Defining international relations.

Trevor Taylor (1979) defines International Relations as

"a discipline, which tries to explain political activities across state
boundaries".

According to Ola, Joseph (1999),

"International relations are the study of all forms of interactions that exist
between members of separate entities or nations within the international
system".

Seymon Brown (1988) thus defines international relations as

"the investigating and study of patterns of action and “reactions among
sovereign states as represented by their governing elites.”

Some scholars see power as the key to international politics. Thus, they define
international relations as the subject that deals with those relations among nations,
which involve power status.

As Stanley Hoffman writes

“the discipline of international relations is concerned with the factors and
the activities which affect the external policies and power of the basic units
into which the world is divided.”

Nature of International Relations

The nature of a subject refers to the characteristics of that subject. In that sense, the
natures of international relations are in the following –

1. Struggle for Power | Nature and scope of International Relations

International politics, in Morgenthau’s view, is a struggle for dominance. Power is the
method of advancing the national interest, as I’ve already stated. Power politics are hence
the primary subject of IR.

2. As an Interdisciplinary Subject
The study of social science is always interdisciplinary. Another interdisciplinary area of
study is international relations, which connects several social science fields like history,
economics, political science, philosophy, geography, and culture.

3. National Interest and power are the core of IR | Nature and scope of
International Relations
The primary objective of the state is the defense of national interests. With this objective
in mind, the state interacts with other states so that its national strength can serve its
interests as a whole. Hence, it can be seen that the basic concerns of IR are those of
national interest and the function of national power in achieving those interests.
 4. Continuous Interaction among Nation States
In the modern world, no state is self-sufficient. Each state depends on the others. So, there
is a requirement for connectivity, which is only made feasible by interactions between
various states.

5. State is the primary actor in IR | Nature and scope of International Relations

The State is the lone and unifying actor in the world of politics. International relations
have historically been dominated by the state. International relations also look at how
states act as a key determinant of global politics.

6. Analytical and Empirical Study for Theory Building

The development of theories in international relations also includes analytical and
empirical methods.

7. Changing nature of international relations | Nature and scope of

International Relations
The nature of global international relations is dynamic. An in-depth examination of world
politics is what is known as international relations. Global politics underwent a significant
change during the post-World War II era. The Warsaw Pact, headed by the USSR, and
NATO, led by the USA, served as the two poles of world affairs.

Once the Soviet Union fell apart in the 1990s, there was a sort of unipolarity in global
politics. Yet, a number of South American nations, including Brazil, and several
economically developing Asian nations, including China, India, Singapore, and Vietnam,
are all having a big impact on global politics. So, it is evident that world politics is once
again becoming multipolar.

Then the growing importance of non-state actors like NGO (Non-Governmental

Organization), MNC (Multinational Companies) etc, is also discussed in the field of
international relations.

Scope of International Relations

The instrument of international relations is the international community. Interstate
relations have seen a significant transformation as a result of the unfathomable
developments in the worldwide community during the past 70 years. Since the 1930s, the
study of international relations has been taught separately in schools. Because of this, it is
impossible to permanently define the boundaries of international relations. You already
have a general understanding of the extent of international relations from the examination
of their nature.

The scope of international relations is mentioned below-

8. Study of Foreign Policy | Nature and scope of International Relations

Foreign policy is a significant topic in international relations. In the past, kings, prime
ministers, or a select few people actively participated in setting foreign policy. Today, the
creation of foreign policy involves not only politicians but also the legislature, a large
number of citizens, and other stakeholders. International relations play a significant role
in the condition of affairs or ideology in foreign policy as well as the ideological concerns
of the respective regimes.

law project making service

9. Study of Nation States
Different states do not have the same ethnic makeup, geographic location, historical past,
religion, or philosophies. And as a result of all these variations, there are variations in how
various states relate to one another. Therefore, a thorough discussion of these disparities
in international relations is required. His response revolves around international relations
when the social environment changes.

10. Study of the behavior of States in International Politics | Nature and

scope of International Relations
Just as a country creates friendly contacts for the benefit of its overall development, it
becomes a topic of international relations; similarly, when there is an interest conflict,
animosity arises among its citizens, and that, too, becomes a component of international
relations. As a result, both cooperation and conflict are a part of international relations.
Making alliances and handling crises are important aspects of international affairs.

11. International Organizations | Nature and scope of International Relations

No less significant is the role that national and multinational organizations play in
international relations. The US Congress of Industrial Organizations, the US Federation
of Labor, the French Labor Organization, and the Women’s International Democratic
Federation Participation Organization all have members from many nations.

