IR NOTES

IR and States
What is IR?
Study of interactions between sovereign states.
❖ Relation between states, like war, foreign policies(majorly focused in IR, it's
about what a state thinks it should do in the world)
❖ Non state actors like MNCs, non governmental organizations
❖ Dynamics, trends and factors affecting states but not emerging from them.
(International migration, pollution war)
➢ Dynamics is the study of changing structural integrations, like changing
geographical borders, how integration and cooperation between states
arises.(Eg, France germany wars before and now)
❖ State centricity of IR has been questioned, and instead of focusing on foreign
policies, IR now majorly focuses on the action of various states, its reaction
to certain groups and entities and how it affects its people.
❖ There is tension of how world is and how it should be
❖ Dichotomy in IR
➢ Realism - interstate relations are setup in such a way, there always will be
and all we can do is to minimize the war
➢ Idealism - believes world can move to better place,

Violence vs War
War is basically state vs state. Violence is conflict within a state, translational conflicts,
and non-state actors' role in it.

History of World

The Thirty Years' War (1618-1648)

- Detail: The Thirty Years' War was a prolonged conflict in Europe that began as a
religious dispute between Catholics and Protestants but evolved into a complex
political and territorial struggle. It encompassed a series of wars and involved many
European states. The Peace of Westphalia in 1648, which ended the war, consisted of
the Treaty of Osnabrück and the Treaty of Münster. These treaties recognized the
sovereignty of individual states, introduced the concept of state equality, and
established the principles of non-interference in domestic affairs.
 - Relevance to International Relations: The Peace of Westphalia is often hailed as the
birth of the modern international system of sovereign nation-states. It marked the
shift from a medieval world order dominated by religious authorities and empires
to a system based on state sovereignty and territorial integrity. This development
is a fundamental concept in international relations, emphasizing the autonomy and
equality of states in the international arena.

Renaissance, Reformation, and Enlightenment

- Detail: The Renaissance, spanning from the 14th to the 17th centuries, was
characterized by a revival of classical learning, art, and culture. The Reformation,
initiated by Martin Luther in 1517, challenged the authority of the Catholic Church,
leading to religious schisms and the rise of Protestantism. The Enlightenment,
flourishing in the 17th and 18th centuries, was marked by the promotion of reason,
individual rights, and the separation of powers, with philosophers like John Locke,
Voltaire, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau advocating for these principles.
- Relevance to International Relations: These intellectual movements contributed to
the development of modern political thought and human rights. Concepts such as
natural rights, democracy, and the social contract emerged during this time, significantly
influencing the formation of modern states and international norms. They remain central
to the study of international relations and diplomacy.

The French Revolution (1789-1799)

- Detail: The French Revolution was a transformative period in France's history,
characterized by political upheaval, radical social change, and revolutionary ideals. It
began with the storming of the Bastille in 1789 and led to the overthrow of the French
monarchy, the Reign of Terror, and the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte.
- Relevance to International Relations: The French Revolution's ideals of liberty,
equality, and fraternity had a profound impact beyond France's borders. It inspired
nationalist movements and challenged the legitimacy of monarchies across Europe. The
Napoleonic Wars that followed reshaped the European map and introduced the concept
of the balance of power in international relations.

Modernity and Colonialism

- Detail: Modernity, spanning from the late 18th century to the early 20th century, was
characterized by industrialization, technological advancement, and urbanization.
Concurrently, European powers embarked on colonial expansion, establishing empires
in Africa, Asia, and the Americas, exploiting resources, and asserting dominance.
- Relevance to International Relations: Colonialism played a central role in shaping
international relations during this era. It led to the creation of global empires, influenced
power dynamics, and created economic and political interdependencies between
colonizers and colonies. The legacies of colonialism continue to impact contemporary
international relations, with discussions on issues like post-colonialism, reparations, and
global inequality.

World Wars (1914-1918 and 1939-1945)

- Detail: World War I, triggered by the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in
1914, involved complex alliances and resulted in a prolonged conflict. World War II,
primarily driven by territorial ambitions and the rise of totalitarian regimes, led to
immense destruction.
The Fourteen Points was a statement of principles for peace that was to be used for
peace negotiations in order to end World War I.
- Relevance to International Relations: These wars were pivotal in reshaping
international relations. World War I led to the establishment of the League of Nations
and the concept of collective security. World War II resulted in the formation of the
United Nations and the emergence of the United States and the Soviet Union as
superpowers. The devastation of both wars underscored the importance of diplomacy,
cooperation, and conflict resolution in international relations.

The United States as a Hegemony (Post-World War II)

- Detail: After World War II, the United States emerged as the world's dominant
superpower. The U.S. played a key role in European reconstruction through the
Marshall Plan, formed military alliances like NATO, and implemented the Truman
Doctrine to contain the spread of communism.
- Relevance to International Relations: Post-World War II American hegemony
exemplifies the influence of a dominant power in shaping international relations. It
highlights the role of economic aid, military alliances, and ideological competition in the
global order. The United States promoted democratic values and capitalism, impacting
the ideological dimensions of international relations.

Mao and the Chinese Revolution (1949)

- Detail: Mao Zedong's communist forces achieved victory in the Chinese Civil War in
1949, leading to the establishment of the People's Republic of China (PRC) on the
mainland. Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist government, representing the Republic of
China (ROC), retreated to Taiwan.
- Relevance to International Relations: The Chinese Revolution marked the rise of a
communist state in East Asia, challenging the Western-dominated international order. It
introduced the concept of a communist state in the region, influencing Cold War
dynamics and global politics. The presence of two Chinas—one on the mainland and
one on Taiwan—has remained a significant issue in international relations.
The Cold War (1947-1991)
- Detail: The Cold War was a protracted ideological and geopolitical rivalry between
the United States and the Soviet Union. It involved proxy conflicts, nuclear arms races,
and espionage.
- Relevance to International Relations: The Cold War era is a central focus of
international relations studies. It exemplifies the complexities of bipolarity, the role of
ideology in foreign policy, and strategies like containment and détente. The Cuban
Missile Crisis during this period underscored the significance of crisis diplomacy and
nuclear deterrence in international relations.

The Cuban Missile Crisis (1962)

- Detail: The Cuban Missile Crisis arose when the U.S. discovered Soviet nuclear
missiles in Cuba, leading to a tense standoff and the threat of nuclear war.
- Relevance to International Relations: The Cuban Missile Crisis is a landmark case
study in international relations. It emphasizes the importance of diplomacy,
communication, and crisis management in averting nuclear conflict. It also illustrates the
concept of mutually assured destruction (MAD) and the potential catastrophic
consequences of nuclear war.

Belt and Road Initiative for International Cooperation(2013)

- Detail: China's Belt and Road Initiative is an extensive infrastructure and economic
development project aimed at connecting Asia, Europe, and Africa through new trade
routes and investment. Basically, china declaration of it attempting to reclaim its lost
former glory.
- Relevance to International Relations: This initiative showcases China's growing
influence in global affairs through economic diplomacy and infrastructure development.
It highlights the role of economic interdependence and connectivity in contemporary
international relations and raises geopolitical questions about China's rise.

Ping Pong Diplomacy (1971)

- Detail: Ping Pong Diplomacy refers to friendly exchanges between American and
Chinese table tennis players in the early 1970s, which led to improved relations.
- Relevance to International Relations: This event exemplifies the potential of cultural
diplomacy and sports in international relations. It contributed to the normalization of
relations between two major powers and underscored the role of non-traditional
diplomacy in shaping global politics.

Jimmy Carter's Recognition of China (1979)

- Detail: President Jimmy Carter officially recognized the People's Republic of China
in 1979, ending U.S. diplomatic recognition of Taiwan.
 - Relevance to International Relations: This move reflects the importance of
recognizing emerging powers and the strategic considerations of diplomatic recognition
in shaping global politics. It also contributed to the broader reconfiguration of
international alliances during the Cold War era.

The 2008 Financial Crisis

Detail: The 2008 financial crisis, often referred to as the Global Financial Crisis (GFC),
began with the collapse of Lehman Brothers, a major American investment bank, in
September 2008. It quickly spread to become a global economic crisis. It was
characterized by a credit crunch, bank failures, stock market declines, housing market
crashes, and severe economic downturns in many countries.

Impact on Globalization: The crisis exposed the vulnerabilities of a highly

interconnected global financial system. It led to a temporary decline in globalization as
countries turned inward to protect their economies. Some nations imposed protectionist
measures and tightened financial regulations to shield themselves from further
economic shocks.

Rise of Nationalism: The crisis contributed to a resurgence of nationalism in some

countries. Economic hardships and job losses fueled anti-globalization sentiments, and
some leaders adopted protectionist policies and emphasized national interests over
international cooperation.

Shift in Global Power: The crisis accelerated the shift in economic power from traditional
Western powers to emerging economies like China. China's relative resilience during
the crisis boosted its global influence and contributed to the ongoing rebalancing of
international power dynamics.

Significance to International Relations: The 2008 financial crisis serves as a critical case
study for international relations scholars and practitioners. It highlights the complex
interactions between economics and geopolitics, the interplay between nationalism and
globalization, and the challenges of managing global crises. The crisis also underscores
the importance of international cooperation and governance in addressing transnational
challenges and maintaining global stability

State
Political entity that has sovereignty over a population in a given territory. Basic unit of
analysis in IR. A state must define, resolve and fulfill its national interests.
According to realism, it must also provide security through powers such as, military
power, economic power(hard powers). Cultural power, intellectual power, technological
power(Soft powers)

According to Right of Self-Determination

● Territory
● Sovereignty
● Independence
● Legitimacy
Domestic policies should not change foreign policy(But, realism stands against this)

Westphalian System
Based on Peace of Westphalia, signed in 1648, which ended the thirty years of war.
● Each state has sovereignty over its territory and domestic affairs, this is the
principal international law.
● To the exclusion of all external powers, on the principle of non-interference in
another country’s domestic affairs
● All countries, large or small, are equal in front of international law.

