Approaches to study International Relations - 3 | PSIR Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Systems Approach

• During the Cold War, the Systems approach became central to Political Science and International Relations (IR).
• The Cold War brought complex issues like the rise of mass destruction technologies(atom bombs, lethal weapons) and advancements in cybernetics and computer science.
• These complexities highlighted the need for an integrated and comprehensive approach, leading to the development of General System Theory (GST).
• The Systems approach posits that all systems in the universe are interconnected and influence one another.
• Understanding the dynamics of these systems is crucial for grasping specific phenomena in the universe.

Understanding the Systems Approach in International Relations

• The systems approach is a way of looking at a phenomenon by considering the wholeness of a system, how it organizes itself, and the relationships and interactions among its different parts.
• This approach criticizes the reductionist tradition in science, which focuses on breaking down a phenomenon into its individual parts to understand it.
• In International Relations (IR), the systems approach examines the function of the international system as a whole, rather than just analyzing the actions of individual nation-states.
• A system is defined as a set of interconnected elements organized to achieve a specific purpose. The four key features of a system are:
• Elements: The individual parts that make up the system.
• Interconnections: The relationships and interactions between the elements.
• Function or Purpose: What the system is designed to do.
• Regulating Force: The mechanism that controls and regulates the system's activities.
• For example, in the human digestive system, the elements include teeth, enzymes, stomach, and intestines. These elements work together to digest food and extract nutrients, with chemical signals regulating the process.
• Human beings are part of multiple interconnected systems in society, each influencing and interacting with the others.
• The systems approach is rooted in General Systems Theory (GST), developed by biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy. He emphasized the importance of studying the interactions between components in a system.
• GST gained prominence during a time of global challenges, such as the Cold War and concerns about mass destruction. It aimed to provide a framework for understanding and controlling human behavior and social conflicts through interdisciplinary research.
• Scholars like Kenneth Boulding and James Grier Miller contributed to the advancement of GST and behavioral science, applying it to various disciplines, including sociology, linguistics, and ecology.
• In political science and IR, GST was adapted to study and understand social relations and conflicts within a systems framework.

The Systems Approach to International Relations (IR)

• The Systems Approach to International Relations (IR) differs from the traditional approach, which mainly looks at domestic factors like a country's ideology or the personality of its leader.
• The Systems Approach believes that the international system is an integrated whole composed of its structure and nation-states.
• This approach focuses on the functions of the international system and its regulating forces, rather than on the internal matters of individual countries.

Systems Approach of Morton Kaplan

Introduction to Kaplan’s Systems Approach in International Relations

• Kaplan’s work marks a shift from focusing on political systems within nation-states to examining the international system as a whole.
• His analysis is set against the backdrop of the Cold War, a period marked by tension between the US-led capitalist bloc and the Soviet-led socialist bloc.

Six International Systems Proposed by Kaplan

• Balance of Power System
• Loose Bipolar System
• Tight Bipolar System
• Universal System
• Hierarchical System
• Unit Veto System

1. Balance of Power System

• Timeframe: Between the 18th century and 1914.
• Characteristics:
  • Five dominant European powers of similar strength.
  • Focus on diplomacy and alliance-building.
  • Occasional wars, but aimed at preserving the system.
  • Defeated states reintegrated rather than excluded.

2. Loose Bipolar System

• Timeframe: During the Cold War.
• Characteristics:
  • Two major blocs led by the US and the Soviet Union, differing in ideologies: democratic capitalism vs. communism.
  • Inclusion of Non-Aligned states and international organizations like the United Nations.
  • Avoidance of direct conflict between superpowers due to the threat of nuclear retaliation.

3. Tight Bipolar System

• Characteristics:
  • Similar to the Loose Bipolar System.
  • Hierarchical organization of actors within the blocs.
  • Marginalization of international organizations and Non-Aligned states.

4. Universal System

• Characteristics:
  • Emergence of powerful international organizations like the United Nations.
  • Integration and solidarity among states.
  • High levels of cross-border cooperation and humanitarian interventions.

5. Hierarchical System

• Formation following the breakup of one of the two blocs in the bipolar system.
• Reorganization into a political hierarchy, with the remaining bloc’s ideology imposed on the collapsed bloc’s members.
• The resulting system can be democratic or authoritarian, depending on the remaining bloc’s ideology and the role of international organizations.

6. Unit Veto System

• All states possess the capability to destroy one another, but the risk of mutual destruction discourages aggression.
• Advancements in communication and technology reduce the likelihood of accidental wars.

Systems Approach of Kenneth Waltz

Kenneth Waltz and Neorealism in International Relations

• Kenneth Waltz, the founder of Neorealism or 'Structural Realism,' made significant contributions to the Systems approach in International Relations (IR).
• In his 1954 book,Man, the State, and War,Waltz introduced three levels of analysis in international relations:
• Selfish nature of man
• Behaviour of states and institutions

Pressure of the international system

• He argued that issues of high politics, like war, are determined by the international system rather than just the behavior of individual states or their leaders. This perspective emphasized the need to analyze the international system to understand international politics.
• In his 1979 book,Theory of International Politics,Waltz elaborated on the key principles of Neorealism and his Systems approach.
• He described the international system as consisting of its structure and interacting units, mainly nation-states.
• The structure of the international system, according to Waltz, comprises three elements:
• Ordering Principle: The international system is anarchic due to the absence of a world government, leading to a self-help system for nation-states.
• Function of the Units: The primary function of units (nation-states) is to ensure their survival and security.
• Distribution of Material Capabilities: This refers to the distribution of military and economic resources among states, which includes military weapons, manpower, and economic resources that support military infrastructure.
• Waltz argued that the distribution of material capabilities regulates the behavior of nation-states, similar to the 'invisible hand' in the market.
• In an anarchic system, states are locked in a security dilemma, prompting them to augment their capabilities to balance against potential rivals.
• The distribution of material capabilities can lead to war, diplomatic initiatives, military alliances, or bandwagoning.
• Waltz also distinguished between 'low politics' (issues within nation-states, like unemployment and environmental concerns) and 'high politics' (international issues like war and national security).
• He emphasized that low politics does not affect international politics and that all nation-states function similarly in the international system, regardless of their internal political systems.
• Waltz argued that to understand international politics, one must examine the dynamics of the international system rather than domestic factors.
• He proposed Neorealism as a framework to analyze international politics by focusing on the external dimensions of politics and the autonomy of the international system.