The Coalition and its numerous specialist bodies, including UNESCO, the International
Labor Organization, and the World Health Organization, involve non-governmental
organizations in their work as well. Thus, all national and international organizations are
discussed in international relations.

5. Role of People in International politics

The significance of the general public and public opinion is likewise growing quickly on a
global scale. The end of imperialism—from an international, disarmament-focused,
political, and economic perspective—has sparked protests and movements among people
in various nations. People from several societies, including American scientists and
intellectuals, have protested the Vietnam War. So, opinions about the state of the world
fall under the category of international relations.

12. Role of the Third World

In recent world politics, the third emergence has brought significant qualitative change.
Third generation people make up the majority of humanity. 101 nations took part in the
Eighth Non-Alignment Conference in 1986. It is crucial because non-aligned nations are
playing a larger role in developing new international arrangements, reducing tensions
between the East and the West, disarming, ending colonial control, etc. As a result,
international relations discussions should include the third world’s participation in global
politics.

International relations now cover a wider range of topics, many of which are dynamic in
character. International relations today cover all domestic policies that influence or may
influence other countries. In the past, these issues were not related to international
relations. Therefore, it can be said that the scope of international relations has expanded.

13. Role of Non-State Actors in International Field

The operations of the state and its official institutions are merely one aspect of
international relations’ content. The state is not the only participant in the global society
that is active. International relations are impacted by the actions of numerous non-state
entities.

Examples of non-state actors in international relations include multinational corporations

(MNCs), the European Economic Community, the Council for Mutual Economic
Assistance, NATO, SEATO, the WARSAW PACT, ASEAN, the Organization of American
States, various terrorist organizations, and religious organizations.

14. Question of War and Peace | | Nature and scope of International Relations
The desire to prevent war between nations is still a topic of discussion in international
relations today. What was once utopian is now progressively becoming a reality. The major
goal of the United Nations’ founding was to maintain universal peace and security. To
foster an environment of peace and security, major international powers and regional
leaders frequently exchange ideas. There are more and more contacts of every sort for the
benefit of different exchanges and the progress of globalization in the realms of culture
and other things. International relations are now centered on all of this.

15. Global Environmental Issues | Nature and scope of International Relations

Environmental concerns are currently one of the most important topics in international
relations. The politics of the environment in the 1970s were solely concerned with issues
relating to resources. Yet starting in the 1990s, the politics of the environment centred on
the problem of “Climate change,” which is a result of global warming.

To tackle this issue, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), Kyoto
Protocol in 1997, the Paris Agreement on climate change, etc, have launched. So, every
state in the globe is impacted by global environmental challenges. All states are making
every effort to conserve this beautiful globe by reducing their use of greenhouse gases,
which is why it is regarded as the most crucial aspect of international relations.

Applying theories-case study of United Nations

A theory is a set of accepted beliefs or organized principles that explain and guide analysis
and one of the ways that theory is defined is that it is different from practice, when certain
principles are tested.
From a theoretical point of view, the effectiveness and utility of the United Nations differs
depending on which perspective we choose to adopt. Liberals tend to have faith in the
capacity of international organizations, primarily the United Nations, along with other
organizations such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Health Organization
and the World Bank, to uphold the framework of global governance. International
organizations may not be perfect, but they help the world find alternatives to war through
trade and diplomacy (among other things), which are staples of the liberal account of IR.
On the other hand, middle-ground theories such as constructivism focus on
ideas and interests. As constructivists focus often on the interactions of elite
individuals, they see large organizations like the United Nations as places where they can
study the emergence of new norms and examine the activities of those who are spreading
new ideas.
Realists, although they do not reject the United Nations completely, argue that the world
is anarchic and states will eventually resort to war despite the efforts of international
organizations, which have little real authority. Generally, realists believe that
international organizations appear to be successful when they are working in the interests
of powerful states. But, if that condition is reversed and an organization becomes an
obstacle to national interests, then the equation may change. This line of enquiry is often
used by realists to help explain why the League of Nations was unsuccessful – failing to
allow for Germany and Japan’s expansionist desires in the 1930s. A contemporary
example would be the United States invading Iraq in 2003 despite the Security Council
declining to authorize it. The United States simply ignored the United Nations and went
ahead, despite opposition. On the other hand, liberals would argue that without the
United Nations, international relations would likely be even more chaotic – devoid of a
respectable institution to oversee relations between states and hold bad behavior to
account. A constructivist would look at the very same example and say that while it is
true that the United States ignored the United Nations and invaded Iraq, by doing so it
violated the standard practices of international relations. The United States disregarded
a ‘norm’ and even though there was no direct punishment, its behavior was irregular and
so would not be without consequence. Examining the difficulties the United States faced
in its international relations following 2003 gives considerable weight to the
constructivist and liberal viewpoints.
In contrast to liberals and constructivists, who value the United Nations to an extent,
critical theories offer different perspectives. Marxists would argue that any
international body, including the United Nations, works to promote the interests of the
business class. After all, the United Nations is composed of (and was built by) states who
are the chief protagonists in global capitalism – the very thing that Marxism is opposed
to. Likewise, the United Nations can be said to be dominated by imperial (or neo-
imperial) powers. Imperialism, according to Marxist doctrine, is the highest stage of
capitalism. The United Nations, then, is not an organization that offers any hope of real
emancipation for citizens. Even though it may appear humanitarian, these actions are
merely band-aids over a system of perpetual state-led exploitation that the United
Nations legitimizes.
Poststructuralists would seek to question the meanings behind the role of the United
Nations and the arbitrary power structure of the Security Council. They would also look
at how key terms are used by the United Nations and what they mean. For example,
examining the wording of concepts like ‘peacekeepers and ‘peacekeeping’ as opposed to
‘peace-making’ and ‘peace-enforcing’. Or similarly, ‘collective security’ versus
‘international security’: poststructuralists would be skeptical as to whether these terms
really differ in meaning and would point to the power of language in advancing the agenda
of the United Nations – or perhaps that of the powerful states controlling it. Even the
name of the dominant organ of the United Nations – the ‘Security’ Council – begs the
question, security for whom? A critique here would point out that at its core, the United
Nations is primarily concerned with facilitating the national security of powerful states
rather than human security. In instances like these, the tools that poststructuralism
provides to deconstruct and analyze wording have real value.

