You are currently viewing IGNOU MPS 2 GUESS PAPER FOR EXAM


QNO1:-What is Realism. What is its Classical Realism & Contempory Realism or Neo-Realism? OR Bring out the essence of key concepts frequently used in the Realism? What purpose do they serve? OR Discuss some important theories in the Realist Approach. OR Discuss Realism as a school of thought in the study of international Relations {lR) highlighting its key concepts.

ANS:-Realism in international relations theory is one of the dominant schools of thinking within the international relations discipline. Realism or political realism prioritizes national interest and security over ideology, moral concerns and social reconstructions. This term is often synonymous with power politics.

Common assumptions

Realist theories tend to uphold that:

  • The international system is in a constant state of antagonism.
  • There is no actor above states capable of regulating their interactions; states must arrive at relations with other states on their own, rather than it being dictated to them by some higher controlling entity.
  • In pursuit of national security, states strive to attain as many resources as possible.
  • States are unitary actors each moving towards their own national interest. There is a general distrust of long-term cooperation or alliance.
  • The overriding national interest of each state is its national securityand survival.
  • Relations between states are determined by their levels of powerderived primarily from their militaryand economic capabilities.
  • The interjection of morality and values into international relations causes reckless commitments, diplomatic rigidity, and the escalation of conflict.
  • Sovereignstatesare the principal actors in the international system and special attention is afforded to large powers as they have the most influence on the international stage. International institutions, non-governmental organizations, multinational corporations, individuals and other sub-state or trans-state actors are viewed as having little independent influence.

In summary, realists believe that mankind is not inherently benevolent but rather self-centered and competitive. This perspective, which is shared by theorists such as Thomas Hobbes, views human nature as egocentric (not necessarily selfish) and conflictual unless given the right conditions under which they can coexist, contrasts with the approach of liberalism to international relations. Further, they believe that states are inherently aggressive (offensive realism) and/or obsessed with security (defensive realism); and that territorial expansion is only constrained by opposing power(s). This aggressive build-up, however, leads to a security dilemma where increasing one’s security can bring along even greater instability as the opponent(s) builds up its own arms in response (an arms race). Thus, security becomes a zero-sum game where only relative gains can be made. There are no universal principles which all states can use to guide their actions. Instead, a state must always be aware of the actions of the states around it and must use a pragmatic approach to resolve the problems that arise.

Classical realism

Classical realism states that it is fundamentally the nature of man that pushes states and individuals to act in a way that places interests over ideologies. Classical realism is defined as the “drive for power and the will to dominate [that are] held to be fundamental aspects of human nature”.

Classical Realism refers to an artistic movement in late 20th century painting that places a high value upon skill and beauty, combining elements of 19th century neoclassicism and realism.

Modern realism began as a serious field of research in the United States during and after World War II. This evolution was partly fueled by European war migrants like Hans Morgenthau.

  • George F. Kennan- Containment
  • Nicholas Spykman- Geostrategy, Containment
  • Herman Kahn- Nuclear strategy
  • H. Carr

Liberal realism or the English school or rationalism

The English School holds that the international system, while anarchical in structure, forms a “society of states” where common norms and interests allow for more order and stability than what might be expected in a strict realist view. Prominent English School writer Hedley Bull’s 1977 classic entitled The Anarchical Society is a key statement of this position.

Prominent liberal realists:

  • Hedley Bull- argued for both the existence of an international society of states and its perseverance even in times of great systemic upheaval, meaning regional or so-called “world wars”.
  • Martin Wight

Neorealism or structural realism

Neorealism derives from classical realism except that instead of human nature, its focus is predominantly on the international system. While states remain the principal actors, greater attention is given to the forces above and below the states through levels of analysis or structure-agency debate. The international system is seen as a structure acting on the state with individuals below the level of the state acting as agency on the state as a whole.

While neorealism shares a focus on the international system with the English School, neorealism differs in the emphasis it places on the permanence of conflict. To ensure state security, states must be on constant preparation for conflict through economic and military build-up.

Prominent neorealists:

  • Robert Jervis- Defensive realism
  • Kenneth Waltz- Neorealism
  • Stephen Walt- Defensive realism
  • John Mearsheimer- Offensive realism
  • Robert Gilpin- Hegemonic theory

Neo-classical realism

Neoclassical Realism can be seen as the third generation of realism, coming after the classical authors of the first wave (Thucydides, Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes), and the neorealists (esp. Kenneth Waltz). Its designation of “neoclassical”, then, has a double meaning: 1) It offers the classics a renaissance; 2) It is a synthesis of the neorealist and the classical realist approaches.

Neoclassical realism is particularly appealing from a research standpoint because it still retains a lot of the theoretical rigor that Waltz has brought to realism, but at the same time can easily incorporate a content-rich analysis, since its main method for testing theories is the process-tracing of case studies.

Prominent neoclassical realists:

  • Randall Schweller
  • Thomas J. Christensen
  • William Wohlforth
  • Aaron Friedberg
  • Norrin Ripsman

Realism in statecraft

Modern realist statesmen

  • Henry Kissinger
  • Zbigniew Brzezinski
  • Brent Scowcroft

The ideas behind George F. Kennan’s work as a diplomat and diplomatic historian remain relevant to the debate over American foreign policy, which since the 19th century has been characterized by a shift from the Founding Fathers’ realist school to the idealistic or Wilsonian school of international relations. In the realist tradition, security is based on the principle of a balance of power and the reliance on morality as the sole determining factor in statecraft is considered impractical. According to the Wilsonian approach, on the other hand, the spread of democracy abroad as a foreign policy is key and morals are universally valid. During the Presidency of Bill Clinton, American diplomacy reflected the Wilsonian school to such a degree that those in favor of the realist approach likened Clinton’s policies to social work. According to Kennan, whose concept of American diplomacy was based on the realist approach, such moralism without regard to the realities of power and the national interest is self-defeating and will lead to the erosion of power, to America’s detriment.


Democratic peace

Democratic peace theory advocates also that Realism is not applicable to democratic states’ relations with each another, as their studies claim that such states do not go to war with one another. However, Realists and proponents of other schools have critiqued both this claim and the studies which appear to support it, claiming that its definitions of ‘war’ and ‘democracy’ must be tweaked in order to achieve the desired result.


