Q1. What is Internation relations? Dicuss its scope and relevance in contemporary era.

Ans INTRODUCTION

International Relations (IR) is the study of how countries interact on issues like politics, security, and
economics. It looks at both cooperation and conflict between nations, as well as global challenges
like climate change and terrorism. The origins of IR trace back to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648,
which established the modern state system. However, IR as an academic discipline began after World
War I, when scholars sought to understand the causes of conflict and prevent future wars. In 1919,
the first academic chair in IR was established at the University of Wales. Scholars such as Sir Alfred
Zimmern, E.H. Carr, and Woodrow Wilson played key roles in shaping the field, focusing on
diplomacy, collective security, and the role of international institutions. Over time, IR developed
various schools of thought, including Realism, Liberalism, Marxism, and Constructivism, offering
different views on global interactions.

Hans Morgenthau: In his seminal work “Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace”
(1948), he defined IR “the struggle for power among states in the international system.”

Kenneth Waltz: In his book “Theory of International Politics” (1979), he defined IR “a field of political
activity in which states are the crucial actors, but are not necessarily the only ones, and in which
interactions between them take place within a framework of anarchy.”

Scope of international relations

1. Diplomacy and International Cooperation: One of the key focuses of IR is how countries
communicate and work together to solve problems. Diplomacy includes negotiations, treaties, and
discussions on trade, security, human rights, and environmental issues. This cooperation helps
prevent conflicts and ensures peaceful relations between nations.

2. Global Security: Another major area of IR is the protection of countries and their citizens from
threats. This includes military alliances like NATO, peacekeeping missions by the UN, and addressing
terrorism, cyber threats, and nuclear weapons. Global security also covers issues like arms control
and conflict resolution, ensuring a stable world order.

3. Economic Interactions and Trade: Countries depend on each other for goods, services, and
resources. International trade agreements, like those made by the World Trade Organization (WTO),
help manage how goods move across borders. Economic policies and relations also address issues
like poverty, development, and global inequality, aiming to improve prosperity worldwide.

4. Human Rights and Global Challenges: IR also looks at the protection of human rights and tackling
global challenges like climate change, health crises (such as pandemics), and migration. International
organizations such as the United Nations (UN) work to ensure that all countries respect basic rights
and contribute to solving these common problems.

Relevance of International relations

1. Globalization and Interdependence

The interconnectedness of the world has deepened with advancements in technology, trade, and
communication. Countries are no longer isolated but are bound together by economic, political, and
social ties. For example, the global supply chains of companies like Apple or Tesla involve multiple
countries, showing how trade and investment transcend borders. This interdependence means that
events in one part of the world can have cascading effects globally, such as the COVID-19 pandemic's
impact on economies worldwide.
2. Climate Change and Environmental Cooperation
Climate change is a global challenge that requires international cooperation for effective action. The
Paris Agreement (2015) is a prime example of how countries come together to address
environmental issues, setting targets for reducing carbon emissions. Despite challenges, many
nations continue to collaborate on environmental matters. The recent COP28 in Dubai highlighted
the urgency of global action on climate change, demonstrating how IR shapes environmental policies
and responses to global warming.

3. Geopolitical Tensions and Security Concerns

International relations play a crucial role in addressing conflicts, military alliances, and security
concerns. The ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict is a glaring example where international dynamics,
including NATO involvement and Western sanctions on Russia, have significantly influenced the
situation. Similarly, tensions in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait involve the balance of
power and security strategies among countries like China, the United States, and neighboring
Southeast Asian nations. The role of international organizations like the UN in peacekeeping and
diplomacy remains essential.

4. Human Rights and Global Governance

Human rights issues, including refugee crises, gender equality, and freedom of speech, are central to
contemporary international relations. For instance, the international response to the Rohingya crisis,
where countries like Bangladesh, India, and international organizations have worked to provide aid
and advocacy, highlights how global governance systems address humanitarian crises. Similarly, the
United Nations plays a pivotal role in creating frameworks for the protection of human rights
globally, although challenges remain in enforcing these protections.

Q2. Morgenthau's Realism has made significant contribution to the study of International
Relations Discuss.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Realism is a theory in international relations that argues power and self-interest drive the behaviour
of states. Realism identifies the state as the fundamental actor in international politics, emphasizing
its need to gain power and self-preservation. It views the international system as anarchic, lacking a
central authority to mediate conflicts among sovereign states. While realism has ancient roots, it
became a formal theory in the 20th century, especially after World War II during the Cold War. Hans
J. Morgenthau is considered the father of classical realism. Although realism traces back to thinkers
like Thucydides, Machiavelli, and Hobbes, Morgenthau is credited with developing modern classical
realism. His key work, Politics Among Nations (1948), is the foundation of the theory. In it,
Morgenthau outlined realism’s core ideas: power is central to international relations, human nature
is inherently selfish, and politics is a constant struggle for power.

