Only by knowing the internal domestic politics of states, can one understand how they behave in international politics?

Résumé du document

Studying international relations through political science is a way to understand the real incentives of the interactions states have to each other, and also to show the normative constraints, which are inherent in each state, for countries to bind together, to work with each other, or to go to war against each other. This is the reason why we may wonder if internal domestic politics have an influence on international relations.

In order to answer this question, we will study three theories: realism, institutionalism and state-society approach (or liberal theory). If both realists and institutionalists think that international relations are in a situation of anarchy lead by the hope to survive - where states are self-interested - institutionalists grant importance to the role of institutions in increasing the interactions between states. On the other hand, the liberalists, with the state-society approach, think that international relations are ruled by states' internal interests.

Extraits

[...] For instance, offensive realism - in opposition to defensive realism, which imagines the situation in an optimistic point of view fears that the rise of China will weaken the United States and create tensions in international relations due to the fact that both of the countries will want to be the most powerful, to keep (for the United States) or to expand (for China), the power they have on other countries. Institutionalists share a lot of realists' ideas about states' behaviour in international relations. They both believe in the anarchy situation, but rationalists reckon that co-operation may exist between countries. As realist Mearsheimer said in his fifth assumption, “states are rational actors” (John Mearsheimer, “Structural Realism”, in International Relations Theories, Oxford, 1994). Realists thought this rationality only in term of balance of power and degree of threat but institutionalists believe that this rationality can be used in trading partnerships. [...]

[...] In fact, a lot of theorists, especially in Europe believe that the war in Iraq has been made because of Iraq's rich natural resources, and also because the armament industry in the United States represents 40% of the industrial sector, which means that a war raises the economic growth. Also, and to prove that internal politics rules the way states behave in international relations, we are now able to use economic models to understand international politics, such as the prisoner dilemma or the free rider theory. [...]

[...] Also, and according to Mearsheimer's five assumptions, “great powers are the main actors of world politics” (John Mearsheimer, “Structural Realism”, in International Relations Theories, Oxford, 1994). This assumption is understandable when we look at the situation during the Cold War, which can also be linked to the Peloponnesian war: the United States and the Soviet Union had shown that they mattered in former conflicts, that they were the two main coercive powers, and this is why they were dominating international politics. [...]

[...] Only by knowing the internal domestic politics of states, can one understand how they behave in international politics? Introduction Studying international relations through political science is a way to understand the real incentives of the interactions states have to each other, and also to show the normative constraints, which are inherent in each state, for countries to bind together, to work with each other, or to go to war against each other. This is the reason why we may wonder if internal domestic politics have an influence on international relations. [...]

[...] However, if weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, France would have benefit from the eradication of this threat towards western countries, including France. This situation is exactly what we can notice in the economic theories of prisoner dilemma and free rider. Conclusion To conclude, and after having studied the realist, institutionalist and liberal theory, one may consider that the theory that fits the most to our modern world is the liberal theory, also called state-society approach. In fact, it seems that the realist and institutionalist theory are more related to the post Second World War period and the Cold War period, when almost all states had the same goal: protect themselves, survival, and run for power. [...]