren,
Sommerer & Squatrito, 2020).

The creation of the state according to liberalists must be based on placing

importance on individual rights and freedoms. The liberal approach also argues for
an ethically neutral and minimal state (Beckman, 2018). The argument of neutrality
of the state has received immense criticism with critiques arguing that this is a sham
and only serves to hide the substantive ethical content of the liberal approach. This
has in turn resulted in most recent statements of liberalism clearly making an attempt
to refrain from using the neutrality claim in characterizing a liberal state (Beckman,
2018).

Liberalists believe that stable democracies and economically interdependent states

will behave differently in different scenarios or situations (Rousseau & Walker, 2012).
The liberal approach to IR also holds that democratic states are more likely to
engage in international trade and investment and they can will also look for
cooperative solutions arrived by making use of international institutions. The liberal
approach to IR makes reference to the inclusion of citizens and international
organizations by the state (Duguri, Hassan & Ibrahim, 2021). The primary concern of
the liberal approach to IR is that the state must build institutions that prioritise
protecting citizens’ lives and liberties. The liberal and the neo-liberal approach also
believes that the state has a role to play in creating and ensuring the provision of an
environment conducive for growth and prosperity (Rosario, 2014).

Realist approach: Conceptualisation of the State

The realist approach to the conceptualization of the state is not very different to the
liberal approach. The realist approach to IR seeks to describe the international
politics scene as it and not as how people would like it to be (Burchill, 2005). With
regard to the conceptualization of the state, realists state that sovereign states are
the principal actors when it comes to international relations (Ojo & Olomu, 2021).
Inasmuch as individuals such as Patrice Motsepe and other South African
billionaires, big companies such as Shoprite Checkers and Vodacom are powerful

4
due to their net worth, the state is still superior to them and directs them on what to
do. The Nigerian government fined MTN $1.5 billion for failing to disconnect
unregistered subscribers from its network (Mail & Guardian, 2019).

According to realists, even though other actors exist in international relations such as
individuals and organisations, they have limited power in relative to the state. The
realist approach stresses that states as they are the main actors in international
relations they are concerned about their own security and their actions are primarily
in pursuit of their national interest and the struggle for power (Donnelly, 2000;
Burchill, 2005; Ojo & Olomu, 2021). Burchill (2005) argues that the nation-state
holds the supreme political authority in the world. This basically means that when it
comes to international political relations, the state is considered to be the main
player by realists. The realist approach to IR also argues that states have to accept
that inasmuch as they are able to influence they are not in a position to control the
anarchic environment in which they exist in (Burchill, 2005). Realists also argue that
international relations are conducted in a condition of international anarchy, this is
basically a world where there is no common power (Ojo & Olomu, 2021). The state
therefore has no ability to control or exert some kind of superior influence on the
events that are taking place in the world. One example to explain the realist
approach to state conceptualisation with regard to inability to control or exert any
kind of superior influence is the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Since the Russian
invasion began in February 2022, no other world power has managed to ensure that
Russia is stopped. This is an indication of the anarchic nature of the world and that
no state has absolute power but only have relative power (Ojo & Olomu, 2021). The
lack of an authority that holds or wields all the power means that conflict amongst
states which are said to be in competition with one another is inevitable.

Critical discussion
It must be noted that both the realist and the liberal approach to international
relations theory assume that states pursue their self-interest (Donnelly, 2000).
Donnelly (2000) however presents that both these approaches to IR hold very
different substantive conceptions of rational self-interest. The realist approach to IR
has been criticised for encouraging imperialism and expansionism. The liberal
approach to IR is much related to the creation of the democratic state whereas the
realist approach endorses the development of a national security apparatus that can

5
be used in the suppression of the freedom of ordinary individuals domestically as
well as in other countries (Krasner, 1992). When it comes to constraining the power
of the state, it must be noted that under the liberal approach, the existence of
institutions of democracy as well as international organizations result in constraints
on power being imposed public officials or branches of government and on the state
as a whole (Princeton University, 2022). The realist approach portrays pessimism in
the relations between states whereas liberalism portrays optimism in international
relations. Under the realist approach, the nation state is geared towards nothing
else but principally to promote national interests whereas the liberalist wants to
promote more interaction between states. The view of realism with regard to the
conceptualisation of the state is concerned has been accused of being too simplistic
especially when one looks at the complex reality of international relations. The
realists’ argument of the state being the only important actors in international
relations and lessening the role of such non-state actors such as multinational
corporations does not give a real picture of global politics.