Definations on realism

Thucydides: In his book History of the Peloponnesian War he said "The strong do what they have
the power to do, and the weak accept what they have to accept."

Thomas Hobbes: In his work of Leviathan he said "In the state of nature, profit is the measure of
right, and the condition of man... is a war of all against all."
Morgenthau’s contribution to international relations

Hans Morgenthau laid out six key principles that form the foundation of his theory of international
politics. These principles emphasize power, national interests, and the role of human nature in
shaping state behaviour. These principles are as follows:

1. Politics is Governed by Objective Laws Rooted in Human Nature

According to Morgenthau, politics is governed by objective laws that emerge from both human
nature and society. To formulate a logical theory of international politics, it is important to
understand these laws. In one of his well-known quotes, he stated that “moral arguments cannot
challenge political actions that follow the law.” This principle underscores:
– Humans are inherently power-seeking.
– States, as extensions of human communities, also pursue power.
– Historical patterns reveal underlying motives driving state behavior.

This principle emphasizes realism’s importance in crafting theories that are intellectually rigorous
and applicable to global politics.

2. National Interest explained as National Strength

Morgenthau's second principle says that countries focus on their national interests, which are always
tied to power. A country’s national interest that isn’t backed by power isn’t real—it’s just an idea.
Leaders make foreign policy decisions based on what will best protect and increase their country’s
power. Power is the most important factor in international relations, and national interests are more
important than moral beliefs or ideas. Sometimes, leaders use speeches or moral arguments, but this
is just a cover for decisions driven by the country's desire for power and strength. National interest
and power are what shape foreign policy.

3. Interest is always Dynamic

Morgenthau believed that national interest and power are constantly changing due to shifts in
politics and society. A country’s interests today may be very different in the future, so leaders must
regularly reassess them. National power also changes as a country’s resources and global position
evolve. As the balance of power shifts, each nation's relative strength changes. This makes the
international system dynamic and constantly shifting. Morgenthau argued that to create effective
foreign policies, countries must keep re-evaluating their interests and power to adapt to these
changes and make smart decisions for their future.

4. Moral Principles Don’t Apply to State Actions

Political realism argues that moral principles don’t apply to the actions of states in international
politics. Realists believe that countries shouldn’t be held to universal moral standards because their
foreign policies are driven by the pursuit of national power and self-interest, not ethics.
Governments are expected to act in ways that protect and increase their power, not based on what is
morally right. While states may use moral arguments to justify their actions, these are seen as
propaganda to make them look good. In reality, the goal is to advance national interests. Realism
asserts that the political sphere is separate from moral concerns when it comes to state behavior in
the global arena.
5. Difference between the Moral Aspirations of a Nation and the Universal Moral Principles

Morgenthau believed that ethics don't play a major role in international politics. He argued that
national interests and policies cannot be based on universal moral principles. Instead, countries often
disguise their true intentions by claiming their actions are morally justified. According to
Morgenthau, nations use moral arguments as a cover for pursuing power and national interests.
While countries may say their policies are grounded in ethics, this is usually just rhetoric to make
their actions appear favorable. In reality, their decisions are based on strategic calculations aimed at
increasing their power. Morgenthau saw moral principles as a mask, hiding the true motive of
maximizing national power and influence.

6. Autonomy of the Political Sphere

Realism focuses on studying the power struggle between countries, similar to how economists or
lawyers study their own fields. It believes that politics operates separately from economics, law, or
morality. While these factors can influence state behavior, realism prioritizes politics and the pursuit
of power. According to realism, the main force shaping international relations is the struggle for
power and national interests, not economic or legal factors. Moral considerations may have some
influence, but they are less important than political decisions based on national interest. Realists
argue that power dynamics between states are the core of global politics.

Criticisms of Morgenthau’s Principles

1. Too Pessimistic About Human Nature

Scholars like John Locke and Immanuel Kant criticize Morgenthau for having a negative view of
human nature. He focuses on humans as power-seeking, ignoring more cooperative and altruistic
tendencies.

2. Power Monism
Stanley Hoffman and scholars like Alexander Wendt and Robert Keohane argue that Morgenthau
overemphasizes power in international relations. They believe that factors like ideology, culture, and
economics also play a significant role in shaping state behavior, which Morgenthau neglects.

3. State-Centric Approach
Morgenthau’s focus on states as the main actors in global politics is challenged by Richard Haass and
Joseph Nye. They argue that non-state actors, such as corporations and NGOs, now have a major
influence on international relations, making Morgenthau’s theory seem outdated.