Constitutive theory of State

State as a person in international law if, and only if, it is recognized as sovereign by
other states. (at least one sovereign state must deem it to be sovereign).
(This theory of recognition was developed in 19th century)

Declarative theory of state

An entity’s statehood is independent of its recognition by other states. A state as a
person in international law only if it meets the following criteria
● Defined territory
● Permanent population
● Government
● Capacity to get into relations with other states

Charles Tilly on State

WAR MAKES STATES.
Competition among ‘wielders of coercion’ for control over territory, led to european-style
states.
State completion through military, police force, tax bureaucracy, court of law
● Successful war making (defeating external enemies and warlords, leaders of
local militias).
 ● It allowed the concentration of coercive power in the hands of the ruler. (state
making).
● War making spurred the development of state apparatuses.
● Bureaucracies to extract taxes from society to finance the war effort.
(EXTRACTION).
● States promoted capital accumulation to ensure adequate resources
● Formation of courts, police forces etc(PROTECTION)
The organization and deployment of violence themselves account for much of the
characteristic structure of European states
The state becomes the SOLE supplier of violence/coercion/force in the territory

Nation

Ethnicity, nation, nationalism

Ethnicity refers to a group of people who share a common cultural heritage, including
language, religion, customs, and traditions. Ethnicity can be fluid and change
over time, and it is not always defined by a shared ancestry.

Nation is a group of people who share a common political identity, often based on
shared ethnicity, language, culture, and history. Nations can be defined by a
common territory, but this is not always the case. For example, the Kurdish nation is
spread across several countries.

Nationalism is an ideology that emphasizes the importance of nations and

national identity. Nationalists believe that nations have a right to self-determination
and that they should be free from foreign domination. Nationalism can be a positive
force, promoting unity and cooperation within a nation. However, it can also be a
negative force, leading to conflict and violence, especially when it is based on ethnic
exclusivity.

Ethnicity, nation, and nationalism are all interrelated concepts. Ethnicity can play a
role in the formation of nations, and nationalism can be used to promote or
suppress ethnic identity.

For example, the Indian nation was formed in part on the basis of shared ethnicity,
language, and culture. However, there are many different ethnic groups in India, and the
Indian government has promoted a sense of national unity based on shared values and
citizenship, rather than on ethnic homogeneity.
In contrast, some nationalist movements have been based on ethnic exclusivity. For
example, the Nazi regime in Germany promoted the idea of a pure Aryan race and
sought to exterminate other ethnic groups, such as Jews and Roma.

Ethnicity, nation, and nationalism are complex concepts with a long and varied history.
They can be used to promote unity and cooperation, or they can be used to justify
violence and oppression. It is important to understand the relationship between these
concepts in order to promote peace and justice in the world.

Globalism and Nationalism

Globalism
is a process of increasing interconnectedness and interdependence between different
countries and societies. It is driven by factors such as trade, investment, technology,
and migration. Globalism has led to a more integrated global economy, as well as a
more interconnected social and cultural world.

Nationalism
is an ideology that emphasizes the importance of nations and national identity.
Nationalists believe that nations have a right to self-determination and that they should
be free from foreign domination. Nationalism can be a positive force, promoting unity
and cooperation within a nation. However, it can also be a negative force, leading to
conflict and violence, especially when it is based on ethnic exclusivity.

How a state much choose

A state must choose between globalism and nationalism based on its own interests and
priorities. There is no one-size-fits-all answer. Some states may choose to embrace
globalism more fully, while others may choose to focus on protecting their national
interests.

Benefits of globalism
● Increased economic growth and prosperity
● Access to new markets and resources
● Improved technology and innovation
● Greater cultural exchange and understanding

Benefits of nationalism
● Increased national unity and cohesion
● Protection of national sovereignty and security
 ● Preservation of national culture and identity

Globalism challenges
● Increased economic inequality
● Loss of jobs and industries to foreign competition
● Erosion of national sovereignty
● Cultural homogenization

Nationalism challenges
● Increased conflict and violence
● Protectionism and economic isolation
● Ethnic discrimination and intolerance

Balancing globalism and nationalism

It is possible to balance globalism and nationalism in a way that maximizes the benefits
of both and minimizes the challenges. For example, a state can open its economy to
international trade and investment, while also protecting its key industries and national
security interests. A state can also promote cultural exchange and understanding, while
also preserving its own national culture and identity.

Ultimately, the choice between globalism and nationalism is a complex one that must be
made on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the specific interests and priorities of
each state.

Examples:
China: China has embraced globalism in many ways, opening its economy to
international trade and investment. However, China has also maintained strong state
control over its economy and has protected its key industries. China has also promoted
its own national culture and identity.
United States: The United States is a global leader in promoting free trade and
globalization. However, the United States has also protected its key industries and
national security interests. The United States has also promoted its own national culture
and identity.
European Union: The European Union is a supranational organization that has created
a single market and common currency for its member states. The EU has also
promoted cultural exchange and understanding among its member states. However, the
EU has also respected the national sovereignty of its member states.
Collective security: is a set of established rules and procedures that nations agree to
follow in order to maintain international peace and security. These rules and procedures
respect sovereign identities, meaning that nations do not give up their sovereignty when
they join a collective security arrangement.
The most well-known example of a collective security system is the United Nations.
Other examples of collective security arrangements include regional organizations such
as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Organization of American
States (OAS). These organizations have their own rules and procedures for responding
to threats and attacks against their members.

State, nation-state, state-nation

State

is a political entity with a defined territory, population, and government. It has a

monopoly on the legitimate use of force within its territory. States are the basic
building blocks of the international system.

Nation-state

is a state that is based on a shared national identity. A nation is a group of

people who share a common culture, language, history, and sense of identity.
Nation-states are relatively rare in history, as most states are home to multiple
ethnic groups and nationalities.

State-nation

is a state that is working to build a national identity among its citizens. State-nations
are often found in post-colonial states, where there is a need to create a sense of
national unity among diverse groups of people.

In short:

● A state is a political entity with a defined territory, population, and

government.
● A nation-state is a state that is based on a shared national identity.
● A state-nation is a state that is working to build a national identity among its
citizens.
Here are some examples:

● The United States is a nation-state. It is based on a shared national identity

that is rooted in American values such as liberty, equality, and democracy.
● India is a state-nation. It is home to a wide variety of ethnic groups and
nationalities, but the Indian government is working to build a sense of national
unity among its citizens.
● China is a state that is somewhere between a nation-state and a state-nation.
It has a long history and a strong national identity, but the Chinese
government is also working to build a sense of national unity among its
citizens.

The distinction between state, nation-state, and state-nation is important because it

helps us to understand the different ways that states can be organized. It also helps
us to understand the challenges that states face in building and maintaining national
unity.

No interference is not an absolute thing

The principle of non-interference is a cornerstone of international law. It holds that

states have a right to govern themselves without interference from other states.
However, this principle is not absolute.

US hegemony and how it funds democracy

The United States is the world's leading superpower. It has a global military and
economic presence, and it exerts significant influence over other states. The US
government has a long history of funding democracy promotion programs around the
world. These programs aim to support the development of democratic institutions and
processes in other countries.

Tony Blair's statement "interference is good in name of democracy"

In 2005, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair made the statement that "interference
is good in name of democracy." Blair was defending the US-led invasion of Iraq, which
he argued was necessary to promote democracy in that country. Blair's statement has
been controversial, with some arguing that it is a justification for neo-imperialism.
Democratic peace theory
The democratic peace theory is a theory in international relations that holds that
democracies are less likely to go to war with each other than non-democracies. This is
because democracies are more transparent and accountable, and they are less likely to
engage in adventurism.

Europe had democracy due to historical reason whereas other countries in Asia
and Africa had due to top down model

Europe has a long history of democracy, dating back to the ancient Greeks and
Romans. Democracy in Europe developed gradually over centuries, through a process
of trial and error. In contrast, democracy in many Asian and African countries was
introduced through top-down models, such as decolonization or post-conflict
reconstruction.

China does neo-colonialism as interference

China is a rising power with growing economic and military influence around the world.
China has been accused of engaging in neo-colonialism in some African and Asian
countries. Neo-colonialism is a form of imperialism in which a powerful country exerts
control over another country without directly ruling it. China has been accused of using
its economic power to pressure other countries to adopt policies that benefit China.

How technology is used as means of interference

Technology can be used as a means of interference in a number of ways. For example,
states can use social media to spread disinformation or propaganda in other countries.
States can also use cyber attacks to disrupt critical infrastructure or steal sensitive
information.

Conclusion
No interference is not an absolute thing. There are a number of exceptions to the
principle of non-intervention, including self-defense, collective security, and
humanitarian intervention. The US government has a long history of funding democracy
promotion programs around the world. Tony Blair's statement that "interference is good
in name of democracy" has been controversial, with some arguing that it is a justification
for neo-imperialism. The democratic peace theory holds that democracies are less likely
to go to war with each other than non-democracies. Europe has a long history of
democracy, whereas democracy in many Asian and African countries was introduced
through top-down models. China has been accused of engaging in neo-colonialism in
some African and Asian countries. Technology can be used as a means of interference
in a number of ways, such as spreading disinformation or propaganda or launching
cyber attacks.