Summary of key points

The essay discussed the realist and liberal approach in relation to the international
relations theory. The discussion was focussing on the conceptualisation of the state.
It emerged that according to the liberal approach, the state is a key player in
international relations but there are other prominent actors such as international
organisations whose roles cannot be understated. The state’s behaviour under the
liberal approach is influenced and moulded by the rules of international
organisations. This is not the case under the realist approach. According to realism,
the state is the most important player in international relations and non-state actors
are not important in global politics. Realists support the exertion of force by the state
on the people as long as this leads to the protection of the realist state’s number one
priority: protection of national interests. The liberalists are in support of people
having their freedoms and liberties and the government existing to ensure that these
freedoms and liberties are protected using necessary legal frameworks. The liberal
approach to international relations supports democracy and its promotion. The realist
approach supports protection of national interests at any cost and this usually leads
to competition amongst the states and the liberal state is in favour of more
corporation amongst states.

6
QUESTION 7

Identify and briefly discuss the three levels of analysis used in the theory of
decoloniality.
Introduction
Colonialism is one of the major events in the history of the African continent and it
has shaped the current fortunes of the peoples of this continent. The languages that
are spoken on the African continent, the cultures and the education that is being
given to learners and scholars on the continent’s schools and higher education
institutions is heavily influenced by the colonial past. The manner in which the
African people reason is also heavily influenced by colonialism. The deep effects of
colonialism on the African continent have resulted in many academics calling for
decolonisation of the African continent, a process which entails reversing the effects
of colonialism. Decoloniality entails undoing of colonization. The three levels of
analysis used in the theory of decoloniality are coloniality of power, coloniality of
knowledge and coloniality of being (Seroto, 2018).

Source: Seroto (2018:4)

Some of the major proponents of decoloniality include Ndlovu-Gatsheni. According

to Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2015), decoloniality is aimed at achieving the liberation of the
formerly colonized peoples from the global coloniality and also from the way that
they reason, know and do. The three subsections discuss the three levels of
analysis of decoloniality using academic theory.

7
Coloniality of power

Seroto (2018:4) cites the Quijano (2000a) defining coloniality of power as, “as racial
and epistemological hierarchies that are entangled within the structural hierarchies
such as global capitalism, which continues to be a factor after the period of
colonisation.” Coloniality of power according to Quijano has allowed the control as
well as exploitation of the world’s labour force, resources, wealth as well as
territories across the world in order to sustain the emergence and consolidation of
capitalism (Restrepo, 2018). Coloniality of power is supported by the racialisation of
relations across social as well as geocultural identities. This essentially means from
the context of African continent, the Western world (former colonial masters) holds
the power in their relations with African continent (former colonies), this power gives
them the ability to control international political relations, price of commodities sold
on the international markets and this makes the former colonies who are
predominantly black, just price takers. According to Restrepo (2018), coloniality of
power also means that the Euro-centred character found in the pattern of world
power have cemented or naturalized relations of domination. The West essentially
dominates over its former colonies, and the global-political order has been created
and this has resulted in racial hierarchies, Euro-American-centric, Christian-centric,
patriarchal, capitalist, hetero-normative, hegemonic, asymmetrical and modern
power structure (Seroto, 2018). African people have been converted into copies of
Euro-Americans in almost everything. The concept of coloniality of power is used to
clearly describe and show that there is a particular group or section of the world
which comprises global powers and beneficiaries of modernity and another zone of
none-beings which consists of the victims of colonialism, imperialism and apartheid
(Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2015). This means in the current modern world, there are two
major demarcations those who hold the power and decide the direction of the world
and then there are those who have no power and follow the direction that has been
decided by those with the power. The Western world wields the power and Africans
do not hold any power that decides the direction of the world. In the United Nations
Security Council, Africa has no permanent member yet Western powers do have,
whilst Europe which represents only a tenth of the world’s population has half the
permanent seats (Christopher, Godknows, Uki, Seaman & Harcourt, 2021). The lack

8
of representation of Africa on this very powerful decision making body is one of the
most explicit example of the coloniality of power. Major decisions such as how
COVID-19 was to be combated emanated from the West and the African
governments simply had to abide.

Coloniality of knowledge

Coloniality of knowledge is the second level of analysis used to look at decoloniality.