Q3. Write an essay on feminist approach propounded by J. N, Tickner in the study of international
relations.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Feminism is a movement and ideology that aims to achieve gender equality by challenging the social,
political, and economic inequalities women face. Its origins can be traced to the late 19th and early
20th centuries, when women began advocating for basic rights such as voting and education. The
feminist perspective in International Relations (IR) focuses on how gender, power, and politics are
interconnected on the global stage. It challenges traditional IR theories, which have often ignored or
marginalized women’s roles and experiences in global politics. Scholars like J. Ann Tickner, Jean
Bethke Elshtain, and Cynthia Enloe have significantly contributed to the development of feminist IR
theory.
1. J. Ann Tickner: In her work "Feminist Theory and International Relations in a Postmodern Era,"
1992, she said “Feminist theory in international relations challenges the dominant paradigms of
power and security that have been constructed in ways that privilege masculine interests and
exclude or marginalize women's experiences and perspectives.”

2. Jean Bethke Elshtain: In her work "Women and War," 1987, she said “Feminism is a way of being
in the world that brings to the surface hidden assumptions about gender, power, and inequality
that are embedded in our social and political systems.”

Tickner’s Critique of Traditional International Relations

In her 1988 article, "Hans Morgenthau's Principles of Political Realism: A Feminist Reformulation," J.
Ann Tickner argued that traditional International Relations, especially realism, is rooted in a
masculine perspective. She critiqued Morgenthau's six principles, saying his views on power reflect
male-dominated ideas. Tickner challenged this by suggesting that power should not be defined by a
universal, masculine standard. She called for a reconsideration of power dynamics and their moral
implications, emphasizing that international politics is a male-centered field.

MORGENTHAU’S SIX PRINCIPLES

Tickner focused on Hans Morgenthau’s six principles of political realism because they are a key part
of contemporary realism in international relations. These principles have shaped how many scholars
and practitioners think about international politics.

Morgenthau’s six principles are:

1. Politics is governed by objective laws based on human nature, which is unchanging.

2. Politics is driven by the concept of interest, defined in terms of power, which brings rational order
to politics.

3. Power is an objective, universally valid concept, though its meaning may change.

4. Political realism acknowledges the moral significance of actions and the tension between moral
commands and political success.

5. Realism avoids linking a nation’s moral goals to universal moral laws.

6. Political realism keeps politics separate from other human concerns, focusing on power and the
political sphere.

MORGENTHAU’S PRINCIPLES OF REALISM: A FEMINIST REFORMULATION

In her feminist reformulation of Morgenthau’s six principles of political realism, J. Ann Tickner argued
that a truly realistic view of international politics must include multiple perspectives, not just power
and domination. She rejected the term "realism" because feminists believe there are many realities,
and international politics should recognize both cooperation and conflict, as well as moral and
political concerns. Her reformulated principles are as follows:

1. A feminist perspective argues that objectivity, as defined by society, is linked to masculinity. So-
called "objective" laws of human nature are actually based on a masculine view, ignoring both
feminine and masculine aspects of human nature.
2. Feminists believe national interest is complex and context-dependent, not just about power. It
requires cooperation, not competition, to solve global issues like nuclear war, the economy, and the
environment.

3. Power cannot have a universal meaning. Power as control supports masculinity and overlooks
collective empowerment, which is often seen as feminine.

4. Feminists reject separating morality from politics. All political actions have moral consequences.
Realist approaches that focus on order and control prioritize power over justice and basic human
needs.

5. Feminists believe there are shared moral values among nations that can help reduce conflict and
promote international cooperation, rejecting the idea that political action should be separate from
moral concerns.

6. Feminists argue that separating the political realm from other areas of life is limiting. This narrow
view excludes women's concerns and contributions, reinforcing masculinity in politics.

Tickner did not reject Morgenthau’s work but emphasized the need for a more inclusive, ungendered
approach to international relations, where both men’s and women’s contributions are respected.

Power

Tickner argues that Morgenthau’s definition of power, as the control of one person over another, is
rooted in masculinity, as power has traditionally been a male-dominated activity. Feminists, however,
see power as energy, capacity, and mutual support. Women often use persuasion and coalition-
building, which can be seen in the strategies of small states in international relations, like the South
African Development Co-ordination Conference. While domination is a real aspect of power, Tickner
emphasizes that cooperation also plays a role.

National Security

Tickner also rethinks national security, traditionally tied to military strength. She agrees with
Morgenthau that national security involves defending the national interest through power but argues
that in today's interconnected world, military dominance is less effective. When states depend on
each other and weapons of mass destruction, relying on war for security is no longer practical or
useful.

Feminism waves

First Wave (Late 19th – Early 20th Century) The first wave of feminism, which spanned from the late
19th century to the early 20th century, primarily focused on legal rights, particularly women's
suffrage. Women sought the right to vote, own property, and access education. This wave was led by
figures such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton in the U.S. and Emmeline Pankhurst in
the UK. These feminists campaigned for political participation and legal equality, culminating in
achievements such as the 19th Amendment in the U.S. (1920) and women’s suffrage in the UK (1918,
1928). However, this wave was largely centered on the experiences of white, middle-class women,
often excluding women of color and working-class women.