The term refers to the theory or advocacy of federal political orders, where final authority is divided between sub-units and a centre. Unlike a unitary state, sovereignty is constitutionally split between at least two territorial levels so that units at each level have final authority and can act independently of the others in some area. Citizens thus have political obligations to two authorities. The allocation of authority between the sub-unit and centre may vary. Typically the centre has powers regarding defence and foreign policy, but sub-units may also have international roles. The sub-units may also participate in central decision-making bodies.

The basic idea behind federalism is that a unifying relationship between states should be established under a common system of law. Conflict and disagreement should be resolved through peaceful means rather than through coercion or war. Its most important aspect is in recognizing that different types of institutions are needed to deal with different types of political issues.


Post-realism suggests that Realism is a form of social scientific and political rhetoric. It opens rather than closes a debate about what is real and what is realistic in international relations.

Prominent Post-Realists:

  • Francis A. Beer
  • James Der Derian
  • Robert Hariman
  • Michael J. Shapiro

QNO2:- Discuss the Liberal Approach to the study of International Relations.  OR Discuss the concept of world order. OR Difference between functionalism & neo-functionalism. OR Explain the theory of ‘Conflict Resolution in the study of International Relations.

ANS:-Liberalism is the belief in the importance of individual liberty and equal rights. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but most liberals support such fundamental ideas as constitutions, liberal democracy, free and fair elections,human rights, capitalism, free trade, and the separation of church and state. These ideas are widely accepted, even by political groups that do not openly profess a liberal ideological orientation. Liberalism encompasses several intellectual trends and traditions, but the dominant variants are classical liberalism, which became popular in the eighteenth century, and social liberalism, which became popular in the twentieth century.

Liberalism first became a powerful force in the Age of Enlightenment, rejecting several foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, such as hereditary status, established religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings. The early liberal thinker John Locke, who is often credited for the creation of liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition, employed the concept of natural rights and the social contract to argue that the rule of law should replaceabsolutism in government, that rulers were subject to the consent of the governed, and that private individuals had a fundamental right to life, liberty, and property.

The revolutionaries in the American Revolution and the French Revolution used liberal philosophy to justify the armed overthrow of tyrannical rule. The nineteenth century saw liberal governments established in nations across Europe, Latin America, and North America. Liberal ideas spread even further in the twentieth century, when liberal democracies triumphed in two world wars and survived major ideological challenges from fascism and communism. Conservatism, fundamentalism, andmilitary dictatorship remain powerful opponents of liberalism. Today, liberals are organized politically on all major continents. They have played a decisive role in the growth of republics, the spread of civil rights and civil liberties, the establishment of the modern welfare state, the institution of religious toleration and religious freedom, and the development of globalization. Political scientist Alan Wolfe wrote, “liberalism is the answer for which modernity is the question”.

History of liberalism

The history of liberalism spans the better part of the last four centuries, beginning in the English Civil War and continuing after the end of the Cold War. Liberalism started as a major doctrine and intellectual endeavour in response to the religious wars gripping Europe during the 16th and 17th centuries, although the historical context for the ascendancy of liberalism goes back to the Middle Ages. The first notable incarnation of liberal unrest came with the American Revolution, and liberalism fully exploded as a comprehensive movement against the old order during the French Revolution, which set the pace for the future development of human history.

Classical liberals, who broadly emphasized the importance of free markets and civil liberties, dominated liberal history for a century after the French Revolution. The onset of the First World War and the Great Depression, however, accelerated the trends begun in late 19th century Britain towards a new liberalism that emphasized a greater role for the state in ameliorating devastating social conditions. By the beginning of the 21st century, liberal democracies and their fundamental characteristics—support for constitutions, civil rights and individual liberties, pluralistic society, and the welfare state—were widespread in most regions around the world.

Inception to revolution

The emergence of the Renaissance in the 15th century helped to weaken unquestioning submission to the institutions of the Middle Ages by reinvigorating interest in science and in the classical world. In the 16th century, the Protestant Reformation developed from sentiments that viewed the Catholic Church as an oppressive ruling order too involved in the feudal and baronial structure of European society. The Church launched a Counter Reformation to contain these bubbling sentiments, but the effort unraveled in the Thirty Years War of the 17th century. In England, a civil war led to the execution of King Charles I in 1649. Parliament ultimately succeeded—with the Glorious Revolution of 1688—in establishing a limited and constitutional monarchy.

French Revolution

The march of the women on Versailles in October 1789 was one of the most famous examples of popular political participation during the French Revolution. The demonstrators forced the royal court back to Paris, where it would remain until the proclamation of the First Republic in 1792.

Three years into the French Revolution, German writer Johann von Goethe reportedly told the defeated Prussian soldiers after the Battle of Valmy that “from this place and from this time forth commences a new era in world history, and you can all say that you were present at its birth”. Historians widely regard the Revolution as one of the most important events in human history, and the onset of the Revolution in 1789 is considered by some to mark the end of the early modern period.

The French Revolution is often seen as marking the “dawn of the modern era,” and its convulsions are widely associated with “the triumph of liberalism”. For liberals, the Revolution was their defining moment, and later liberals approved of the French Revolution almost entirely—”not only its results but the act itself,” as two historians noted. The French Revolution began in May 1789 with the convocation of the Estates-General. The first year of the Revolution witnessed, among other major events, the Storming of the Bastille in July and the passage of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in August.

Children of revolution

The Liberals prepare to attack the Carlists in theBattle of Mendigorría (1835), the most important confrontation of the First Carlist War. Both the battle and the war resulted in heavy defeats for the conservative Carlists. The Carlist Warsplagued Spain throughout the 19th century, even though the Carlists never managed to assume power.

Liberals in the 19th century wanted to develop a world free from government intervention, or at least free from too much government intervention. They championed the ideal of negative liberty, which constitutes the absence of coercion and the absence of external constraints. They believed governments were cumbersome burdens and they wanted governments to stay out of the lives of individuals. Liberals simultaneously pushed for the expansion of civil rights and for the expansion of free markets and free trade. The latter kind of economic thinking had been formalized by Adam Smith in his monumental Wealth of Nations (1776), which revolutionized the field of economics and established the “invisible hand” of the free market as a self-regulating mechanism that did not depend on external interference. Sheltered by liberalism, the laissez-faire economic world of the 19th century emerged with full tenacity, particularly in the United States and in the United Kingdom.