Different scholars on Nationalism

Ernest Gellner
to make a nation, endow a culture with its own political roof
​Nationalism cannot emerge without industrialization. Agrarian societies are local
and too decentralized, too primitive to create national consciousness.

Nation is a modern entity - byproduct of 15th century intellectual discoveries in political

economy, capitalism, mercantilism, political geography, and geography combined with
cartography and advances in map-making technologies.

Gellner's theory of nationalism is based on the idea that nationalism is a product of

modernity and that it is essential for the development of modern states. He argued that
modern societies are characterized by a high degree of specialization and division of
labor, which requires a high level of education and training for the workforce. In order to
provide this education and training, the state needs to be able to mobilize the population
and create a sense of national unity. Nationalism provides this sense of national unity.

Benedict Anderson
Nation is an imagined political community that is sovereign and limited
Anderson's theory of nationalism is based on the idea that nations are "imagined
communities." He argued that nations are not natural entities, but rather they are social
constructs that are created through shared experiences and imaginings. Nations are
also based on a sense of common history, culture, and language.
Anderson's concept of the print-capitalist imagination: Anderson argued that print
capitalism made it possible for people to share a common language, culture, and
history. This led to the creation of imagined communities, which are groups of people
who share a common sense of identity and belonging, even though they may never
have met each other. Nations are imagined communities, and Anderson argued that
print capitalism played a key role in their development.

Clifford Geertz
Geertz's views on nationalism are more complex and nuanced than Gellner's or
Anderson's. He argued that nationalism is a multi-faceted phenomenon that can be both
positive and negative. On the one hand, nationalism can provide a sense of identity and
belonging, and it can motivate people to work together for the common good. On the
other hand, nationalism can also be used to justify violence and oppression.
Anthony Smith
Smith's theory of nationalism is based on the idea that nations are rooted in ethnic
groups. He argued that nations are formed when ethnic groups develop a shared sense
of identity and a shared desire for self-determination. Smith also argued that nationalism
is a natural and inevitable process of social development.

Comparison of views
Gellner and Anderson's theories of nationalism are both based on the idea that
nationalism is a product of modernity. However, Gellner emphasizes the role of the state
in the development of nationalism, while Anderson emphasizes the role of shared
experiences and imaginings. Geertz and Smith's theories of nationalism are more
complex and nuanced. Geertz emphasizes the multi-faceted nature of nationalism,
while Smith emphasizes the role of ethnic groups in the formation of nations.

Realism
Basic Assumptions
● State is primary actor in international arena
● State have the following goals
○ Power
○ Security
● Power increases and guarantees security
● Security enables the states to acquire and consolidate power

War is politics by another means” – Clausewitz

It means that war is a tool that states use to achieve their political goals.
Clausewitz believed that war is a natural part of human history and that it is inevitable. He also
believed that war is a rational act, and that states should carefully consider their political
goals before going to war. The statement "War is politics by another means" is often used to
describe the fact that war is not just about fighting and killing. It is also about achieving
political goals, such as gaining territory, influencing the behavior of other states, or
promoting a particular ideology.

“No statesman ever adjusted war to policy with a nicer judgment than Bismarck”- Carr
is a reference to Bismarck's skill in using war to achieve his political goals, without provoking a
wider European conflict.
Bismarck was Chancellor of Prussia from 1862 to 1871, and of the German Empire from 1871 to
1890. During that time, he waged three successful wars: the Second Schleswig War against
Denmark in 1864, the Austro-Prussian War in 1866, and the Franco-Prussian War in 1870-71.
Each of these wars was carefully calculated to achieve a specific goal, and Bismarck was
careful to limit the scope of the wars to avoid provoking a wider European conflict.
For example, in the Second Schleswig War, Bismarck was able to annex the duchies of
Schleswig and Holstein to Prussia without provoking any intervention from the other European
powers. In the Austro-Prussian War, Bismarck defeated Austria and established Prussia as the
dominant power in Germany, but he was careful to avoid humiliating Austria completely. This
allowed him to maintain good relations with Austria and to prevent it from allying with France.
In the Franco-Prussian War, Bismarck was able to defeat France and force it to cede the
territory of Alsace-Lorraine. However, he was again careful to limit the scope of the war. He
refused to invade Paris or to demand a harsh peace treaty. This allowed him to avoid provoking
a wider European conflict and to establish Germany as a major European power.
Bismarck's skill in using war to achieve his political goals was unparalleled. He was able
to wage three successful wars without provoking a wider European conflict. This is a
testament to his diplomatic skills and his ability to calculate the risks and rewards of war.
It is important to note that Bismarck's war policy was not without its critics. Some historians have
argued that his wars were unnecessary and that they contributed to the outbreak of World War I.
However, there is no doubt that Bismarck was a skilled and successful statesman, and his war
policy was one of the key factors in the unification of Germany.

Politics is a struggle for power over men

It is a reference to the fact that politics is about who gets to make the decisions that affect
society, and that this is often a competitive and conflict-ridden process.

Power Politics
Power politics is not the only theory of international relations, but it is one of the most important.
It is a theory that is based on the realism that states live in an anarchic world where they must
rely on their own power to protect their interests and achieve their goals.

States live in world of anarchy

This means that there is no central authority above states that can enforce rules or resolve
disputes. States are sovereign actors, meaning that they have supreme authority within their
own borders.

This anarchy has a number of implications for the behavior of states. First, it means that states
must be self-reliant. They cannot rely on others to protect them or to enforce their interests.
Second, it means that states must be constantly vigilant and prepared to defend themselves.
Third, it means that states are likely to be competitive and suspicious of each other.

Despite the anarchy of the international system, states have developed a number of norms and
institutions to help them manage their relations and to avoid conflict. These include international
law, international organizations, and diplomatic relations. However, these norms and institutions
are not always effective, and states may still resort to force or the threat of force to achieve their
goals.
The anarchic nature of the international system is one of the key challenges that states face. It
is a challenge that they must manage in order to survive and thrive.

Some examples of how the anarchy of the international system can impact the behavior of
states:

● States may be more likely to engage in military buildup in order to deter aggression from
other states.
● States may be more likely to form alliances with other states in order to increase their
power and security.
● States may be more likely to engage in economic competition with other states in order
to increase their wealth and power.
● States may be more likely to intervene in the internal affairs of other states in order to
protect their own interests or to promote their own values.

Power politics has a number of implications for the behavior of states. First, it means that states
are likely to be competitive and suspicious of each other. Second, it means that states are likely
to be willing to use force or the threat of force to protect their interests. Third, it means that
states are likely to be interested in forming alliances with other states.

Each state pursue its own national interest

States are sovereign actors, meaning that they have supreme authority within their own
borders. This means that states are free to pursue their own interests, even if those
interests conflict with the interests of other states.

States have a variety of different interests, including security, economic prosperity, and
ideological influence. States may pursue their interests in a variety of ways, including diplomacy,
trade, and military force.

The fact that each state pursues its own interests can lead to conflict and competition between
states. However, it is also important to note that states also have shared interests, such as
avoiding nuclear war and maintaining a stable international order. States often cooperate with
each other to achieve their shared interests.

States operate in a field of incomplete information

States operate in a field of incomplete information. This means that they do not have perfect
knowledge of the world around them, including the intentions and capabilities of other
states. This incomplete information can lead to a number of challenges for states, including:
● Miscalculation: States may miscalculate the intentions or capabilities of other states,
which can lead to conflict. For example, a state may believe that another state is
planning to attack it when this is not the case.
 ● Uncertainty: States may be uncertain about the intentions and capabilities of other
states, which can lead to caution and hesitation in decision-making. This can make it
difficult for states to take necessary action to protect their interests.
● Misunderstanding: States may misunderstand the intentions and capabilities of other
states, which can lead to tension and conflict. For example, a state may believe that
another state is taking actions that are hostile to it when this is not the case.
States have developed a number of strategies to cope with incomplete information in the
international system. These include:
● Intelligence gathering: States collect intelligence on other states in order to learn more
about their intentions and capabilities. This intelligence can be gathered through a
variety of means, including human intelligence, signals intelligence, and imagery
intelligence.
● Diplomacy: States use diplomacy to communicate with each other and to exchange
information. This can help to reduce uncertainty and to prevent misunderstandings.
● Deterrence: States deter aggression from other states by signaling their willingness to
use force if necessary. This can help to prevent other states from taking actions that they
believe would be harmful to their interests.
● Alliances: States form alliances with other states in order to increase their power and
security. This can help to deter aggression from other states and to make it more difficult
for other states to miscalculate their intentions and capabilities.

Treaties and alliances would last as long as they are convenient

In an anarchic international system, states are ultimately responsible for their own security and
well-being. This means that states may be willing to break treaties or alliances if they believe it
is in their best interests to do so.

There are a number of factors that can influence the durability of treaties and alliances. These
include:
● The interests of the parties involved: Treaties and alliances are most likely to last when
they are in the best interests of all of the parties involved. However, if the interests of
the parties involved change, then the treaty or alliance may become less durable.
● The balance of power: Treaties and alliances are also more likely to last when there
is a rough balance of power between the parties involved. If the balance of power
shifts significantly, then the weaker party may be more likely to break the treaty or
alliance in order to protect its interests.
● The international context: Treaties and alliances are also more likely to last when the
international context is supportive of them. For example, treaties and alliances that are
designed to promote peace and security are more likely to last than treaties and
alliances that are designed to promote aggression or conflict.