Second Wave (1960s – 1980s) The second wave began in the 1960s and continued through the
1980s, expanding the focus to a broader range of issues, including reproductive rights, workplace
discrimination, sexual freedom, and domestic violence. This wave was characterized by efforts to
address systemic sexism and patriarchal structures. Influential works like Betty Friedan’s "The
Feminine Mystique" (1963) and Simone de Beauvoir’s "The Second Sex" (1949) helped to challenge
traditional gender roles. The movement brought about key legal victories, such as the Equal Pay Act
(1963) and Roe v. Wade (1973), which legalized abortion in the U.S. The second wave was notable for
its slogan "the personal is political," underscoring the connection between personal experience and
larger social structures. However, it was often criticized for its lack of inclusivity regarding race and
class.

Third Wave (1990s – Early 2010s) The third wave, starting in the 1990s, emphasized intersectionality,
a term coined by scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw to describe how race, class, gender, and other social
categories intersect to shape individual experiences. This wave challenged the notion of a universal
female experience and focused on the inclusion of women of color, LGBTQ+ individuals, and those
from diverse backgrounds. bell hooks, in works like "Feminism is for Everybody" (2000), emphasized
the need for feminism to address issues beyond gender, including race and class. Third-wave
feminists rejected the binary view of gender, instead celebrating individuality, sexuality, and diversity.

Fourth Wave (2010s – Present) The fourth wave, emerging in the 2010s, is largely defined by its use
of digital platforms to promote feminist causes. Social media has become a powerful tool for raising
awareness about issues like sexual harassment, rape culture, body positivity, and gender-based
violence. Movements like #MeToo, which gained prominence in 2017, highlighted the prevalence of
sexual harassment and assault, demanding accountability from powerful individuals and institutions.
This wave continues to push for inclusivity, with a strong focus on intersectionality, trans rights, and
LGBTQ+ advocacy. The fourth wave is also marked by its call for greater diversity in representation
and leadership.

Q4. Discuss Neo- liberalism theory as propounded by Robert Cohen and Joseph Nye.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Neo-liberalism is an economic and political theory that promotes free markets, trade, deregulation,
and privatization to boost growth and individual freedom. It developed in response to the failures of
Keynesian economics and state control in the mid 20th century, drawing from ideas of economists
like Adam Smith, and later expanded by figures like Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman. Robert
Keohane and Joseph Nye are key scholars in international relations who applied neo-liberalism,
focusing on the role of international institutions and cooperation among states. They also developed
the concept of complex interdependence in their 1977 book Power and Interdependence. This
theory explains how states and other global actors are increasingly interconnected, making
cooperation more important than military power in global politics.

1. Robert Keohane: described neo-liberalism as prioritizing "the role of international institutions in

facilitating cooperation by reducing the uncertainty and transaction costs associated with
international interactions."

2. Joseph Nye: In alignment with neo-liberal thought, highlighted the importance of "soft power"
and argued that "power in the modern world is not just about military or economic might but
about the ability to shape preferences and influence through attraction and persuasion."

Neo-liberalism and Institutionalism

A key idea in neo-liberalism is the importance of international institutions. While realists see these
institutions as less important compared to state power, neo-liberals believe they are essential for
promoting cooperation between countries. This concept, called neo-liberal institutionalism, was
developed by Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye. Keohane and Nye argue that even though the
international system is anarchic, states can still work together through institutions. These institutions
help manage trade, diplomacy, security, and environmental issues. For example, the World Trade
Organization (WTO) creates rules for global trade and resolves disputes, while the United Nations
(UN) helps prevent conflicts and fosters peace. Keohane and Nye emphasize that international
institutions make cooperation easier by reducing costs, offering transparency, setting rules, and
providing a platform for states to interact regularly.

The Concept of Complex Interdependence

The concept of complex interdependence, also known as the Cob-web model, was developed by
Joseph Nye and Robert Keohane in their 1977 book Power and Interdependence. They argued that
states and societies in the modern world are increasingly interconnected through economic,
environmental, and social links. Complex interdependence suggests that states are not isolated
actors but are connected to one another through a web of relationships. For example, a financial
crisis in one country can affect global economies, and environmental problems like climate change
require global cooperation.

Key features of complex interdependence

1. Multiple Channels: In complex interdependence, international relations involve many

connections, not just between governments. These include informal ties, multinational companies,
and organizations. These actors influence government policies and make them more responsive to
global changes.

2. Low Politics vs. High Politics: Neo-liberal framework, the distinction between high politics
(national security and military issues) and low politics (trade, environment, and social cooperation)
becomes blurred. Complex interdependence shows that economic or environmental crises can affect
security, and security issues like WMDs can have economic impacts. Neo-liberals argue that issues
like trade, human rights, and health are interconnected with security, making states more likely to
cooperate across a range of topics, not just military concerns.

3. Minor Role of Military Force: Military force is less important in solving global issues like economic
or environmental problems. While it may still be used in political or military relations, its role has
decreased due to the high costs and risks of modern warfare.