This concept states that there is colonial domination on the sphere of knowledge
generation and this has played a major role in subjugating African knowledge
systems and it has resulted in emptying of African memories and implanting foreign
ways of knowing and remembering (Ndlovu, 2018). This essentially means that due
to the effects of colonialism, African education system is heavily dominated by
Eurocentric education system and the manner in which the Africa scholar has been
generating knowledge is according to European or Western ways. This therefore
means that the Africans are today burdened with knowledge that is not relevant
which actually is serving the purpose of disempowering them as opposed to
empowering them (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2015). The coloniality of knowledge is actually
benefitting the asymmetrical world which is essentially for the benefit of the former
colonial masters. In Africa schools, the languages that are used from South Africa to
Nigeria to Cameroon to Malawi are European, this means that in order to understand
certain concepts an African child is forced to understand concepts in a foreign
language. According to Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2015), there are decolonial theorists that
are doing all they can in order to reverse the coloniality of knowledge and remove
the colonial element in the Westernized African universities. The graduates from
Africa universities which are westernized are very good candidates to serve in the
asymmetrical world which exists to enhance capitalism which is a Western creation.
Many graduates from these universities are quickly snatched by top multinational
corporations and there has been a brain drain with many now working in Western
countries. This is supported by Fiddian-Qasmiyeh and Daley (2019) who argued that
the imposition of knowledge systems by colonial and Western countries promoted
brain drain. It is therefore imperative that Africa creates its own knowledge systems
so that it can free itself from the claws of the colonialists. The African was left feeling

9
that he was inferior in every respect and this has crippled him pyschologically and
this has been partly achieved through the knowledge systems that the Africans have
been subjected to (Seroto, 2018). The inferiority complex of Africans can be seen by
how African people will generally laugh at someone who is unable to express
themselves in English or any Western language and how parents of kindergatten
children will celebrate them when they are now able to communicate fluently in
English.

Coloniality of being

The third level of analysis when it comes to coloniality is coloniality of being. This
concept came about when theorists concluded that colonialism did not only leave a
permanent mark on areas such as authority, sexuality, knowledge as well as the
economy but also on an African’s general understanding of being (Seroto, 2018).
The coloniality of being focusses on how colonialism affected human ontology.
Colonialism dehumanized the African people to a point that they struggled to
understand who they were (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2015). According to Ndlovu-Gatsheni
(2015), the coloniality of being represents an important concept as it aids in the
quest for knowledge around how African humanity was questioned and the
processes that facilitated objectification as well as commodification of African people.
Black people are still facing dehumanizing racism across the world even on the
African continent and this makes many still doubt if they are worthy humans. During
the Russian invasion of Ukraine, African students and other African expatriates
working in Ukraine were made to allow white Ukrainians to enter into the trains first.
The Africans had to endure severe cold weather with little babies and at some point
at Ukrainian-Polish border they suffered further dehumanizing actions when they
were detained by the Polish authorities, this never happened to the white Ukrainians
who were also fleeing from the Russian invasion (Chironda, 2022). Africans still
suffer dehumanization at the hands of Western powers as witnessed at the
beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Such makes Africans question
whether they are worthy humans on this earth. At the level of being, identity
informing concepts which include language and historical narratives tend to have
massive psychological implications on how former colonized people perceive

10
themselves in relation to their cultures (Mano & Milton, 2021). An inferiority complex
has been created in the colonized people. Many people believe that African culture is
inferior and some feel that the African way of worshipping God is inferior and they
are embracing Eurocentric ways from the way in which they talk, worship and even
the songs they sing when they worship.

Summary of key points

The essay discussed the three levels of analysis that are used in the analysis of the
theory of decoloniality. These three levels are coloniality of power, coloniality of
knowledge and then coloniality of being. African scholars and academics have been
involved in a new way of thinking aimed at reversing colonialism and its effects on
the continent. The coloniality of power looks at how the world is run by the West and
in an asymmetrical manner which serves the interests of the West and to the
detriment of Africans. The coloniality of power reveals that there are two zones in the
world which are racialized and consist of the former colonisers, the Europeans, on
one hand and the former colonies who are the Africans. The asymmetrical manner of
the world’s divisions favours the West and ensures that all the power to decide the
direct the world takes in terms of trade and flows of capital is controlled by the
powerful European nations. The coloniality of knowledge means that essentially all
knowledge on the African continent is based on Eurocentric ways. The Africans learn
in European languages and they have to think according to European standards and
generate knowledge in a Eurocentric way. The last is the coloniality of being which
states that the Africa was dehumanized and stripped of his humanity during
colonialism. This has led to Africans thinking less of themselves and they continue to
suffer this dehumanization at the hands of Western powers. The African thinks is his
languages and culture are not worthy especially in comparison to Western
languages and cultures and this has forced other Africans to discard their culture and
embrace European ones instead. There is an urgent need for decoloniality in these
aspects: power, knowledge and being on the former colonies of Western powers on
the African continent.