There are a number of examples of treaties and alliances that have been broken because they
were no longer convenient for one or more of the parties involved. For example, the Nazi-Soviet
Non-Aggression Pact of 1939 was broken by Germany in 1941 when it invaded the Soviet
Union. Similarly, the Warsaw Pact was dissolved in 1991 after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Every action is part of the business, there is nothing personal
It reflects the fact that states are often motivated by their own self-interest, and that they may
make decisions that are seen as harmful or unfair to other states, even if they do not have
any personal animosity towards those states.

There are a number of reasons why states may act in this way. One reason is that states are
sovereign actors, meaning that they are not subject to any higher authority. This means
that states are free to pursue their own interests, even if those interests conflict with the
interests of other states.

Another reason why states may act in this way is that they live in an anarchic international
system. This means that there is no central authority to enforce rules or resolve disputes.
This means that states must rely on their own power to protect their interests and
achieve their goals.

In this context, states may be willing to make decisions that are seen as harmful or unfair to
other states if they believe that it is necessary to protect their own interests. For example, a
state may impose economic sanctions on another state in order to pressure it to change its
behavior, even if this causes hardship for the people of that state.
Examples
● A state may increase its military spending in order to deter aggression from another
state, even if this is seen as provocative by that state.
● A state may negotiate a trade agreement with another state in order to increase its
economic prosperity, even if this means that some domestic industries are harmed.
● A state may provide military or financial assistance to another state in order to promote
its own values or interests, even if this means that the other state is accused of human
rights abuses.

War is of course undesirable but natural or inevitable (necessary evil)

Classical Realism

Peloponnesian War by Thucydides

The war also had a significant impact on the way that states interacted with each other. The war
showed that states were willing to use force to achieve their goals, even if this meant going
to war with their neighbors. This led to a more competitive and distrustful international
environment.

The Peloponnesian War also confirmed the importance of power politics in international
relations. The war showed that states are always competing for power and influence, and that
they are willing to use force to achieve their goals.
The war also highlighted the dangers of overexpansion. Athens lost the war because it
overextended its resources and tried to expand its empire too quickly. This is a lesson that
states continue to learn today.

From a realist perspective, the Peloponnesian War is a classic example of how power
politics and the pursuit of national interests lead to conflict and war. The war also shows
the importance of military power and the dangers of overexpansion.

The Peloponnesian War also had a significant impact on the development of realist theory.
Thucydides's account of the war is considered to be one of the founding texts of realist
thought. Thucydides argued that war is a natural and inevitable part of human history,
and that states are always competing for power and influence.

Hobbes
Hobbes argued that the only way to escape the state of nature is to create a social contract, in
which individuals give up some of their natural rights to a sovereign authority in
exchange for protection and order. This social contract is the basis of the state, which
Hobbes called the Leviathan.

Hobbes' theory of the state has had a profound influence on classical realism. Classical realists
argue that states are the primary actors in international relations, and that they are motivated
primarily by self-interest and the desire for power. They also argue that the international system
is anarchic, meaning that there is no central authority to enforce rules or resolve disputes.

This anarchic environment leads states to be constantly suspicious of each other and to seek to
maximize their power in order to ensure their own security. This can lead to conflict and rivalry
between states, even when they do not have any specific grievance against each other.

Classical realism has been one of the most influential theories of international relations since
the Second World War. It has been used to explain a wide range of phenomena, including the
Cold War, the rise of China, and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.

Here are some of the key features of classical realism as developed by Hobbes:

● Human nature is selfish and competitive. Hobbes believed that people are naturally
motivated by self-interest and the desire for power. This leads to conflict and rivalry in all
human societies, including the international system.
● The international system is anarchic. There is no central authority to enforce rules or
resolve disputes between states. This forces states to rely on their own power and
strength to ensure their security.
● States are the primary actors in international relations. States are rational actors that
seek to maximize their power and security in the anarchic international system.
 ● Power is the central concept in international relations. States use their power to achieve
their goals, which may include maintaining their security, expanding their territory, or
gaining influence over other states.

Alternative Political Systems

Clash of Civilizations and remaking of world order

Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order is a book by Samuel P.

Huntington, published in 1996. In the book, Huntington argues that the fundamental
source of conflict in the post-Cold War world will be cultural and religious. He
identifies seven or eight major civilizations in the world: Western, Confucian, Islamic,
Japanese, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American, and possibly African. He
argues that these civilizations will increasingly clash with each other, as they compete for
resources and power.

Overview of the book's main arguments:

1) The end of the Cold War has ushered in a new era of civilizational conflict. The
bipolar world of the Cold War, in which the United States and the Soviet
Union were the two dominant superpowers, has been replaced by a
multipolar world in which several civilizations are competing for power and
influence.

2) Culture and religion are the primary sources of conflict in the post-Cold
War world. Huntington argues that people's cultural and religious identities
are becoming increasingly important, and that these identities are more
likely to lead to conflict than economic or ideological differences.

3) The seven or eight major civilizations of the world are on a collision course.
Huntington argues that these civilizations are competing for resources,
power, and influence, and that this competition is likely to lead to conflict.

4) The West is in a unique position to shape the emerging world order. Huntington
argues that the West is the most powerful civilization in the world, and that it
has a responsibility to shape the emerging world order in a way that is favorable
to its values and interests.

The clash of civilizations thesis has a number of implications for international relations.
First, it suggests that the world is becoming more divided along cultural and religious
lines. This could lead to increased conflict and instability in the international system.

Second, the clash of civilizations thesis suggests that the West will face a number of
challenges in the post-Cold War world. The West will need to compete with other
civilizations for resources, power, and influence. It will also need to find ways to
cooperate with other civilizations in order to address common problems, such as
terrorism and climate change.

Third, the clash of civilizations thesis suggests that the United States has a special role
to play in the post-Cold War world. The United States is the most powerful
civilization in the world, and it has a responsibility to shape the emerging world
order in a way that is favorable to its values and interests.

1) Chinese Political System(Sinic Civilization):

The Chinese political system(Sinic Civilization) is an alternative political system in a

number of ways.

1) One-party rule: The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is the sole ruling party in
China. This is in contrast to Western democracies, which are typically multi-party
systems.

2) Meritocracy: The CCP selects its leaders based on merit and ability, rather than
social status or connections. This is in contrast to many Western political
systems, which are often influenced by money and special interests.

3) Strong central government: The Chinese government is highly centralized,

with the CCP at the top. This is in contrast to many Western political systems,
which are more federal or decentralized. Sinic civilization has a long tradition of
centralized government. The emperor was the supreme authority, and he ruled
with the help of a bureaucracy of appointed officials.

4) Confucianism: Confucianism is the dominant ideology in Sinic civilization, and it

has a profound influence on the political system. Confucianism emphasizes the
importance of social order, harmony, and the paternalistic role of the state.
This is in contrast to Western political systems, which are often based on
individualism and the rule of law.

In recent years, there has been a renewed interest in the Sinic civilization as a
possible alternative to Western political systems. This is due to a number of
 factors, including the perceived failure of Western democracy to live up to its
ideals, the rise of China as a global power, and the growing dissatisfaction with
the current political system in many countries

China’s Isolation versus Foreign Power Expansionism

Historically, China has been a relatively isolated country. This was due to a number of
factors, including its large size, its geographic isolation, and its cultural self-sufficiency.
However, in the 19th century, China was forced to open up to the outside world by
Western powers who were seeking to expand their trade and influence.

This led to a period of semi-colonialism in China, as Western powers carved out spheres
of influence in the country. China was also forced to cede territory to Western
powers, such as Hong Kong and Taiwan.

The Chinese Communist Party came to power in 1949 and vowed to end China's
humiliation and restore its sovereignty. The CCP pursued a policy of isolationism for
much of the Cold War era. However, in the late 1970s, China began to open up to the
outside world again.

Since then, China has become a major player in international relations. It is now the
world's second-largest economy and has a permanent seat on the UN Security
Council. China is also increasingly assertive in its foreign policy, and it is seeking to
expand its influence around the world.

"China's isolation versus Foreign Powers' Expansionism" is a reminder of the complex

and often fraught relationship between China and the rest of the world. China has a
long history of being both a victim and a perpetrator of expansionism.

In recent years, China has been accused of engaging in expansionist behavior in the
South China Sea and in its dealings with its neighbors, such as India and Bhutan. China
has also been criticized for its support for authoritarian regimes around the world.

The United States and other Western powers are concerned about China's rising power
and its increasingly assertive foreign policy. They are seeking to counter China's
influence and to uphold the rules-based international order.
Opium trade and opium wars

The opium trade began in the 18th century, when British merchants began smuggling
opium from India into China. Opium is a highly addictive drug, and its use spread
rapidly throughout China. The Qing government tried to ban the opium trade, but it
was unable to stop it.

The Opium Wars were fought between China and Great Britain in 1839-1842 and
1856-1860. The wars were sparked by China's attempts to suppress the opium trade.
China was defeated in both wars, and it was forced to sign treaties that opened up
its ports to foreign trade and gave foreigners extraterritorial rights.

The Trade and Wars had a profound impact on China. They led to the decline of the
Qing dynasty and the eventual collapse of the Chinese imperial system. They also
paved the way for the rise of Western imperialism in China.

In the context of international relations, the opium trade and the Opium Wars marked a
turning point in China's relationship with the West. China was no longer able to isolate
itself from the world, and it was forced to open up to foreign trade and influence. The
Opium Wars also showed that China was no longer a major military power, and it
was vulnerable to Western aggression.

It also had a significant impact on the international balance of power. The British
victory in the Opium Wars made Great Britain the dominant power in China. It also
led to the expansion of Western imperialism in other parts of Asia and Africa.

The Treaty of Nanking was a peace treaty signed on August 29, 1842, between the
Qing dynasty of China and the United Kingdom, ending the First Opium War. It was
the first of a series of unequal treaties that China was forced to sign with Western
powers in the 19th century.