Politically, liberals saw the 19th century as a gateway to achieving the promises of 1789. In Spain, the Liberales, the first group to use the liberal label in a political context, fought for the implementation of the 1812 Constitution for decades—overthrowing the monarchy in 1820 as part of the Trienio Liberal and defeating the conservative Carlists in the 1830s. In France, the July Revolution of 1830, orchestrated by liberal politicians and journalists, removed the Bourbon monarchy and inspired similar uprisings elsewhere in Europe.

Conflict and renewal

British leaflet from the Liberal Partyexpressing support for the National Health Insurance Act of 1911. The legislation provided benefits to sick and unemployed workers, marking a major milestone in the development of social welfare.

The 20th century started perilously for liberalism. The First World War proved a major challenge for liberal democracies, although they ultimately defeated the dictatorial states of the Central Powers. The war precipitated the collapse of older forms of government, including empires and dynastic states. The number of republics in Europe reached 13 by the end of the war, as compared with only three at the start of the war in 1914. This phenomenon became readily apparent in Russia. Before the war, the Russian monarchy was reeling from losses to Japan and political struggles with the Kadets, a powerful liberal bloc in the Duma.

The Great Depression fundamentally changed the liberal world. There was an inkling of a new liberalism during the First World War, but modern liberalism fully hatched in the 1930s as a response to the Depression, which inspired John Maynard Keynes to revolutionize the field of economics. Classical liberals, such as economist Ludwig von Mises, posited that completely free markets were the optimal economic units capable of effectively allocating resources—that over time, in other words, they would produce full employment and economic security.

The social liberal program launched by President Roosevelt in the United States, the New Deal, proved very popular with the American public. In 1933, when Roosevelt came into office, the unemployment rate stood at roughly 25 percent. The size of the economy, measured by the gross national product, had fallen to half the value it had in early 1929.


Liberalism—both as a political current and an intellectual tradition—is mostly a modern phenomenon that started in the 17th century, although some liberal philosophical ideas had precursors inclassical antiquity. The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius praised “the idea of a polity administered with regard to equal rights and equal freedom of speech, and the idea of a kingly government which respects most of all the freedom of the governed”. Scholars have also recognized a number of principles familiar to contemporary liberals in the works of several Sophists and in the Funeral Orationby Pericles. Liberal philosophy symbolizes an extensive intellectual tradition that has examined and popularized some of the most important and controversial principles of the modern world. Its immense scholarly and academic output has been characterized as containing “richness and diversity,” but that diversity often has meant that liberalism comes in different formulations and presents a challenge to anyone looking for a clear definition.

Major themes

Though all liberal doctrines possess a common heritage, scholars frequently assume that those doctrines contain “separate and often contradictory streams of thought”. The objectives of liberal theorists and philosophers have differed across various times, cultures, and continents. The diversity of liberalism can be gleaned from the numerous adjectives that liberal thinkers and movements have attached to the very term liberalism, including classical, egalitarian, economic, social, welfare-state, ethical, humanist, deontological, perfectionist, democratic, and institutional, to name a few. Despite these variations, liberal thought does exhibit a few definite and fundamental conceptions. At its very root, liberalism is a philosophy about the meaning of humanity and society. Liberals accept that war is sometimes necessary, but in contrast to neoconservatives, liberals believe that applying unilateral force is wrong, and will only initiate a cycle of violence that will be impossible to stop.

Classical and modern

Thomas Hill Green was one of the most influential liberal philosophers ever. In Prolegomena to Ethics (1884), he established the first major foundations for what later became known as positive liberty. In a few years, his ideas became the official policy of theLiberal Party in Britain, precipitating the rise of social liberalism and the modern welfare state.

Early liberals, including Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Baruch Spinoza, attempted to determine the purpose of government in a liberal society. To these liberals, securing the most essential amenities of life—liberty and private property among them—required the formation of a “sovereign” authority with universal jurisdiction. In a natural state of affairs, liberals argued, humans were driven by the instincts of survival and self-preservation, and the only way to escape from such a dangerous existence was to form a common and supreme power capable of arbitrating between competing human desires. This power could be formed in the framework of a civil society that allows individuals to make a voluntary social contract with the sovereign authority, transferring their natural rights to that authority in return for the protection of life, liberty, and property. These early liberals often disagreed in their opinion of the most appropriate form of government, but they all shared the belief that liberty was natural and that its restriction needed strong justification. Liberals generally believed in limited government, although several liberal philosophers decried government outright, with Thomas Paine writing that “government even in its best state is a necessary evil”.

As part of the project to limit the powers of government, various liberal theorists—such as James Madison and the Baron de Montesquieu—conceived the notion of separation of powers, a system designed to equally distribute governmental authority among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Governments had to realize, liberals maintained, that poor and improper governance gave the people authority to overthrow the ruling order through any and all possible means—even through outright violence and revolution, if needed. Contemporary liberals, heavily influenced by social liberalism, have continued to support limited constitutional government while also advocating for state services and provisions to ensure equal rights. Modern liberals claim that formal or official guarantees of individual rights are irrelevant when individuals lack the material means to benefit from those rights, urging a greater role for government in the administration of economic affairs. Early liberals also laid the groundwork for the separation of church and state. As heirs of the Enlightenment, liberals believed that any given social and political order emanated from human interactions, not from divine will. Many liberals were openly hostile to religious belief itself, but most concentrated their opposition to the union of religious and political authority—arguing that faith could prosper on its own, without official sponsorship or administration from the state.

Criticism and support

Liberalism has drawn both criticism and support in its history from various ideological groups. For example, some scholars suggest that liberalism gave rise to feminism, although others maintain that liberal democracy is inadequate for the realization of feminist objectives. Liberal feminism, the dominant tradition in feminist history, hopes to eradicate all barriers to gender equality—claiming that the continued existence of such barriers eviscerates the individual rights and freedoms ostensibly guaranteed by a liberal social order. British philosopher Mary Wollstonecraft is widely regarded as the pioneer of liberal feminism, with A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) expanding the boundaries of liberalism to include women in the political structure of liberal society. Less friendly to the goals of liberalism has beenconservatism. Like liberalism, conservatism is complex and amorphous, laying claims to several intellectual traditions over the last three centuries. Edmund Burke, considered by some to be the first major proponent of modern conservative thought, offered a blistering critique of the French Revolution by assailing the liberal pretensions to the power of rationality and to the natural equality of all humans. Conservatives have also attacked what they perceive to be the reckless liberal pursuit of progress and material gains, arguing that such preoccupations undermine traditional social values rooted in community and continuity. However, a few variations of conservatism, like liberal conservativism, expound some of the same ideas and principles championed by classical liberalism, including “small government and thriving capitalism”.