The International Court of Justice hand down a highly anticipated ruling in

South Africa’s case against Israel over genocidal acts in Gaza.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has delivered its highly anticipated interim ruling
in South Africa’s case against Israel over alleged genocidal acts in Gaza.
Here are the highlights of the provisional measures ordered on Friday by the court in a
case that has drawn global interest:

Genocide prevention The World Court ordered Israel to take action to prevent acts of
genocide as it wages war against the Hamas group in the Gaza Strip. In the ruling, 15 of
the 17 judges on the ICJ voted for emergency measures that covered most of what South
African had asked for, with the notable exception of ordering a halt to Israeli military
action in Gaza. Israel’s military operation has laid waste to much of the densely populated
enclave and killed more than 26,000 Palestinians in nearly four months, according to
Gaza health authorities. The war has now carried on for more than 100 days since Hamas
attacked southern Israel on October 7, killing 1,139 people and taking 240 captives.

No ceasefire The court stopped short of calling for an immediate ceasefire. Less than
two years ago in March 2022, it had ordered Russia to halt its war on Ukraine after Kyiv
took Moscow to the ICJ. the ICJ refrained from repeating the interim measures it had
ordered against Russia — which Moscow has ignored.
ICJ has jurisdiction Israel had insisted in its arguments this month that the ICJ did
not have jurisdiction in the case. But on Friday, Judge Joan Donoghue, the president of
the ICJ, said the court had concluded that it could rule on the matter and specifically that
it could order provisional measures. She highlighted South Africa’s prior public
statements suggesting that Israel might have violated its commitments under the 1948
Genocide Convention.
Additionally, Donoghue pointed out that Israel has consistently rejected any allegations
of genocide in Gaza. She highlighted the opposing positions held by the involved parties
to underline that a dispute exists between the two parties. Donoghue said that, based on
the evidence presented, some of the acts and omissions by Israel and its officials seem to
fall within the scope of the Genocide Convention.

Prevent and punish incitement to genocide in Gaza The court also warned Israel
to “take all measures in its power to prevent” acts that could fall under the Genocide
Convention, set up as the world grappled with the horrors of the Holocaust. It also said
Israel should “prevent and punish” any incitement to genocide. South Africa has accused
Israel of “genocidal” acts intended to cause the “destruction of a substantial part of the
Palestinian national, racial and ethnical group”. It had urged the court to order Israel to
“immediately suspend” its military operations in Gaza and allow humanitarian aid to
reach civilians there.

Israel must report back within one month The judges ruled that Israel must report
to the court within a month on what it is doing to uphold the order to take all measures
within its power to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza. Donoghue said the ruling creates
international legal obligations for Israel

Allow humanitarian aid into the strip The court also ruled Israel must promptly
implement “immediate and effective” measures to guarantee the delivery of urgently
required humanitarian aid and basic services to Gaza.