The treaty was signed after the British defeated the Chinese at the Battle of Nanjing.
Under the terms of the treaty, China was forced to pay a large indemnity to the
British, cede the island of Hong Kong to the British, open up five ports to foreign
trade, and reduce tariffs on British goods.

The Treaty of Nanking was a humiliating defeat for China, and it marked the beginning
of a period of Western imperialism in China.

The Treaty of Nanking was a major turning point in Chinese history, and it continues to
be a controversial topic today. Some Chinese people see the treaty as a symbol of
national humiliation, while others argue that it was necessary to open up China to the
outside world and modernize the country.

The Sino-Japanese War of 1895

The Sino-Japanese War of 1895 was a short but significant conflict between China and
Japan. The war was sparked by a dispute over the Korean Peninsula. China had
traditionally claimed suzerainty over Korea, but Japan had been expanding its influence
in Korea in the late 19th century.

In 1894, a peasant uprising broke out in Korea. The Korean government asked China
for help in suppressing the uprising. China sent troops to Korea, but Japan also sent
troops, arguing that it had a right to protect its interests in Korea.

The Japanese army quickly defeated the Chinese army. The war ended with the
signing of the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895. Under the terms of the treaty, China
ceded Taiwan and Penghu to Japan, recognized Korea's independence, and paid a
large indemnity to Japan.

The war marked the beginning of Japan's rise as a regional power and the decline of
China's influence in East Asia. The war also led to a period of tension and rivalry
between China and Japan, which would eventually lead to the Second Sino-Japanese
War in the 1930s.

Century of Humiliation

The Century of Humiliation is a term used to describe the period of Chinese history
from the mid-19th century to the mid-20th century, during which China was
subjected to a series of foreign invasions, defeats, and unequal treaties. This
period began with the First Opium War in 1839, and ended with the establishment
of the People's Republic of China in 1949.

During the Century of Humiliation, China was defeated by Western powers and Japan
in a number of wars and conflicts. This led to the loss of territory, the imposition of
unequal treaties, and a decline in China's international status. Some of the major
events of the Century of Humiliation include:

The First and Second Opium Wars (1839-1842 and 1856-1860)

The Sino-French War (1884-1885)
The First Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895)
The Boxer Rebellion (1900)
The Second Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945)

It led to a sense of national humiliation and a desire for revenge in Chinese society and
culture. It also contributed to the rise of Chinese nationalism and the Chinese
Communist Party

2) Islamic System:
The core Islamic Ideology is that there is no god but Allah. Only He is the Giver of
the Supreme Law. Only He has the Ultimate Sovereignty and only He has the
Ultimate Authority to be submissively obeyed, worshiped and adored. All man
made laws must be consistent with His Supreme Law and all human authorities must be
subordinate to His Divine Authority. Allah has no partners in His Supreme Legislative
Authority, in His Ultimate Sovereignty or in His Ultimate Authority to be submissively
obeyed, worshiped and adored.

Islamic Republic vs. Democracy

In any Republic, the Majority cannot do any legislation against a constitution that is
framed by their founding fathers based on the collective human wisdom. In an
Islamic Republic, the Majority cannot do any legislation against the Quran revealed by
the Almighty God or against a constitution derived from the Quran. In a Democracy, the
Majority can do any legislation whatsoever without any restrictions.

Sovereignty and Authority

The Islamic Republic is based on Divine sovereignty or Will of the Almighty,

wherein the Almighty God is the ultimate source of power and authority. The will of
the majority is to be subservient to the will of the Almighty. Any laws made by the
legislative body are subject to judicial review and possible invalidation by the judiciary if
a law is against the Word of God given in the Quran. In case of popular sovereignty,
the touchstone for substantiation and validation of any new laws is the man-made
constitution while in case of Divine sovereignty the touchstone is the Word of God,
whereas in case of parliamentary sovereignty, there is no such touchstone at all and the
will of the majority prevails. After Muhammad, the Last Messenger of God, no individual
or group can assume the executive authority of the Islamic Republic by claiming that he
or they are chosen by God.

Anyone for the executive authority of Islamic Republic must be directly or indirectly
elected by Muslim community.

State and the Masjid

In Islam, the state is a unity and there is no distinction or dualism of the masjid and
the state. During the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad and his four rightly guided
successors, the masjid and the state were not separate entities with separate authorities.
Masjid had a multi-faceted role including an office of the head of the state, a place of
meetings of the cabinet/council as well as meetings with foreign delegates, and a
community center. There is no priesthood in Islam and no so-called religious
authority separate from the state authorities. The distinction or separation of the state
and the masjid was made during the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties who ruled after
the first four successors of the Prophet. The head of the Islamic state is neither a high
priest nor an infallible representative of God.

The Islamic Union (The following study involves a brief description of what
Islamic Ideology is and what could be the possible political and governing
structure considering Islamic Political System as an alternative)

According to the Quran, the believers in the Islamic Ideology and belief system are a
single brotherhood. Being a single Muslim Community, they are all believers in one
God and are obliged to submit to the Ultimate source of Law given by the Almighty in the
Quran. All this necessitates their political and economic union in the community of
nations of the world. Currently, the Muslim Community in the world is divided into 57
independent sovereign states, with a variety of political systems including kingdoms,
sultanate, emirates, democratic republic, Arab republic, Islamic republic, federal republic,
people’s republic, and so on. Currently, the 57 independent sovereign states of the
Muslims are joined together by (a rather ineffective) Organization of the Islamic
Conference (OIC), which was established by an initial 25 founding member states
on 25 September 1969, in the wake of the arson of Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.
Notably, the European Union of 28 member states is much more effective as
compared to the OIC of 57 member states. The OIC also needs to be transformed into
the Islamic Union of the Muslim States. Currently, the supreme authority of the OIC
is the Islamic Summit (a counterpart of the European Council), comprising the
Kings and Heads of States or Governments of the member states.
 In addition to the Islamic Summit comprising the elected heads of the Governments, the
Islamic Union of the Muslim States should also have an Islamic Parliament, which
could be a directly elected parliamentary institution of the Islamic Union with legislative
powers. The Islamic Parliament (the Lower House) along with the Council of Foreign
Ministers of all the Muslim States (the Upper House) may comprise a bicameral
legislature of the Islamic Union. They should have the Islamic Constitution drafted in
the light of the Quran to provide a framework for future legislations.

It is vital that all the members of the Islamic Union have joint Defense and Foreign
policies. In the light of the Quranic Verses , there should be an Islamic Peace Force
and an International Islamic Court of Justice. The Islamic Peace Force may be a joint
deterrence against any possible foreign aggression as well as a means of establishing
peace and security within the Muslim states against any terrorist activities or
aggression of one state against the other. The Islamic Court of Justice will not
only be the final arbiter in disputes among the Muslim states but also the
definitive authority for the interpretation of the Islamic Law or Sharia. All the
currently existing 57 Muslim States may not be willing at once to join the Islamic Union.
A small number of Muslim States will have to take the initiative and others will hopefully
join in later with the passage of time.

Anarchy in international relations

Anarchy is the absence of a central authority in the international system. This means that there
is no one to enforce international law or resolve disputes between states. States are ultimately
responsible for their own security and well-being.

Anarchy is a fundamental concept in international relations theory. It is one of the key reasons
why international relations is often seen as a dangerous and unpredictable world.

There are a number of implications of anarchy for international relations. First, anarchy leads to
a focus on power. States are constantly trying to increase their power in order to protect
themselves from other states. This can lead to arms races and other forms of conflict.

Second, anarchy leads to a state of self-help. States are ultimately responsible for their own
security and well-being. This can lead to states taking actions that are harmful to other states,
such as preemptive wars or interventions in the domestic affairs of other states.

Third, anarchy leads to a lack of trust. States cannot trust other states to uphold their
commitments or to act in their best interests. This can make it difficult to cooperate on
international issues.
Despite the challenges posed by anarchy, there are also some benefits to the international
system. First, anarchy allows for a great deal of diversity. States are free to choose their own
political systems and economic policies. This can lead to innovation and progress.

Second, anarchy can lead to cooperation. States may cooperate on issues of mutual interest,
such as trade and security. This cooperation can help to reduce conflict and promote peace and
prosperity.

Overall, anarchy is a complex and important concept in international relations. It has both
positive and negative implications for the international system.

Here are some examples of anarchy in international relations:

The Syrian civil war is an example of how anarchy can lead to conflict and violence. There is no
central authority in Syria that can enforce the rule of law or resolve the conflict. This has led to a
protracted and bloody war that has killed hundreds of thousands of people and displaced
millions more.

The rise of China is another example of anarchy in international relations. China is a rising
power that is challenging the US-led international order. There is no central authority that can
regulate the relationship between China and the US. This has led to increased tensions and
competition between the two powers.

The proliferation of nuclear weapons is another example of anarchy in international relations.

There is no central authority that can prevent states from developing or acquiring nuclear
weapons. This poses a serious threat to global security.

Middle Kingdom syndrome

The Middle Kingdom syndrome is a term used to describe the belief that China is superior to
other countries and that it has a special role to play in the world. This belief is often based on
China's long history and culture, as well as its recent economic and military rise.

The Middle Kingdom syndrome can have a number of implications.

First, it can lead to a sense of entitlement and arrogance on the part of China. China may
believe that it has the right to dictate to other countries or to interfere in their internal
affairs.

Second, the Middle Kingdom syndrome can lead to distrust and suspicion on the part of
other countries. Other countries may be wary of China's intentions and may be reluctant
to cooperate with it on important international issues.
Third, the Middle Kingdom syndrome can lead to conflict and instability. If China believes that its
interests are being threatened or if it feels that its status is not being respected, it may be more
likely to resort to military force or other coercive measures.