Liberalism worldwide

Liberals are committed to build and safeguard free, fair and open societies, in which they seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one is enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity … Liberalism aims to disperse power, to foster diversity and to nurture creativity.

Liberal International

Liberalism is frequently cited as the dominant ideology of modern times. Politically, liberals have organized extensively throughout the world. Liberal parties, think tanks, and other institutions are common in many nations, although they advocate for different causes based on their ideological orientation. Liberal parties can be center-left, centrist, or center-right depending on their location.

They can further be divided based on their adherence to social liberalism or classical liberalism, although all liberal parties and individuals share basic similarities, including the support for civil rights and democratic institutions. On a global level, liberals are united in the Liberal International, which contains over 100 influential liberal parties and organizations from across the ideological spectrum.

Some parties in the LI are among the most famous in the world, such as the Liberal Party of Canada, while others are among the smallest, such as the Liberal Party of Gibraltar. Regionally, liberals are organized through various institutions depending on the prevailing geopolitical context. In the European Parliament, for example, the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe is the predominant group that represents the interest of European liberals.

Impact and influence

The Liberal International, a global federation of liberal political parties and institutions, was founded in 1947. It represents one attempt in a long tradition of liberals trying to establish cross-cultural and transnational connections through global organizations.

The fundamental elements of contemporary society have liberal roots. The early waves of liberalism popularized economic individualism while expanding constitutionalgovernment and parliamentary authority. One of the greatest liberal triumphs involved replacing the capricious nature of royalist and absolutist rule with a decision-making process encoded in written law. Liberals sought and established a constitutional order that prized important individual freedoms, such as the freedom of speech and of association, an independent judiciary and public trial by jury, and the abolition of aristocratic privileges.

Another major liberal accomplishment includes the rise of liberal internationalism, which has been credited with the establishment of global organizations such as the League of Nations and, after the Second World War, the United Nations.

QNO3:- What do you mean by Neo-Liberal lnstitutionalism? Examine its core assumptions.  OR Discuss the Neo-Liberal Approach to the study of International Relations.

ANS:-Neo-liberalism describes a market-drivenapproach to economic and social policy based on neoclassical theories of economics that stresses the efficiency of private enterprise, liberalized trade and relatively open markets, and therefore seeks to maximize the role of the corporate sector in determining the political and economic priorities of the state.

The term “neoliberalism” has also come into wide use in cultural studies to describe an internationally prevailing ideological paradigm that leads to social, cultural, and political practices and policies that use the language of markets, efficiency, consumer choice, transactional thinking and individual autonomy to shift risk from governments and corporations onto individuals and to extend this kind of market logic into the realm of social and affective relationships.

Policy implications

Neo-liberalism seeks to transfer control of the economy from public to the private sector, under the belief that it will produce a more efficient government and improve the economic health of the nation. The definitive statement of the concrete policies advocated by neoliberalism is often taken to be John Williamson’s “Washington Consensus”, a list of policy proposals that appeared to have gained consensus approval among the Washington-based international economic organizations (like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank). Williamson’s list included ten points:

Fiscal policy Governments should not run large deficits that have to be paid back by future citizens, and such deficits can only have a short term effect on the level of employment in the economy. Constant deficits will lead to higher inflation and lower productivity, and should be avoided. Deficits should only be used for occasional stabilization purposes.

Redirection of public spending from subsidies (especially what neoliberals call “indiscriminate subsidies”) and other spending neoliberals deem wasteful toward broad-based provision of key pro-growth, pro-poor services like primary education, primary health care and infrastructure investment.

  • Tax reform– broadening the tax base and adopting moderate marginal tax rates to encourage innovation and efficiency;
  • Interest ratesthat are market determined and positive (but moderate) in real terms;
  • Floating exchange rates;

Trade liberalisation – liberalization of imports, with particular emphasis on elimination of quantitative restrictions (licensing, etc.); any trade protection to be provided by law and relatively uniform tariffs; thus encouraging competition and long term growth

Liberalisation of the “capital account” of the balance of payments that is, allowing people the opportunity to invest funds overseas and allowing foreign funds to be invested in the home country

Privatisation of state enterprises; Promoting market provision of goods and services which the government can not provide as effectively or efficiently, such as telecommunications, where having many service providers promotes choice and competition.

Deregulation – abolition of regulations that impede market entry or restrict competition, except for those justified on safety, environmental and consumer protection grounds, and prudent oversight of financial institutions;

  • Legal security for property rights; and,
  • Financialisationof capital.

Embedded liberalism

The term embedded liberalism refers to the economic system that dominated the non-communist global economy from the end of World War II to the 1970s. David Harvey argues that at the end of World War II, the primary objective was to develop an economic plan that would not lead to a repeat of theGreat Depression during the 1930s. Harvey notes that under this new system free trade was regulated “under a system of fixed exchange rates anchored by the US dollar’s convertibility into gold at a fixed price. Fixed exchange rates were incompatible with free flows of capital.” Harvey argues that embedded liberalism led to the surge of economic prosperity that came to define the 1950s and 1960s.

Collapse of embedded liberalism

David Harvey notes that the system of embedded liberalism began to break down beginning towards the end of the 1960s. The 1970s were defined by an increased accumulation of capital, unemployment, inflation (or stagflation as it was dubbed), and a variety of fiscal crises. He notes that “the embedded liberalism that had delivered high rates of growth to at least the advanced capitalist countries after 1945 was clearly exhausted and no longer working.” A number of theories concerning new systems began to develop, which led to extensive debate between those who advocated “social democracy and central planning on the one hand” and those “concerned with liberating corporate and business power and re-establishing market freedoms on the other. Harvey notes that by 1980, the latter group had emerged as the leader, advocating and creating a global economic system that would become known as neoliberalism.