Systems Approach of Keohane and Nye

Neoliberalism in International Relations refers to a theoretical approach that emphasizes the role of international institutions and interdependence among states in the global system. Key thinkers like Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye have significantly contributed to this perspective.

Key Concepts:

• Interdependence: Refers to the mutual reliance among countries due to increasing cross-border interactions, such as trade and communication.
• Complex Interdependence: A concept developed by Keohane and Nye, highlighting the multiple channels of interaction between countries, including economic, environmental, and social factors.
• International Institutions: Defined as sets of rules and norms that govern state behavior and facilitate cooperation. For example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) promotes trade by establishing rules for member countries.
• International Organizations: Formal entities like the United Nations (UN), International Monetary Fund (IMF), and World Health Organization (WHO) that embody international institutions and play crucial roles in global governance.
• International Regimes: Specific sets of rules and norms within particular issue areas, such as the Climate Change Regime or the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Regime.

Evolution of International Institutions: Since the Cold War, the number of formal international organizations has significantly increased, reflecting the growing importance of international cooperation.

Systems Approach: Neoliberalism views the international system as composed of states, international institutions, and non-state actors, all interacting within an anarchical and interdependent framework.

Cooperation and Conflict: While the international system is characterized by anarchy, Keohane and Nye argue that interdependence fosters cooperation among states, providing a counterbalance to potential conflicts.

Role of Institutions: Institutions shape state behavior by establishing binding norms, influencing how states interact with one another. For instance, countries may adjust their laws to comply with international agreements, as seen in the case of patent laws influenced by WTO guidelines.

Systems Approach of Alexander Wendt

Structural Constructivism, proposed by Alexander Wendt, is a theory in International Relations (IR) that emphasizes the social construction of international relations. It focuses on ideational factors like culture, social values, identity, and language, rather than material factors like military power and economic resources. Wendt's version of Constructivism aligns with some principles of Neorealism and Neoliberalism.

Here are the key features of Wendt's Systems Approach:

• Composition of the International System: Wendt agrees with Neorealism and Neoliberalism that the international system consists of its structure and nation-states. However, he believes that the structure is made up of social relationships, which include shared knowledge, social practices, and material resources. For example, the shared understanding between the United States and North Korea identifies them as enemies. Material resources gain significance based on shared knowledge and practices.

• Regulating and Constitutive Role of Ideational Factors: Wendt argues that ideational factors like identity, norms, and culture regulate and constitute the behavior of nation-states. For instance, a nation-state's identity as democratic influences its actions, such as promoting human rights and democratic values globally. Ideational factors shape the interests of nation-states and guide their behavior in the international arena.

• Consequences of Anarchy: Wendt agrees with Neorealism and Neoliberalism that the international system is anarchic, but his perspective on its consequences differs. While Neorealism views anarchy pessimistically, suggesting self-help as the only security mechanism, and Neoliberalism sees the potential for mitigation through institutions, Wendt takes a neutral stance. He argues that "anarchy is what states make of it," meaning the nature of anarchy depends on the relationships among nation-states. Wendt identifies three forms of anarchy: Hobbesian, Lockean, and Kantian. Hobbesian anarchy, characterized by hostility, aligns with Neorealism. Lockean anarchy is less competitive, while Kantian anarchy, based on friendly relations, is peaceful.

Systems Approach of Immanuel Wallerstein

Immanuel Wallerstein's World-Systems Approach
Immanuel Wallerstein's World-Systems Approach is an advanced version of dependency theory. He presents this approach in a series of books, including The Modern World-System and The Capitalist World Economy.

Key Concepts:

• Modern World-System: Wallerstein argues that the contemporary world is a capitalist system that originated in Europe between 1450 and 1650. This system expanded globally through colonization, integrating all regions into a capitalist framework.
• World-System vs. Nation-States: Wallerstein emphasizes that the world is not merely a collection of independent nation-states. Instead, these states are part of a larger World-System regulated by global capital. To understand global developments, it is essential to examine the World-System as a whole.

A) Composition of the Modern World-System:

• Economic Zones: The world is divided into three economic zones based on labor division:
• Core: The technologically advanced zone (e.g., Western Europe, the United States, Japan) that produces high-value commodities and enjoys high profits.
• Peripheral: The least developed regions (e.g., parts of Latin America, Asia, Africa) that primarily produce primary commodities and have lower profits.
• Semi-Peripheral: Regions with a mix of core and peripheral activities (e.g., India, China, South Africa).

B) Nature of the Modern World-System:

• Capitalist System: The modern world-system is capitalist, with economic power resting in the hands of those who own the means of production. This system is inherently exploitative, with capitalists exploiting workers and core regions exploiting peripheral states, leading to significant economic inequalities.
• Regulating Force: The global capital is the regulating force of the modern world-system, organizing economic activities worldwide. Globalization is seen as an economic transition where the interests of global capital are prioritized through neoliberal economic programs.
• Influence on Nation-States: Global capital, along with international organizations like the IMF and transnational corporations, influences the decisions of nation-states, particularly in the Global South, challenging the sovereignty of these states.