Here are some examples of how the Middle Kingdom syndrome has manifested in international
relations:

China's territorial claims in the South China Sea have led to tensions with its neighbors and
have raised concerns about the stability of the region.

China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has been criticized for being a form of neocolonialism and
for trapping developing countries in debt
.
China's crackdown on democracy and human rights in Hong Kong has been condemned by
many countries around the world

Eurocentrism in international relations theory

Eurocentrism in international relations theory refers to the privileging of European
perspectives, values, and experiences in the study of international relations. This can be
seen in the choice of topics that are studied, the theories that are developed, and the
methods that are used.

Eurocentrism can have a number of negative consequences. First, it can lead to a distorted
understanding of the world. By focusing on Europe, Eurocentric theories often ignore or
marginalize the experiences of other parts of the world. This can lead to policies and
institutions that are biased against non-European countries.

Second, Eurocentrism can lead to conflict. By promoting the superiority of European values
and institutions, Eurocentric theories can alienate non-European countries and create
tensions in the international system.

For Example:
The focus on the Peace of Westphalia as the foundation of the modern international system.
The Peace of Westphalia was a treaty that ended the Thirty Years' War in Europe in 1648. It is
often seen as the beginning of the modern international system, based on the principles of state
sovereignty and non-intervention. However, the Peace of Westphalia did not apply to
non-European countries, and it is therefore not an accurate foundation for the study of the
international system as a whole.
The emphasis on realism as the dominant theory of international relations. Realism is a theory
that focuses on the role of power and conflict in international politics. It is often seen as the most
objective and scientific theory of international relations. However, realism is based on a number
of assumptions that are specific to Europe, such as the existence of a state system and the
importance of military power.

The use of Western methods in international relations research. The most common methods
used in international relations research are quantitative methods, such as statistical analysis.
These methods are often seen as being more objective and rigorous than qualitative methods,
such as case studies and interviews. However, quantitative methods are not always well-suited
to the study of complex social phenomena, such as international relations.

Security Dilemma
The security dilemma in international relations is a situation in which actions taken by states
to increase their own security can inadvertently threaten the security of other states. This
can lead to a cycle of increasing militarization and tensions, as states try to outmaneuver
each other and gain an advantage.

The security dilemma is caused by the anarchic nature of the international system. There is
no central authority to enforce rules or resolve disputes between states. This forces states to
rely on their own power and strength to ensure their security.

The security dilemma can be seen in a number of historical examples, such as the arms race
between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. In this case, both
sides were trying to increase their own security by developing more powerful nuclear weapons.
However, this only made the other side feel more insecure, and led to a cycle of increasing
militarization and tension.

The security dilemma can also be seen in the current conflict between Russia and
Ukraine. Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, citing security concerns as its
justification. However, the invasion has only made Ukraine and its allies feel more insecure,
and has led to a significant increase in NATO forces in Eastern Europe.

The security dilemma is a difficult problem to solve. There is no easy way to balance the need
for security with the risk of provoking other states. However, there are a number of things that
states can do to reduce the risk of conflict, such as:

● Engaging in dialogue and diplomacy to build trust and reduce misunderstandings.

● Agreeing to arms control agreements to limit the number and types of weapons that
states can possess.
 ● Creating international institutions to promote cooperation and resolve disputes
peacefully.

DAvid lakes paper about states and ir

Balance of power
The balance of power in international relations is a concept that refers to the distribution of
power among states in the international system. It is a central concept in realist theory, which
argues that states are primarily motivated by self-interest and the desire for power.

Realists argue that states are constantly seeking to increase their power in order to ensure
their security. This can lead to conflict and rivalry between states, even when they do not have
any specific grievance against each other.

The balance of power can be measured in a number of ways, including military power,
economic power, and diplomatic influence. A state with a large military, a strong economy,
and a wide range of allies is more likely to be able to influence other states and achieve
its goals.

The balance of power is important because it can help to prevent war. When there is a
rough balance of power between states, no one state is powerful enough to dominate the
others. This makes it less likely that any one state will initiate a war, for fear of retaliation from
the other states.

However, the balance of power can also be destabilizing. If one state becomes too
powerful, the other states may feel threatened and form alliances to counterbalance it.
This can lead to an arms race and an increase in tensions, which can increase the risk of war.

The balance of power has been a key factor in shaping international relations for centuries. It
was particularly important during the Cold War, when the United States and the Soviet Union
were engaged in a global rivalry for power. The balance of power also plays a role in the current
international system, where the United States is the dominant power but there are a number of
other rising powers, such as China and India.
State of Power
The state of power in the world is constantly changing, but there are some broad trends that can
be observed.

The rise of China: China is now the second-largest economy in the world and is rapidly
increasing its military spending. This has led to concerns among other powers, such as the
United States, about the shifting balance of power in Asia.
The decline of the United States: The United States remains the most powerful country in the
world, but its relative power is declining. This is due to a number of factors, including the rise of
China, the economic crisis of 2008, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The fragmentation of power: In the past, the international system was dominated by a few great
powers. Today, there is a more diverse range of powerful states, including middle powers and
regional powers. This has made it more difficult for any one state to dominate the international
system.
The changing state of power in the world has a number of implications. It means that the world
is becoming more multipolar, with a number of different states competing for influence. It also
means that the international system is becoming more complex and unpredictable.

In addition to the above trends, the following are some other notable developments in the state
of power in the world:

● The growing power of non-state actors: Non-state actors, such as terrorist groups and
transnational corporations, are playing an increasingly important role in international
affairs. This is challenging the traditional state-centric system of international relations.
● The rise of new technologies: New technologies, such as artificial intelligence and
cyberwarfare, are changing the way that states interact with each other. These
technologies are also creating new opportunities for non-state actors to challenge state
power.

David lakes paper

● States are the primary actors in international relations.
● States have the authority to make decisions that bind their citizens.
● This authority is known as sovereignty.
● States can interact with each other in ways that non-state actors cannot.
● States can make treaties and go to war.
 ● States are important for understanding world politics.
● The state is a social construct.
● The state is a product of history.
● The state is a dynamic institution.
● The state is not monolithic.
● The state is not always rational.
● The state is not always benevolent.
● The state is not always effective.
● The state is not the only actor in international relations.
● Non-state actors, such as multinational corporations and international
organizations, are also important.
● The role of the state in international relations is changing.
● The state is facing challenges from globalization, regionalization, and
technological change.
● The future of the state is uncertain

Non-Western IR Theory
Non-Western International Relations (IR) theory refers to a diverse body of scholarship that
challenges the Eurocentric or Western-centric dominance in the field of IR. It aims to bring the
perspectives, experiences, and insights of non-Western scholars and regions to the forefront of
IR discourse.

Key tenets of Non-Western IR theory:

➢ Decentering the West: Non-Western IR theory challenges the assumption that Western
perspectives are universal or superior, arguing for a more inclusive and diverse
understanding of international relations.

➢ Rethinking IR concepts: Non-Western IR theory reexamines traditional IR concepts, such

as sovereignty, security, and international order, from non-Western perspectives,
highlighting the limitations of Western-centric frameworks.

➢ Indigenous knowledge and epistemologies: Non-Western IR theory incorporates

indigenous knowledge systems, alternative epistemologies, and local understandings of
international relations, broadening the scope of IR scholarship.
 ➢ Global IR: Non-Western IR theory promotes a more global and inclusive approach to IR,
recognizing the diverse experiences and perspectives of non-Western regions and
actors.

Examples of Non-Western IR theory:

➢ Asian IR: Asian IR scholars examine international relations from the perspectives of
Asian countries, cultures, and historical experiences, challenging Western-centric
concepts and narratives.

➢ African IR: African IR scholars explore international relations through the lens of African
experiences, emphasizing issues such as colonialism, postcolonialism, and the African
diaspora.

➢ Latin American IR: Latin American IR scholars analyze international relations from the
perspectives of Latin American countries, focusing on issues such as dependency theory,
regional integration, and social movements.

➢ Postcolonial IR: Postcolonial IR scholars examine the lingering effects of colonialism on

international relations, exploring issues such as power imbalances, cultural dominance,
and indigenous rights.

Neo-Neo debate

Neorealism
Neorealists believe that international relations are inherently anarchic, meaning there is no
central authority to enforce rules or resolve conflicts. States, as the primary actors in the
international system, are driven by a quest for security and power, leading to a competitive and
conflictual environment. Neorealists emphasize the role of structural factors, such as the
distribution of power and the balance of power, in shaping state behavior.
Key tenets of neorealism:

➢ Anarchy: The international system is characterized by anarchy, the absence of a central

authority.

➢ State-centricity: States are the primary actors in international relations, driven by

self-interest and the pursuit of security.

➢ Power: Power is the primary currency in international relations, influencing state

behavior and outcomes.

➢ Balance of power: The balance of power among states shapes international stability and
conflict dynamics.

Neoliberalism
Neoliberals, on the other hand, argue that international relations are not inherently conflictual
and that cooperation is possible among states. They emphasize the role of interdependence,
institutions, and norms in promoting cooperation and international order. Neoliberals believe
that states can overcome the challenges of anarchy through institutions, such as international
organizations and trade agreements, that facilitate cooperation and reduce transaction costs.

Key tenets of neoliberalism:

➢ Interdependence: States are increasingly interconnected economically, politically, and

culturally, creating a web of interdependence.

➢ Institutions: International institutions provide a framework for cooperation,

rule-making, and dispute resolution.