Post-1970s economic liberalism

Global spread

Chronic economic crisis throughout the 1980s, and the collapse of the Communist bloc at the end of the 1980s, helped foster political opposition to state interventionism in favor of free market reform policies. From the 1980s onward, a number of communist countries initiated various neoliberal market reforms, such as the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia under the direction of Ante Markovic (until the country’s collapse in the early 1990s), and the People’s Republic of China under the direction of Deng Xiaoping.

Changes occurred from the 1970s to the 1980s. Started off with most of the democratic world governments focused primarily on the primacy of economic individual rights, rules of law and roles of the governments in moderating relative free trade. It was almost considered national self determination at the time.

Stances of organized labour shifted when governments of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher took strong stances to break down trade barriers entirely to reduce government power; thus allowing the market to be more important. Therefore industries will increasingly shift globally with integrated knowledge boosting the economy.

Socially, neoliberalism is marked by the return of class rules and the blurring of social and market valuesAssuming this perspective is true, neoliberalism can be viewed as a domino-effect concept.

Chicago School

The Chicago school of economics describes a neoclassical school of thought within the academic community of economists, with a strong focus around the faculty of University of Chicago.

The school emphasizes non-intervention from government and rejects regulation in laissez-faire free markets as inefficient. It is associated with neoclassical price theory and libertarianism and the rejection of Keynesianism in favor of monetarism until the 1980s, when it turned to rational expectations. The school has impacted the field of finance by the development of the efficient market hypothesis. In terms of methodology the stress is on “positive economics”– that is, empirically based studies using statistics to prove theory.


In Australia, neoliberal economic policies have been embraced by governments of both the Labor Party and the Liberal Party since the 1980s. The governments ofBob Hawke and Paul Keating from 1983 to 1996 pursued economic liberalisation and a program of micro-economic reform. These governments privatized government corporations, deregulated factor markets, floated the Australian dollar, and reduced trade protection.


In Canada, the issues identified with neoliberalism (reducing taxes and welfare spending, minimizing of government and reform of public healthcare and education, among others) are often associated with Brian Mulroney, Mike Harris, Ralph Klein, Gordon Campbell and Stephen Harper.


Milton Friedman used the term “Miracle of Chile” in reference to Augusto Pinochet’s support for liberal economic changes in Chile carried out by the “Chicago Boys”. Their implemented economic model had three main objectives: economic liberalization, privatization of state owned companies, and stabilization of inflation. These market-oriented economic policies were continued and strengthened by successive governments after Pinochet stepped down. At the time, Milton Friedman stated that the Chilean experiment was “comparable to the economic miracle of post-war Germany.”

Hong Kong

Milton Friedman described Hong Kong as a laissez-faire state and he credits that policy for the rapid move from poverty to prosperity in 50 years. Hong Kong’s GDP grew under British colonial control between 1897 and 1997, while possessing central banking, school regulations, environmental regulations and government ownership of housing — all examples of economic intervention.. These regulations were however light in comparison to many other countries and in terms of economic regulation Freidman’s analysis of Hong Kong as a ‘lassiez-faire’ state seems justified: Hong Kong has no capital gains tax, no interest tax, no sales tax and only a 15% flat income tax. It also has no tariffs or other legal restrictions on international free trade, no minimum wage laws, no price or wage controls. Further it extends no unemployment benefits, enacts to labour legislation, and provides no social security and no national health insurance.


The largest privatization in history was that of Japan Post. It was the nation’s largest employer and one third of all Japanese government employees worked for Japan Post.

In September 2003, Koizumi’s cabinet proposed splitting Japan Post into four separate companies: a bank, an insurance company, a postal service company, and a fourth company to handle the post offices as retail storefronts of the other three. After privatization was rejected by upper house, Koizumi scheduled nationwide elections to be held on September 11, 2005. He declared the election to be a referendum on postal privatization. Koizumi subsequently won this election, gaining the necessary supermajority and a mandate for reform, and in October 2005, the bill was passed to privatize Japan Post in 2007.


Mexico is presently the eighth largest trading nation. Mexico joined GATT, or General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1986 and has been a part of the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) since 1990. Another trading partnership Mexico entered into was the Uruguay Round (UR).

New Zealand

The term Rogernomics was created by analogy with Reaganomics to describe the economic policies followed by New Zealand Finance Minister Roger Douglas from his appointment in 1984.

The policies included cutting agricultural subsidies and trade barriers, privatising public assets and the control of inflation through measures rooted in monetarism, and were regarded in some quarters of Douglas’s New Zealand Labour Party as a betrayal of traditional Labour ideals. The Labour Party subsequently retreated from pure Rogernomics, which became a core doctrine of ACT. The Labour Party leader planned to create a 15% flat tax in New Zealand, and to privatise schools, roads and hospitals, which was moderated by the Labour cabinet at the time, although the resultant reforms were still generally considered radical in a global context. After Douglas left the Labour party, he went on to co-found ACT in 1993, which regards itself as the new liberal party of New Zealand.

South Africa

South Africa’s GDP has grown since the beginning of the new government system in 1994, which ended the rule of apartheid in South Africa. While some see the implementation of neoliberal policies inside South Africa as having spurred the country’s growth rate, others cite policies such as maintaining high interests rates to quell inflation as actually hurting economic growth. Meanwhile, the implementation of GEAR (Growth Employment and Redistribution Strategy) policies have caused a decline in employment that started after the new government in 1994, which caused an increase in South Africa’s poverty level.[63]

United Kingdom

Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister with a mandate to reverse Britain’s economic decline. Thatcher’s political and economic philosophy emphasised reduced state intervention,[64] freer markets, and more entrepreneurialism. She once slammed a copy of Friedrich Hayek’s The Constitution of Libertydown on a table during a Shadow Cabinet meeting, saying, “This is what we believe.” Thinkers closely associated with Thatcherism include Keith Joseph,Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman.

United States

The Administration of Ronald Reagan, from 1981 to 1989, made a range of decisions that served to liberalize (in contemporary US terminology, this is more likely to be described as conservative economics rather than liberal; in the sense of this article, liberalize refers to an economic system involving few regulations) the American economy. These policies are often described as Reaganomics, and are often associated with supply-side economics (The notion that, in order to lower prices and cultivate economic prosperity, policies should appeal to producers rather than consumers.).

Political freedom

In Capitalism and Freedom (1962), Friedman developed the argument that economic freedom while itself an extremely important component of total freedom, is also a necessary condition for political freedom. He commented that centralized control of economic activities was always accompanied with political repression.