11
Bibliography
Beckman, L., 2018. The Liberal State and the Politics of Virtue. New York:
Routledge.
Brenner, N., Jessop, B., Jones, M. & Macleod, G., 2003. State / Space: A Reader.
Victoria: John Wiley & Sons.
Burchill, S., 2005. The National Interest in International Relations Theory. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Chironda, M., 2022. frican refugees fleeing Ukraine held in EU immigration detention
facilities. [Online]
Available at: https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/521083-african-
refugees-fleeing-ukraine-held-in-eu-immigration-detention-facilities.html
[Accessed 19 October 2022].
Christopher, F. et al., 2021. The UN Security Council Permanent Membership: The
Troubling Trend of Expansion and Hegemony. Open Journal of Political Science,
11(2), pp. 316-327.
Donnelly, J., 2000. Realism and International Relations. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Duguri, U. S., Hassan, I. & Ibrahim, Y. K., 2021. International Relations, Realism,
and Liberalism: A Theoretical Review. International Journal of Social and Humanities
Extension, 2(1), pp. 1-6.
Ekins, R., 2021. The State and Its People. The American Journal of Jurisprudence,
66(1), pp. 49-67.
Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, E. & Daley, P., 2019. Routledge Handbook of South-South
Relations. New York: Routledge.
Krasner, S. D., 1992. Realism, Imperialism and Democracy: A Response to Gilbert.
Political Theory, 20(1), pp. 38-52.
Lake, D. A., 2007. The State and International Relations. [Online]
Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1004423
[Accessed 17 October 2022].
Mail & Guardian, 2019. MTN pays off bulk of $1.5 billion Nigeria fine. [Online]
Available at: https://mg.co.za/article/2019-05-22-mtn-pays-off-bulk-of-15-billion-
nigeria-fine/
[Accessed 18 October 2022].
Mano, W. & Milton, V. C., 2021. Routledge Handbook of African Media and
Communication Studies. New York: Routledge.

12
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. J., 2015. Decoloniality as the Future of Africa. History
Compass, 13(10), pp. 485-496.
Ndlovu, M., 2018. Coloniality of Knowledge and the Challenge of Creating African
Futures. Ufahamu: A Journal of African Studies, 40(2), pp. 95-112.
Ojo, O. & Olomu, B., 2021. The Realist Approach to Understanding the State and it’s
Politics in Nigeria: A Theoretical Analysis. European Journal of Social Sciences,
62(2), pp. 32-37.
Ozkan, E. & Cetin, H. C., 2016. The Realist and Liberal Positions on the Role of
International Organizations in Maintaining World Order. European Scientific Journal,
12(17), pp. 85-96.
Princeton University, 2022. Liberalism and the Discipline of Power. [Online]
Available at: https://www.google.com/url?
sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiCuKO6z
-36AhVEXcAKHaw-D0YQFnoECAsQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.princeton.edu
%2F~starr%2Farticles%2Farticles07%2FStarr-Liberalism-
Ch1.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1qnyZXQ5sbs_Su3f1KkmOh
[Accessed 19 October 2022].
Restrepo, E., 2018. Coloniality of Power. In: The International Encyclopedia of
Anthropology. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, pp. 1-5.
Rosario, T. C.-d., 2014. The State and the Advocate: Case studies on development
policy in Asia. New York: Routledge.
Rousseau, D. L. & Walker, T. C., 2012. Liberalism. In: M. D. Cavelty & V. Mauer,
eds. Handbook of Security Studies. Hoboken: Taylor & Francis, pp. 21-33.
Seroto, J., 2018. Dynamics of Decoloniality in South Africa: A Critique of the History
of Swiss Mission Education for Indigenous People. Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae,
44(3), pp. 1-14.
Tallberg, J., Lundgren, M., Sommerer, T. & Squatrito, T., 2020. Why International
Organizations Commit to Liberal Norms. International Studies Quarterly, 64(3), pp.
626-640.
van de Haar, E., 2009. Liberalism and International Relations Theory. In: Classical
Liberalism and International Relations. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 125-150.

13
14