➢ Norms: Shared norms and values promote cooperation and reduce conflict by
establishing common expectations for state behavior.

➢ Economic interdependence: Economic interdependence creates incentives for

cooperation and peaceful resolution of disputes.
The Neo-Neo Debate
The Neo-Neo debate revolves around the following questions:

1. Is international relations inherently conflictual or cooperative?

2. What role do structural factors, such as anarchy and the distribution of power, play in
shaping state behavior?

3. To what extent can cooperation be achieved through institutions and norms in an

anarchic system?

4. How do economic factors, such as interdependence, influence international relations?

Non-State actors
NSAs are entities that operate independently of state governments. NSAs are not mere
bystanders in international politics; they are active participants, influencing policies, promoting
norms, and challenging traditional power structures.
They encompass a diverse range of actors, including:

➢ Intergovernmental organizations (IGOs): Formal organizations composed of multiple

states, such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization.

➢ Non-governmental organizations (NGOs): Private, voluntary organizations that operate

independently of governments, such as Amnesty International and Oxfam.

➢ Multinational corporations (MNCs): Private companies that operate across multiple

countries, such as Apple and Toyota.

➢ Religious groups: Organizations based on religious beliefs, such as the Catholic Church
and the Islamic Development Bank.
Who is a hegemon? What is their role in shaping
international relations?
In international relations, a hegemon is a state that exercises predominant leadership or
influence over other states in a given region or the world. Hegemons often possess superior
military, economic, and cultural power, enabling them to set the rules of the international
system and shape global norms and institutions.

Characteristics of a Hegemon

➢ Superior military power: The hegemon maintains the strongest military capabilities,
deterring aggression and enabling it to project power around the world.

➢ Economic dominance: The hegemon holds a leading position in the global economy,
having strong financial markets, advanced technology, and a competitive industrial base.

➢ Cultural influence: The hegemon's values, norms, and cultural practices exert a
significant influence on other countries, shaping global trends and preferences.

A hegemon plays a pivotal role in shaping international relations by:

➢ Providing public goods: The hegemon may provide collective goods, such as security,
stability, and economic opportunities, for other states in exchange for their cooperation.

➢ Promoting international order: The hegemon can establish and promote a rules-based
international order, facilitating cooperation, trade, and peaceful coexistence among
states.

➢ Spreading norms and values: The hegemon's values and norms may diffuse throughout
the international system, influencing the behavior of other states.

➢ Resolving conflicts: The hegemon may act as a mediator or intervener in international

conflicts, seeking to resolve disputes peacefully.
 ➢ Power imbalances and exploitation: Hegemons can exploit their superior power to
extract resources, pursue their own interests at the expense of others, and impose their
will on weaker states. This can lead to economic inequality, political subordination, and
the suppression of self-determination.

➢ Neocolonialism and indirect control: Hegemons may maintain their influence through
indirect means, such as economic dominance, cultural imperialism, and the
manipulation of international institutions. This can create a form of neocolonialism
where states are nominally independent but remain dependent on the hegemon's
economic and political support.

➢ Misuse of power and interventionism: Hegemons may use their power to intervene in
the internal affairs of other states, justifying their actions in terms of promoting
democracy, human rights, or security. However, such interventions can lead to
unintended consequences, such as instability, conflict, and the erosion of sovereignty.

Examples of Hegemons in History

➢ Great Britain: The British Empire exercised global hegemony during the 19th and early
20th centuries, shaping the international order through its naval power, economic
dominance, and cultural influence.

➢ United States: The United States emerged as the preeminent hegemon following World
War II, maintaining its leadership through its military strength, economic power, and
cultural influence during the Cold War and beyond.

➢ China: China is increasingly seen as a potential future hegemon, with its rapidly growing
economy, expanding military capabilities, and growing global influence.
Comment on the direction India’s foreign policy has
taken since 2014 and critically engage with its
attempts to decoupling from the Western
frameworks in IR.

India's foreign policy has undergone a significant transformation since Narendra Modi assumed
power as Prime Minister in 2014. This shift has been marked by a move towards a more
assertive and independent approach, with a focus on strengthening India's regional and global
standing.

Key trends in India's foreign policy since 2014:

➢ Act East Policy: India has prioritized its engagement with East Asian countries,
recognizing the region's growing economic and strategic importance. The Act East Policy
aims to strengthen economic ties, enhance connectivity, and foster cooperation in areas
such as security, infrastructure, and maritime affairs.

➢ Neighborhood First Policy: India has reaffirmed its commitment to its neighborhood,
emphasizing the importance of regional stability and cooperation. The Neighborhood
First Policy seeks to promote peace, security, and economic development in the
countries surrounding India.

➢ Multilateral Engagement: India has actively participated in multilateral forums, such as

the United Nations, G20, and BRICS, seeking to promote its interests and perspectives
on global issues.

➢ Economic Diplomacy: India has utilized economic diplomacy to advance its foreign policy
goals, leveraging its growing economic clout to attract investment, enhance trade, and
strengthen partnerships with other countries.

➢ Defense Diplomacy: India has modernized its military capabilities and strengthened its
defense partnerships with key allies, such as the United States, France, and Israel.
Attempts to Decouple from Western Frameworks in IR:

India has shown a growing willingness to decouple from Western-centric frameworks in IR,
reflecting its desire for greater autonomy and a more multipolar world order. This is evident in
several areas, including:

➢ Non-Alignment: India has maintained its policy of non-alignment, avoiding formal

alliances and seeking to balance its relations with major powers like the United States,
Russia, and China.

➢ South-South Cooperation: India has emphasized South-South cooperation, promoting

partnerships and knowledge exchange with developing countries in Africa, Latin
America, and Asia.

➢ Independent Stance on Global Issues: India has taken independent stances on global
issues such as climate change and trade, reflecting its national interests and priorities.

➢ Multilateral Reforms: India has called for reforms of multilateral institutions, such as the
United Nations Security Council, to make them more representative and responsive to
the needs of developing countries.

Critical Engagement with Decoupling Efforts:

While India's efforts to decouple from Western frameworks in IR reflect its desire for greater
autonomy, it is important to critically engage with these efforts:

➢ Balancing Independence with Cooperation: India needs to strike a balance between

asserting its independence and maintaining constructive cooperation with major powers
and multilateral institutions.

➢ Addressing Global Challenges Collectively: Global challenges such as climate change and
pandemics require collective action, and India's decoupling efforts should not hinder
international cooperation on these issues.
 ➢ Upholding Universal Values: While pursuing its own national interests, India should
continue to uphold universal values such as human rights, democracy, and rule of law,
which are often enshrined in Western-centric frameworks.

➢ Engaging with Diverse Perspectives: India should engage with a wider range of
perspectives, including those from non-Western scholars and countries, to gain a more
nuanced understanding of global dynamics.

➢ Shaping Alternative Frameworks: India should contribute to the development of

alternative frameworks in IR that reflect the perspectives and interests of developing
countries.

COP 28
The 28th Conference of the Parties (COP 28) to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is scheduled to take place in
November-December 2023 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. This high-level meeting will
bring together representatives from nearly 200 countries to discuss and negotiate
international climate action.

COP 28: A Critical Juncture in International Climate Cooperation

COP 28 will be a critical juncture in international climate cooperation as the world
grapples with the escalating climate crisis. With global emissions still on the rise and the
impacts of climate change becoming increasingly severe, there is an urgent need for
ambitious and effective action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build resilience
to climate change.

Key Objectives of COP 28

➢ Accelerating emission reductions: Parties will negotiate ways to accelerate
the global transition to a low-carbon economy, aiming to keep the goal of limiting
global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius within reach.

➢ Enhancing climate finance: Developed countries will be called upon to

provide more and better financing to support developing countries' climate
mitigation and adaptation efforts.
 ➢ Addressing loss and damage: Parties will discuss ways to address the loss
and damage experienced by vulnerable countries due to climate change, a topic
that has gained increasing prominence in recent years.

➢ Finalizing the Global Stocktake: COP 28 is expected to finalize the first

Global Stocktake, a comprehensive assessment of climate action and progress
made under the Paris Agreement.

The Role of the United Arab Emirates as COP 28 Host

The United Arab Emirates, as the host of COP 28, has a significant role to play in
shaping the outcome of the conference. The UAE is committed to climate action and has
set ambitious targets for reducing its own emissions. As host, the UAE will be
responsible for facilitating negotiations, ensuring inclusivity and representation, and
promoting effective outcomes.

Importance of COP 28 with respect to IR

COP 28 holds immense significance in the realm of international relations by serving as
a critical platform for reaffirming global solidarity, accelerating emission reductions,
enhancing climate finance, addressing loss and damage, promoting technology transfer,
strengthening international cooperation, enhancing accountability and transparency,
and shaping the future of climate governance.

1. Reinforcing Global Solidarity:

COP 28 provides a crucial platform for nations to reaffirm their commitment to the
Paris Agreement, the landmark accord adopted in 2015 to address climate change. By
convening representatives from nearly 200 countries, COP 28 reinforces the global
consensus on the urgency of climate action and the need for collective solutions.

2. Accelerating Emission Reductions:

A key objective of COP 28 is to accelerate the global transition to a low-carbon economy.
This entails negotiating more ambitious emission reduction targets and establishing
concrete pathways to achieve these targets. COP 28 can serve as a catalyst for nations to
step up their efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the impacts of
climate change.

3. Enhancing Climate Finance:

Developed countries have a responsibility to provide adequate financial support to
developing nations for their climate mitigation and adaptation efforts. COP 28 offers an
opportunity to strengthen climate finance commitments, ensuring that developing
countries have the resources necessary to transition to renewable energy sources and
build resilience to climate change impacts.