In his view, the voluntary character of all transactions in a free market economy and wide diversity that it permits are fundamental threats to repressive political leaders and greatly diminish power to coerce. Through elimination of centralized control of economic activities, economic power is separated from political power, and the one can serve as counterbalance to the other. Friedman feels that competitive capitalism is especially important to minority groups, since impersonal market forces protect people from discrimination in their economic activities for reasons unrelated to their productivity.

State-centric approach

The state-centric approach to neoliberalism is not critical, but it concurs with the critical approach that neoliberal ideas are really just laissez-faire liberal prescriptions that overthrew Keynesianism. State-centric theorists hold that neoliberalism is “the attempt to reduce the role of the state in the market through tax cuts, decreases in social spending, deregulation, and privatization.”

However, the state-centric approach argues that state actors were the political entrepreneurs who formulated neoliberalism – rather than, as critics of neoliberalism would claim, capitalist political organizations, and economists and economic departments, think tanks, and politicians all supported by class-conscious capitalists. State-centric theorists argue that neoliberalism spread because it fit the voters’ preferences best; they disagree in this with the critical approach, which maintains that neoliberal framing and policies were propagated by well-heeled, highly organized political machines that insisted to the public, “There is no alternative”.

QNO4:-Discuss the Post-structuralist Approach to the study of lntemational Relations.

ANS:-Post-structuralism primarily encompasses the intellectual developments of certain mid-20th-century French and continental philosophers and theorists. The movement is difficult to summarize, but may be broadly understood as a body of distinct responses to structuralism, which argued that human culture may be understood as a series of signs or symbols; or, put differently, that human culture may be understood by means of a structure -— modeled on language —- that is distinct both from the organizations of reality and the organization of ideas and imagination — a “third order.” The precise nature of the revision or critique of structuralism differs with each post-structuralist author, though common themes include the rejection of the self-sufficiency of the structures that structuralism posits and an interrogation of the binary oppositions that constitute those structures. Writers whose work is often characterised as post-structuralist include Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, and Julia Kristeva.

The movement is closely related to postmodernism. As with structuralism, anti-humanism, as a rejection of the enlightenment subject, is often a central tenet.Existential phenomenology is a significant influence; one commentator has argued that post-structuralists might just as accurately be called “post-phenomenologists.”

Some have argued that the term “post-structuralism” arose in Anglo-American academia as a means of grouping together continental philosophers who rejected the methods and assumptions of analytical philosophy. Further controversy owes to the way in which loosely-connected thinkers tended to dispense with theories claiming to have discovered absolute truths about the world. Although such ideas generally relate only to the metaphysical (for instance, metanarratives of historical progress, such as those of dialectical materialism), many commentators discredited the movement as relativist, nihilist, or simply indulgent to the extreme. Many so-called “post-structuralist” writers rejected the label and there is no manifesto.

Post-structuralism emerged in France during the 1960s as an antinomian movement critiquing structuralism. The period was marked by political anxiety, as students and workers alike rebelled against the state in May 1968, nearly causing the downfall of the French government. At the same time, however, the support of the French Communist Party (PCF) for the oppressive policies of the USSR contributed to popular disillusionment with orthodox Marxism. As a result, there was increased interest in alternative radical philosophies, including feminism, western Marxism, anarchism, phenomenology, and nihilism. These disparate perspectives, which Michel Foucault later labeled “subjugated knowledges,” were all linked by being critical of dominant Western philosophy and culture. Post-structuralism offered a means of justifying these criticisms, by exposing the underlying assumptions of many Western norms.


General practices

Post-structural practices generally operate on some basic assumptions:

  • Post-structuralists hold that the concept of “self” as a separate, singular, and coherent entity is a fictional construct. Instead, an individual comprises tensions between conflicting knowledge claims (e.g. gender, race, class, profession, etc.). Therefore, to properly study a text a reader must understand how the work is related to his or her own personal concept of self. This self-perception plays a critical role in one’s interpretation of meaning. While different thinkers’ views on the self (or the subject) vary, it is often said to be constituted by discourse(s). Lacan’s account includes a psychoanalytic dimension, while Derridastresses the effects of power on the self. This is thought to be a component of post-modernist theory.
  • The author’s intended meaning, such as it is (for the author’s identity as a stable “self” with a single, discernible “intent” is also a fictional construct), is secondary to the meaning that the reader perceives. Post-structuralism rejects the idea of a literary text having a single purpose, a single meaning, or one singular existence. Instead, every individual reader creates a new and individual purpose, meaning, and existence for a given text. To step outside of literary theory, this position is generalizable to any situation where a subject perceives a sign. Meaning (or the signified, inSaussure’s scheme, which is as heavily presumed upon in post-structuralism as in structuralism) is constructed by an individual from a signifier. This is why the signified is said to ‘slide’ under the signifier, and explains the talk about the “primacy of the signifier.”
  • A post-structuralist critic must be able to use a variety of perspectives to create a multifaceted interpretation of a text, even if these interpretations conflict with one another. It is particularly important to analyze how the meanings of a text shift in relation to certain variables, usually involving the identity of the reader.


A major theory associated with Structuralism was binary opposition. This theory proposed that there are certain theoretical and conceptual opposites, often arranged in a hierarchy, which human logic has given of text. Such binary pairs could include Enlightenment/Romantic, male/female, speech/writing, rational/emotional, signifier/signified, symbolic/imaginary.

Post-structuralism rejects the notion of the essential quality of the dominant relation in the hierarchy, choosing rather to expose these relations and the dependency of the dominant term on its apparently subservient counterpart. The only way to properly understand these meanings is to deconstruct the assumptions and knowledge systems which produce the illusion of singular meaning. This act of deconstruction illuminates how male can become female, how speech can become writing, and how rational can become emotional.

Structuralism vs. Post-structuralism

Structuralism was an intellectual movement in France in the 1950s and 1960s that studied the underlying structures in cultural products (such as texts) and used analytical concepts from linguistics, psychology, anthropology and other fields to interpret those structures. It emphasized the logical and scientific nature of its results.

Post-structuralism offers a study of how knowledge is produced and a critique of structuralist premises. It argues that because history and culture condition the study of underlying structures it is subject to biases and misinterpretations. To understand an object (e.g. one of the many meanings of a text), a post-structuralist approach argues, it is necessary to study both the object itself and the systems of knowledge that produced the object.