Soft Power: Nye’s Contribution to Neo-liberalism

Joseph Nye introduced the concept of soft power as a key part of neo-liberalism. Soft power refers to
a country’s ability to influence others through attraction and persuasion, rather than force. It
emphasizes the role of culture, diplomacy, and ideas in shaping global influence. Nye argued that
countries can gain power by promoting their values, building strong diplomatic ties, and shaping
global narratives. For example, the U.S. has used its cultural exports like Hollywood films and
educational exchanges to influence other countries without military force. Nye’s concept of soft
power showed how non-coercive influence, alongside international institutions, can promote
cooperation and peace.

Criticisms of Neo-liberalism

Neo-liberalism has faced several criticisms. Scholars like Robert Cox (World-Systems Theory) argue
that it benefits powerful states and multinational corporations, ignoring the needs of weaker
countries and marginalized groups. John Mearsheimer (Offensive Realism) criticizes neo-liberalism
for underestimating the potential for conflict, claiming it assumes cooperation is always possible.
Critics of neo-liberal institutionalism, such as Alexander Wendt (Constructivism), argue that
international institutions often reflect the interests of powerful states and may not effectively
enforce rules or foster true cooperation.

Additionally, critics like David Harvey (Marxist Geography) argue that neo-liberalism’s focus on
market-driven solutions neglects issues like inequality, environmental damage, and social justice.
While it promotes economic growth, it can also worsen inequality and harm the environment
without proper regulation.

Q5. Critically examine the World System theory of Immanuel Wallerstein.

Ans INTRODUCTION

World-System Theory is a macro-sociological perspective that seeks to explain the dynamics of the
"capitalist world economy." A classic example of this approach is associated with Immanuel
Wallerstein, who in 1974 published a seminal paper, The Rise and Future Demise of the World
Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis. In 1976, Wallerstein further expanded on his
ideas with The Modern World System I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European
World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. This work marked a landmark contribution to sociological
and historical thought, sparking numerous reactions and inspiring others to build on his theories.
Marxists believe that the global system of world politics can be understood through an "octopus
model," in which capitalist superpowers dominate and capture the entire world system. Wallerstein’s
legacy lies in his analysis of capitalism and its contradictions.

World-System Theory and Its Key Concepts

The World-System Theory emerged at a time when the modernization theory, which was used to
understand development, was being criticized. Dependency theory, which provided an alternative
understanding of development, gained attention at this time. Wallerstein's main argument was that
the international system is structured in a way that creates inequality, where exploitation is key to
this structure. World-System Theory considers the entire international system, focusing on the
relationships between development, underdevelopment, and international relations over long
periods of time.

Wallerstein proposed a three-tiered structure of the world system: core, semi-periphery, and
periphery. Core states benefit by exploiting the periphery through processes like colonization and
cheap labor. The semi-periphery acts as a buffer zone, both exploiting the periphery and being
exploited by the core. This model emerged as part of the development of World-System Theory,
shifting focus to the interaction between core, semi-periphery, and periphery nations within a
political and legal framework, which is sometimes referred to as the "world system."

To understand Wallerstein's World-System Theory, the key arguments can be divided into the
following categories:

1. The nature of analysis and its stages.

2. Evaluation of the world system.

3. The relationship between core, semi-periphery, and periphery.

4. The decline and crisis of the neo-capitalist system.

These points highlight that the capitalist world economy grows only when there is growth in
industrial production. Therefore, the modern capitalist world system has gone through various stages
of development and transformation.

UNDERSTANDING WORLD SYSTEM THEORY

According to Wallerstein, a world system is a social system with boundaries, structures, and groups,
governed by legitimacy. It is held together by forces that maintain its cohesion and function. Modern
nation-states are part of the world system and play a key role in shaping social and economic
interactions. Wallerstein identifies different stages of the world system theory:

1. Mini-System:
A mini-system consists of small, homogenous societies that are self-sufficient and engage in personal
activities. They produce all the necessary food and services within their system. Interaction is based
on needs and is usually local.

2. World Empire:
A world empire is much larger and more complex. It involves the extraction of surplus goods and
services from the external economy. This surplus value is used to compensate administrators, armies,
and political leaders. The system is built to maintain control over large territories and resources.

3. World Capitalist System:

Wallerstein was a major proponent of this system, which emerged in the 16th century. In this system,
countries are divided into core, semi-periphery, and periphery.

a) Core Countries:
Core countries benefit most from the capitalist world economy. They are typically located in the
northern and western parts of Europe. These countries have a strong democratic presence, high
purchasing power, and the ability to import raw materials and export manufactured goods. They are
characterized by stable governments, advanced infrastructure, tax policies, and research
development, which promote capitalism and economic growth.

b) Periphery Countries:
Periphery countries are weaker and more dependent on core countries. They are often exploited for
their raw materials and cheap labor. These countries have weaker governance structures and are
heavily influenced by the core. The exploitation leads to economic and social inequalities.

c) Semi-Periphery Countries:
Semi-periphery countries are in a transitional state, either declining from core status or rising from
the periphery. These countries experience tension between local elites and the dominant global
system. They often play a dual role: they exploit the periphery while being exploited by the core.
They are also involved in international banking and trade but are not as successful as core countries.