4. Addressing Loss and Damage:

Vulnerable countries are already experiencing loss and damage due to climate change,
including rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and disruptions to ecosystems. COP
28 can play a crucial role in addressing this issue by establishing mechanisms for
providing compensation and support to affected communities.

5. Promoting Technology Transfer:

Developing countries often lack access to advanced technologies that can enable them to
transition to a low-carbon economy and adapt to climate change. COP 28 can facilitate
technology transfer and collaboration, ensuring that developing countries have the tools
and expertise they need to address climate change effectively.

6. Strengthening International Cooperation:

COP 28 serves as a critical forum for strengthening international cooperation on climate
change. By bringing together governments, businesses, civil society organizations, and
other stakeholders, COP 28 can foster dialogue, exchange knowledge, and promote joint
action to address the climate crisis.

7. Enhancing Accountability and Transparency:

COP 28 can contribute to enhancing accountability and transparency in international
climate efforts. By reviewing progress made under the Paris Agreement and identifying
areas for improvement, COP 28 can ensure that nations are held accountable for their
commitments and that climate action is pursued in a transparent and effective manner.

8. Shaping the Future of Climate Governance:

COP 28 provides an opportunity to reflect on the effectiveness of existing climate
governance mechanisms and consider potential reforms. By examining lessons learned
from the Paris Agreement implementation, COP 28 can help shape the future of climate
governance and ensure that it is fit for purpose in addressing the evolving climate crisis.
Venezuela-Guyana Conflict
The Venezuela-Guyana Crisis is an ongoing territorial dispute between Venezuela and
Guyana over the Essequibo region, an area of approximately 159,500 square kilometers
that is currently under Guyanese control. The dispute has its roots in colonial-era
claims, with Venezuela asserting ownership based on Spanish maps from the 16th
century, while Guyana maintains that the Essequibo region was ceded to British Guiana
(now Guyana) in an 1899 arbitration award.

Background to the Dispute

The roots of the dispute lie in the colonial era, when both Venezuela and British Guiana
(now Guyana) were Spanish and British colonies, respectively. In 1580, a Spanish
explorer named Antonio de Berrío claimed the entire Essequibo region for Spain.
However, Spanish control over the region was weak, and the area was largely inhabited
by indigenous peoples.
In 1803, the British took control of the Essequibo region from the Dutch, who had
briefly controlled it after the Spanish. The British continued to administer the region as
part of British Guiana until 1899, when Venezuela challenged British claims to the
Essequibo.

The 1899 Arbitration Award

In 1899, Venezuela and British Guiana agreed to submit the dispute to arbitration by a
panel of five jurists, two from each country and a neutral president chosen by the
Russian Tsar. In 1899, the arbitration tribunal issued a unanimous award in favor of
British Guiana, upholding its claim to the Essequibo region.

Venezuela has never accepted the 1899 award, arguing that the tribunal was biased and
that the award was based on false evidence. Venezuela called the award an
"Anglo-Russian conspiracy". Venezuela has continued to claim the Essequibo region,
and the dispute has remained a source of tension between the two countries ever since.

Recent Developments in the Crisis

➢ Guyana's oil discoveries: Guyana has made significant oil discoveries in
recent years, which has increased the value of the Essequibo region. Venezuela
has accused Guyana of illegally exploiting oil resources in the disputed area.

➢ Venezuela's economic and political crisis: Venezuela's economic collapse

under President Nicolás Maduro has led to increased tensions with Guyana, as
 Venezuela has become increasingly dependent on oil and gas resources from the
Essequibo region.

➢ International involvement: The dispute has attracted international attention,

with both Venezuela and Guyana seeking support from regional and international
organizations. The United Nations has called for a peaceful resolution to the
dispute, but no progress has been made.

Implications for International Relations

➢ Challenges to international law: Venezuela's refusal to accept the 1899
arbitration award undermines the principle of pacta sunt servanda, the
foundation of international law.

➢ Threats to regional stability: The dispute could escalate into conflict,

destabilizing the region and potentially drawing in other countries.

➢ Implications for oil and gas resources: The dispute could have implications
for the development of oil and gas resources in the region, as companies may be
hesitant to invest in disputed areas.

➢ Role of international organizations: The dispute highlights the importance

of international organizations in promoting peaceful resolution of disputes and
upholding the rule of law.

Israel-Palestine issue
The Israeli–Palestinian conflict is a complex and long-standing conflict between the
Israelis and the Palestinians over various issues, including control of the territory of
Palestine, the right of return for Palestinian refugees, and the status of Jerusalem. The
conflict has its roots in the late 19th century, when the Zionist movement, which
advocated for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, began to gain
momentum. At the time, Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire, and its population
was predominantly Arab.

In 1917, during World War I, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration,
which expressed support for the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine.
After the war, the Ottoman Empire was dissolved, and Palestine was placed under
British rule. During the British Mandate of Palestine, the Jewish population in the
region grew significantly. This led to increased tensions between Jews and Arabs, and
eventually to the outbreak of the 1947–1949 Palestine war. The war ended with the
establishment of the State of Israel and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of
Palestinians.

The conflict can be considered an attack on a state as defined by international relations

in the following ways:

➢ Violation of sovereignty: The Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories

is a violation of Palestinian sovereignty. Israel has control over Palestinian
territory, borders, airspace, and resources, and it restricts the movement of
Palestinians.

➢ Use of force: Israel has used force against Palestinians in a number of ways,
including airstrikes, artillery shelling, and ground incursions. This use of force
has resulted in the deaths and injuries of thousands of Palestinians
.
➢ Collective punishment: Israel has imposed collective punishment on
Palestinians in the form of blockades and curfews. These measures have caused
widespread hardship and suffering among Palestinians.

➢ Denial of self-determination: The Israeli occupation of the Palestinian

territories has denied Palestinians the right to self-determination. Palestinians
are unable to determine their own political future, and they are subject to Israeli
rule.

India and USA Standoff over Gurpatwant Singh

Pannun
In November 2023, the United States Department of Justice charged an Indian national
with plotting to assassinate a US citizen of Indian origin, Gurpatwant Singh Pannun.
Pannun is a designated global terrorist who advocates for a separatist Sikh state called
Khalistan. This incident has triggered a diplomatic standoff between India and the US.
Pannun is a leader of Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), a banned organization in India. SFJ
advocates for Khalistan, a separate Sikh state carved out of India. The Indian
government considers SFJ to be a terrorist organization.
Alleged Plot
➢ US authorities allege that an Indian intelligence official conspired to assassinate
Pannun in New York City.

➢ The official is accused of directing a co-conspirator in India to identify

individuals in the US who could carry out the assassination.

India's Response:

➢ India strongly denies the allegations and claims that the US is conducting a
"witch hunt" against Indian officials.

➢ India has accused the US of violating diplomatic protocols by not sharing

intelligence about the alleged plot before making the charges public.

➢ India has also summoned the US ambassador to Delhi to lodge a formal protest.

US Response:

➢ The US maintains that it has provided India with sufficient information about the
alleged plot.

➢ The US has urged India to cooperate with the investigation and hold those
responsible accountable.

➢ US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has stated that the US is committed to

working with India to address terrorism threats.

Impact on India-U.S. Relations

➢ Strained bilateral relations: The standoff has strained the relationship
between India and the US, which are strategic partners. This is the first time that
the US has accused an Indian official of plotting to assassinate someone on US
soil. The Indian government has denied the allegations and accused the US of
conducting a "witch hunt" against Indian officials. This has led to a deterioration
of trust and cooperation between the two countries.
 ➢ Increased security concerns: The alleged plot to assassinate Pannun has
raised concerns about the possibility of further terrorist attacks by Khalistani
groups. The Indian government has increased security measures in Punjab and
other states with a large Sikh population. The US has also warned its citizens in
India to be aware of the potential threat of terrorism.

➢ Damage to India's image: The allegations against an Indian official have

damaged India's image on the international stage. Some countries have called for
a more thorough investigation into the matter. This could lead to India being
isolated from the international community.

Eight Indian Navy Officers Sentenced to Death in

Qatar: Details, Appeal, and International Relations
Implications
Background:
In August 2022, eight former Indian Navy officers working for Dahra Global, a private
company overseeing submarine induction for the Qatari navy, were arrested in Qatar on
charges of espionage. The charges against them remained confidential and were never
publicly disclosed by Qatar.

Death Sentence and India's Appeal:

On October 26, 2023, a Qatari court sentenced all eight individuals to death. This
verdict sent shockwaves through India, with the Indian government calling it "deeply
shocking" and exploring "all legal options."

India immediately filed an appeal against the death sentence in November 2023. The
Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) maintained the confidentiality of the judgment and
urged everyone to refrain from speculation due to the sensitivity of the case. The Indian
Embassy in Qatar was granted consular access to the eight individuals several times
during the legal process.
Impact on International Relations:

➢ India-Qatar Relations: The death sentence has significantly strained relations

between India and Qatar. India has expressed strong displeasure with the verdict
and has called for a fair and transparent legal process. Qatar, on the other hand,
has maintained that the legal process was fair and unbiased.

➢ International Relations: This case has also raised concerns about the treatment of
foreign nationals in Qatar, particularly those working on sensitive projects. It has
also cast a shadow on India's efforts to strengthen its strategic partnership with
Qatar and other Middle Eastern countries.

➢ Death Penalty as a Tool of Diplomacy: The use of the death penalty in this case
has sparked debates regarding its effectiveness as a deterrent and its
compatibility with human rights principles. This could potentially impact the
international community's perception of both India and Qatar.