Historical vs. descriptive view

Post-structuralists generally assert that post-structuralism is historical, and classify structuralism as descriptive. This terminology relates to Ferdinand de Saussure’s distinction between the views ofhistorical (diachronic) and descriptive (synchronic) reading. From this basic distinction, post-structuralist studies often emphasize history to analyze descriptive concepts. By studying how cultural concepts have changed over time, post-structuralists seek to understand how those same concepts are understood by readers in the present. For example, Michel Foucault’s Madness and Civilizationis both a history and an inspection of cultural attitudes about madness. The theme of history in modern Continental thought can be linked to such influences as Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Friedrich Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morals and Martin Heidegger’s Being and Time.

Structuralists also seek to understand the historical interpretation of cultural concepts, but focus their efforts on understanding how those concepts were understood by the author in his or her own time, rather than how they may be understood by the reader in the present.

Scholars between both movements

The uncertain distance between structuralism and post-structuralism is further blurred by the fact that scholars generally do not label themselves as post-structuralists. In some cases (e.g. Claude Lévi-Strauss and Roland Barthes), scholars associated with structuralism became noteworthy in post-structuralism as well. Along with Lévi-Strauss, three of the most prominent post-structuralists were first counted among the so-called “Gang of Four” of structuralism par excellence: Jacques Lacan, Roland Barthes, and Michel Foucault. The works of Jacques Derrida, Gilles Deleuze, and Julia Kristeva are also counted as prominent examples of post-structuralism.

The critical reading carried out by these thinkers sought to find contradictions that an author includes, supposedly inevitably, in his work. Those inconsistencies are used to show that the interpretation and criticism of any literature is in the hands of the reader and includes that reader’s own cultural biases and assumptions. While many structuralists first thought that they could tease out an author’s intention by close scrutiny, they soon argued that textual analysis discovered so many disconnections that it was obvious that their own experiences lent a view that was unique to them.

Some observers from outside the post-structuralist camp have questioned the rigor and legitimacy of the field in academia. American philosopher John Searleargued in 1990 that “The spread of ‘poststructuralist’ literary theory is perhaps the best known example of a silly but noncatastrophic phenomenon.” Similarly, physicist Alan Sokal in 1997 criticized “the postmodernist/poststructuralist gibberish that is now hegemonic in some sectors of the American academy.” Literature scholar Norman Holland argued that post-structuralism was flawed due to reliance on Saussure linguistic model, which was seriously challenged by the 1950s and was soon abandoned by linguists: “Saussure’s views are not held, so far as I know, by modern linguists, only by literary critics and the occasional philosopher. [Strict adherence to Saussure] has elicited wrong film and literary theory on a grand scale. One can find dozens of books of literary theory bogged down in signifiers and signifieds, but only a handful that refer to Chomsky.

Major works and concepts

Eco and the open text

When The Open Work was written by Umberto Eco (1962) it was in many (or all) senses post-structuralist. The influence of this work is, however, complex: Eco worked closely with Barthes, and in the second Preface to the book (1967), Eco explicitly states his post-structuralist position and the assonance with his friend’s position. The entire book is a critique of a certain concept of “structure” and “form,” giving to the reader a strong power in understanding the text.

Barthes and the need for metalanguage

Although many may have felt the necessity to move beyond structuralism, there was clearly no consensus on how this ought to occur. Much of the study of post-structuralism is based on the common critiques of structuralism. Roland Barthes is of great significance with respect to post-structuralist theory. In his work, Elements of Semiology (1967), he advanced the concept of the “metalanguage”. A metalanguage is a systematized way of talking about concepts like meaning and grammar beyond the constraints of a traditional (first-order) language; in a metalanguage, symbols replace words and phrases. Insofar as one metalanguage is required for one explanation of first-order language, another may be required, so metalanguages may actually replace first-order languages. Barthes exposes how this structuralist system is regressive; orders of language rely upon a metalanguage by which it is explained, and therefore deconstruction itself is in danger of becoming a metalanguage, thus exposing all languages and discourse to scrutiny. Barthes’ other works contributed deconstructive theories about texts.

Derrida’s lecture at Johns Hopkins

The occasional designation of post-structuralism as a movement can be tied to the fact that mounting criticism of structuralism became evident at approximately the same time that structuralism became a topic of interest in universities in the United States. This interest led to a 1966 conference at Johns Hopkins University that invited scholars who were thought to be prominent post-structuralists, including Derrida, Barthes, and Lacan. Derrida’s lecture at that conference, “Structure, Sign, and Play in the Human Sciences,” often appears in collections as a manifesto against structuralism. Derrida’s essay was one of the earliest to propose some theoretical limitations to structuralism, and to attempt to theorize on terms that were clearly no longer structuralist.

The element of “play” in the title of Derrida’s essay is often erroneously taken to be “play” in a linguistic sense, based on a general tendency towards puns and humour, while social constructionism as developed in the later work of Michel Foucault is said to create a sense of strategic agency by laying bare the levers of historical change. The importance of Foucault’s work is seen by many to be in its synthesis of this social/historical account of the operations of power (see governmentality).


QNO5:- Discuss Post-Modernist Approaches to the study of lntemational Relations.

ANS:-Postmodernism is a movement away from the viewpoint of modernism. More specifically it is a tendency in contemporary culture characterized by the problematization of objective truth and inherent suspicion towards global cultural narrative or meta-narrative. It involves the belief that many, if not all, apparent realities are only social constructs, as they are subject to change inherent to time and place. It emphasizes the role of language, power relations, and motivations; in particular it attacks the use of sharp classifications such as male versus female, straight versus gay, white versus black, and imperial versus colonial. Rather, it holds realities to be plural and relative, and dependant on who the interested parties are and what their interests consist in. It attempts to problematise modernist overconfidence, by drawing into sharp contrast the difference between how confident a speaker is of their position versus how confident they need to be to serve their supposed purposes. Postmodernism has influenced many cultural fields, including literary criticism, sociology, linguistics, architecture, visual arts, and music.

Postmodernist thought is an intentional departure from modernist approaches that had previously been dominant. The term “postmodernism” comes from its critique of the “modernist” scientific mentality of objectivity and progress associated with the Enlightenment.