Wallerstein argues that the capitalist system is not suitable for all nations. He emphasizes the need to
study and analyze the history of the capitalist world system, as it has led to distorted patterns of
development, resulting in economic and social inequalities between different classes and regions.

Crticism

Wallerstein’s World-System Theory has faced several criticisms. Tony Smith argues that Wallerstein's
view of state power is flawed. Wallerstein claims that the strongest states in the 16th century were at
the core, but Smith points out that Spain and Sweden were more powerful at the time, despite being
on the periphery. These countries succeeded due to strong state structures focused on
modernization. Scholars like Skocpol and Brenner criticize Wallerstein for inconsistently explaining
how productive hierarchies support unequal exchanges between states. They argue that Wallerstein
overlooks how core countries like England and Holland developed strong states, unlike semi-
peripheral nations like Sweden. There’s also criticism that World-System Theory is Eurocentric,
focusing too much on economic processes while ignoring cultural exchange. The theory also doesn’t
fully explain the role of socialist societies or internal factors like class struggle.

Q6. What do you understand by global governance? Highlight the climate change negotiations and
their impacts.

Ans INTRODUCTION

Global Governance refers to the systems and processes through which international actors—such as
countries, organizations, and businesses—collaborate to address global challenges that cannot be
solved by individual nations alone, like climate change, health crises, or security threats. It involves
creating and enforcing international laws and agreements. The idea grew after World War II, with the
United Nations (UN) formed in 1945 to promote peace and cooperation. As issues like trade, the
environment, and human rights became more complex, the need for global cooperation grew.
Climate change became a key issue in the 1990s, with the UNFCCC created in 1992. In 2015, the Paris
Agreement at COP21 saw nearly 200 countries pledge to limit global warming to below 2°C. These
efforts influence global policies, economies, and environmental strategies.

Amartya Sen: "The world is interconnected. Global governance is not a luxury; it is an urgent
necessity."

Thomas G. Weiss: "Global governance is about managing the increasingly interdependent world,
where national governments alone cannot solve major problems."

Global Efforts to Address Climate Change

Climate change is a major global issue, and international negotiations have been essential in
addressing it. Over the past few decades, these negotiations have led to key treaties, agreements,
and commitments focused on limiting global temperature rise and reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. The formal recognition of climate change as a global issue began in the late 1980s.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), was the first major
international effort to address climate change. It was adopted at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil, in June 1992. The UNFCCC is a treaty aimed at stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in
the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous human interference with the climate
system. It came into force in 1994, with 197 countries becoming parties to it.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established in 1988 by the United Nations
(UN) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), provides scientific assessments of climate
change. It evaluates the causes, impacts, and potential solutions, guiding global climate policies and
actions through periodic reports that influence international negotiations.

Climate Change Negotiation

Kyoto Protocol

One of the first significant outcomes of UNFCCC negotiations was the Kyoto Protocol. Adopted in
December 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, It set legally binding targets for developed countries to reduce their
greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2% below 1990 levels between 2008-2012. The Protocol aimed to
address climate change by focusing on countries with the highest historical emissions.

Impact: The Kyoto Protocol helped raise awareness about climate change and encouraged countries
to reduce emissions. It introduced carbon markets and Clean Development Mechanisms (CDM) to
support clean energy projects. However, its impact was limited, especially because the U.S. didn’t
ratify it, and developing countries had no binding targets.

Copenhagen Accord

The 15th Conference of the Parties (COP15) in Copenhagen in 2009 was expected to produce a
legally binding treaty to combat climate change. It was negotiated by countries like the U.S., China,
and India and set a goal to limit temperature rise to below 2°C. The accord called for $100 billion
yearly from developed countries to help developing nations adapt, but this financial pledge wasn’t
legally binding.

Impact: The Copenhagen Accord had a minor impact. While it recognized the need to limit global
temperature rise to below 2°C and called for financial support to developing countries, it lacked
binding commitments on emissions reduction. The financial pledge was not legally enforced, and
many countries did not fully commit, limiting its effectiveness in addressing climate change.

Paris Agreement

After the failure of the Copenhagen Summit, negotiators focused on a stronger deal. The 21st
Conference of the Parties (COP21), held in Paris in December 2015, It aimed to limit global
temperature rise to well below 2°C, striving for 1.5°C. For the first time, both developed and
developing countries were asked to act. Countries submitted voluntary Nationally Determined
Contributions (NDCs) to cut emissions, updating them every five years.

Impact: The Paris Agreement had a major global impact by uniting countries to tackle climate
change. Countries committed to voluntary Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), updated
every five years. While not legally binding, it stressed transparency and accountability. Developed
nations also pledged $100 billion annually to help developing countries cope with climate impacts.

Conference of the Parties (COP29)

COP29, held in Baku, Azerbaijan, November 2024, focused on global climate action. The conference
set a new climate finance goal to help developing countries, aiming to triple funding from USD 100
billion to USD 300 billion annually by 2035. It also advanced carbon markets, allowing countries to
trade carbon credits. COP29 made progress on climate transparency, adaptation, and support for
vulnerable countries. It emphasized the inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and gender equality in
climate decisions.

Impact: COP29’s decisions will significantly increase financial support for developing countries,
helping them adapt to climate change and shift to clean energy. The agreement on carbon markets
will make it easier and cheaper for countries to meet their climate goals.
Q7. What is Eurocentrism? Discuss the non-western perspective of IR?

Ans INTRODUCTION

Eurocentrism refers to a worldview that judges other cultures and societies through the lens of
European values, norms, and history. It assumes that European culture is the standard or
"mainstream," while other cultures, such as those in Asia, Africa, or Latin America, are seen as
"other," inferior, or backward. The term was coined by Samir Amin in 1988 to describe this global
dominance of European ideas, which often disregards the contributions and significance of non-
European societies. Eurocentrism views European culture as rational, scientific, and modern, while
labeling other cultures as traditional or superstitious. It became dominant during European
colonialism and still influences global views, especially in science, technology, and politics. Tied to
imperialism, it justified European dominance and left a legacy of inequality and historical violence.

Arnold Toynbee: “although western capitalism shrouded the world and achieved a political unity
based on its economy, the Western countries cannot "westernize" other countries.”

Andre Gunder Frank: “Europe’s ‘rise’ was made possible by the ‘fall’ of the rest of the world.”

Non-Western Perspective of IR

The non-Western perspective on International Relations (IR) offers different ways of thinking about
global politics, which challenge the Eurocentric ideas that dominate mainstream IR theories. Amitav
Acharya and Barry Buzan categorize these non-Western contributions into four main types.

1. Classical Non-Western Thinkers: Just like Western IR focuses on thinkers like Hobbes or
Machiavelli, non-Western traditions also have influential figures such as Sun Tzu’s The Art of War
teaches strategy and leadership, focusing on using power indirectly and adapting to changing
circumstances. Confucius emphasized moral leadership and harmony, while Kautilya’s Arthashastra
offered ideas on statecraft and strategy, similar to Western realism, but with an Indian perspective.
These thinkers offer a non-Western form of strategic thinking that often focuses on maintaining state
sovereignty and power.

2. Non-Western Leaders and Nationalist Thought: Leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru (India), Mao
Zedong (China), and Sukarno (Indonesia) developed their own foreign policy ideas, independent of
Western thought. For example, Nehru’s non-alignment policy in the Cold War sought to keep newly
independent countries free from both U.S. and Soviet influence. Mao’s Three Worlds Theory divided
the world into three groups, focusing on Third World unity to counter Western dominance. These
leaders helped shape non-Western contributions to global politics, although their ideas were
influenced by Western theories.

3. Non-Western Use of Western Theories: Some non-Western scholars use Western IR theories, such
as realism and liberalism, to analyze their local contexts. While this helps apply global theories to
non-Western situations, it raises questions about whether their work can be considered truly
indigenous or just an adaptation of Western ideas.

4. Indigenous Theories and Subaltern Studies: The subaltern studies movement, led by scholars like
Homi Bhabha and Gayatri Spivak, focuses on the voices of marginalized and colonized peoples.
These scholars critique Western dominance and emphasize the experiences of the Global South.
Postcolonial theorists, like Arjun Appadurai, also examine how globalization affects the Global South,
highlighting the need to move beyond binary distinctions between the West and non-West.
Criticism/ Non-western perspective theories

Postcolonialism and Decolonizing IR

Postcolonial theory criticizes the Eurocentric views in IR, saying that the history of colonialism has
created unfair power structures that still exist today. Scholars like Frantz Fanon, Edward Said, and
Gayatri Spivak argue that Western theories often ignore the experiences of colonized countries. For
example, the idea of the nation-state doesn’t fit many postcolonial countries, where borders were
drawn by colonial powers. Postcolonial scholars also criticize institutions like the IMF and World Bank
for forcing poor countries to follow economic policies that keep them dependent on the West.

The Global South and Dependency Theory

The Global South refers to the developing world, and scholars from this region have argued that
Western theories don’t consider their experiences. Dependency theory, developed by scholars like
Raúl Prebisch and Samir Amin, says that the West’s wealth is built on the exploitation of poorer
countries. They argue that the global economy is set up so that rich countries get richer while poor
countries stay poor. This challenges the idea that all countries have equal chances in international
trade and politics.

African Perspectives on IR
African scholars focus on the impact of colonialism, which still shapes the global system today. They
emphasize unity and cooperation between African countries through ideas like pan-Africanism.
Leaders like Kwame Nkrumah called for Africa to work together and chart its own path. African
scholars also focus on issues like poverty and health, which are often ignored in Western theories of
international relations that focus more on state security.

Islamic and Asian Perspectives

Islamic and Asian perspectives offer even more challenges to Western ideas. Islamic political thought,
with its focus on justice and community (ummah), offers a different view of global politics. Scholars
like Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im argue that Islamic values can help shape international relations. In
Asia, countries like China and India promote a multipolar world, criticizing Western interventionism.
Their views on sovereignty and justice are different from those of the West, suggesting a more
balanced global order.

Q8. Discuss the two significant phases in the evolution of Indian contributions to International
Relations (IR)

Ans INTRODUCTION

India, one of the world’s largest and most populous democracies, has made significant contributions
to international relations (IR) since its independence in 1947. India faced numerous challenges,
including maintaining sovereignty, building a stable democracy, and asserting its place in a world
dominated by powerful nations. India’s contributions to IR can be understood through two significant
phases: the post-independence phase and the post-Cold War phase. In the post-independence
phase, India focused on ensuring its sovereignty, promoting peace, and maintaining a neutral stance
during the Cold War. India's foreign policy in this era was primarily concerned with decolonization,
securing territorial integrity, and fostering international cooperation through movements like Non-
Alignment. In contrast, the post-Cold War phase, beginning in the 1990s, saw India shift towards
greater economic integration, strategic partnerships, and an active role in global governance,
addressing new challenges like climate change, global security, and sustainable development.
First phase, Post independence (1947 – 1991)

1. Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)

India's most significant contributions to international relations was its leadership role in the Non-
Aligned Movement (NAM). This was an important initiative, especially during the Cold War, when the
world was divided between the U.S.-led capitalist bloc and the Soviet-led socialist bloc. It was
founded in 1961, and was based on the idea of political independence, sovereignty, and peaceful
coexistence. The key principles of NAM included:

1. Mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity

2. Non-interference in the internal affairs of other nations

3. Peaceful coexistence and diplomacy

India’s participation in NAM allowed it to build strong diplomatic ties with newly independent
nations in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. By advocating for the rights of emerging nations and
promoting global cooperation, India helped establish a Third World bloc that represented the
interests of colonized and developing nations.

2. India’s Role in Disarmament Initiatives

India has strongly supported disarmament since independence. In 1954, Prime Minister Jawaharlal
Nehru proposed a global ban on nuclear weapons at the UN. India chose not to sign the Non-
Proliferation Treaty (NPT), arguing for a nuclear-free world and actively participated in the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In 1998,
India conducted nuclear tests (Pokhran-II), but made it clear that its nuclear weapons were for self-
defense and deterrence. India also adopted a No First Use (NFU) policy, India opposed anti-ballistic
missile systems, believing they could increase global instability.

3. South-South Cooperation and Anti-Colonial Struggles

India’s foreign policy after independence strongly supported South-South Cooperation, which aimed
to strengthen ties between developing countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. India played a
key role in creating the Group of 77 (G77) in 1964 to push for economic reforms and better
representation for the Global South. India also supported anti-colonial struggles, backing
independence movements in Algeria, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe. In 1955, India hosted the Asian-
African Conference (Bandung Conference), promoting unity and solidarity among newly
independent countries in their fight against colonialism and imperialism.

Second phase, Post Cold war (1991-Present)

1. Advocacy for a Multipolar World Order

India has supported a multipolar world, where power is shared among multiple countries rather than
dominated by one. After the Cold War ended in 1991, the United States became the leading global
power, but India argued that a balanced power structure would promote fairness and stability. This
vision is evident in India’s role in BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa), established in 2006
to represent emerging economies. India has also pushed for reforms in the UN Security Council,
including a permanent seat for itself, to make global governance more inclusive. Under Prime
Minister Narendra Modi, India has reinforced its stance, promoting multipolarity at global platforms
like the G20 and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which it joined in 2017.
2. Promoting Global Economic Integration

Since India’s economic reforms in 1991, it has worked to connect more with the global economy. By
opening its markets, India attracted foreign investments and increased trade. For example, the India-
ASEAN Free Trade Agreement in 2003 strengthened ties with Southeast Asia. India has also played
an active role in the World Trade Organization (WTO), advocating for fair trade, especially for
farmers. In 2005, India started talks with the European Union on a Free Trade Agreement, which was
finalized in 2017. India also signed a Civil Nuclear Deal with the United States in 2008, boosting
nuclear trade. India’s IT industry, with companies like TCS and Infosys, became a global leader,
exporting services worldwide.

3. Leadership in Global Environmental and Climate Change Initiatives

India has made significant contributions to global environmental efforts, strengthening its role in
international relations. In 2015, India played a key role in the Paris Climate Agreement, committing
to reduce emissions by 33-35% by 2030. India also launched the International Solar Alliance (ISA) to
promote solar energy in sunny, developing countries, boosting its leadership in renewable energy.
Furthermore, India has called for climate financing from developed nations to help address climate
change in poorer countries.