These movements, modernism and postmodernism, are understood as cultural projects or as a set of perspectives. “Postmodernism” is used in critical theory to refer to a point of departure for works of literature, drama, architecture, cinema, journalism, and design, as well as in marketing and business and in the interpretation of law, culture, and religion in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Indeed, postmodernism, particularly as an academic movement, can be understood as a reaction to modernism in the Humanities. Whereas modernism was primarily concerned with principles such as identity, unity, authority, and certainty, postmodernism is often associated with difference, plurality, textuality, and skepticism.

The term was first used around the 1870s in various areas. For example, John Watkins Chapman avowed “a Postmodern style of painting” to get beyond French Impressionism. Then, J. M. Thompson, in his 1914 article in The Hibbert Journal (a quarterly philosophical review), used it to describe changes in attitudes and beliefs in the critique of religion: “The raison d’etre of Post-Modernism is to escape from the double-mindedness of Modernism by being thorough in its criticism by extending it to religion as well as theology, to Catholic feeling as well as to Catholic tradition.”

In 1917 Rudolf Pannwitz used the term to describe a philosophically oriented culture. His idea of post-modernism came from Nietzsche’s analysis of modernity and its end results of decadence and nihilism. Overcoming the modern human would be the post-human. Contrary to Nietzsche, Pannwitz also includes nationalist and mythical elements.

The term was used later in 1926 by B. I. Bell in his “Postmodernism & other Essays”. In 1921 and 1925 it had been used to describe new forms of art and music. In 1942 H. R. Hays used it for a new literary form, but as a general theory of an historical movement it was first used in 1939 by the historian Arnold J. Toynbee: “Our own Post-Modern Age has been inaugurated by the general war of 1914-1918.”

In 1949 the term was used to describe dissatisfaction with modern architecture, leading to the postmodern architecture movement. Postmodernism in architecture is marked by the re-emergence of surface ornament, reference to surrounding buildings in urban architecture, historical reference in decorative forms, and non-orthogonal angles. It may be a response to the modernist architectural movement known as theInternational Style.

The term was then applied to a whole host of movements, many in art, music, and literature, that reacted against a range of tendencies in the imperialist phase of capitalism called “modernism,” and are typically marked by revival of historical elements and techniques. Walter Truett Anderson identifies Postmodernism as one of four typological world views. These four worldviews are the Postmodern-ironist, which sees truth as socially constructed; the scientific-rational, in which truth is found through methodical, disciplined inquiry; the social-traditional, in which truth is found in the heritage of American and Western civilization; and the neo-romantic, in which truth is found through attaining harmony with nature and/or spiritual exploration of the inner self.

Postmodernist ideas in philosophy and the analysis of culture and society expanded the importance of critical theory and has been the point of departure for works of literature, architecture, and design, as well as being visible in marketing/business and the interpretation of history, law and culture, starting in the late 20th century. These developments — re-evaluation of the entire Western value system (love, marriage, popular culture, shift from industrial to service economy) that took place since the 1950s and 1960s, with a peak in the Social Revolution of 1968 — are described with the termPostmodernity,[10] as opposed to Postmodernism, a term referring to an opinion or movement. Whereas something being “Postmodernist” would make it part of the movement, its being “Postmodern” would place it in the period of time since the 1950s, making it a part of contemporary history.

QNO6:- Critcalb examine the feminist view of State and its relevance in lntemational Relations. OR Discuss Feminism war & peace. OR What is the Relevance of Feminist critiques in third world socities. OR What is the feminist approach to the study of Intemational Relations? Discuss.

ANS:-Feminism refers to movements aimed at establishing and defending equal political, economic, and social rights and equal opportunities for women. Its concepts overlap with those of women’s rights. Feminism is mainly focused on women’s issues, but because feminism seeks gender equality, some feminists argue that men’s liberation is therefore a necessary part of feminism, and that men are also harmed by sexism and gender roles. Feminists—that is, persons practicing feminism—can be persons of either sex.

Feminist theory emerged from these feminist movements and includes general theories and theories about the origins of inequality, and, in some cases, about the social construction of sex and gender, in a variety of disciplines. Feminist activists have campaigned for women’s rights—such as in contract, property, and voting—while also promoting women’s rights to bodily integrity and autonomy and reproductive rights. They have opposed domestic violence,sexual harassment, and sexual assault. In economics, they have advocated for workplace rights, including equal pay and opportunities for careers and to start businesses.

The movements and theoretical developments were historically led predominantly by middle-class white women from Western Europe and North America, but, since then, more women have proposed additional feminisms.

Approaches to Feminism

Feminist philosophy emerged in the US in the 1970s following only a decade behind the rise of the US women’s movement in the 1960s.Although Simone de Beauvoir published her now highly influential The Second Sex in 1953, it would take at least a decade for women in the US to begin to organize around the injustices Beauvoir identified, and even longer for feminist philosophers in the US to turn to her work for inspiration.

Although I will focus in this introductory essay on the emergence of contemporary US feminist philosophies, it is important to stress that this is only one chapter in a larger history of feminist philosophy. Feminist philosophies have histories that date back historically at least to the early modern period, and have different genealogies in different geographical regions. Both the history of and particular character of feminist philosophy in other countries and in other time periods varies in important and interesting ways. It is crucial, therefore, to understand this essay only as an introduction to contemporary feminist philosophies in the U.S.

Understanding the emergence of feminist philosophy in the U.S. requires an overview of at least two contexts — the political context of what came to be called the “second wave of the woman’s movement” and the nature of philosophy in U.S. academies.

The Political Context: The Rise of the U.S. Feminist Movement

The 1950s are a complex decade in the U.S. The country is at the height of the McCarthy era, yet it is the same decade that witnesses the rise of the Civil Rights Movement. In 1953 Barrows Dunham, chair of the philosophy department at Temple University is subpoenaed by the House Committee on Un-American Activities. Although he is tried and acquitted for refusing to provide more than his name, address, and age, Temple University fires him.A number of philosophers are called upon to testify before the HUAC and others are fired from positions because of their membership in the Communist Party. In 1955 Rosa Parks is arrested for keeping her seat in the front of a bus in Montgomery Alabama just one year after the Supreme Court in Brown vs. the Board of Education bans segregation in public schools. In 1957 Martin Luther King is named president of the newly formed Southern Christian Leadership Conference and begins his campaign to end race discrimination.

It is important to remember that 1950 is only five years into a campaign to encourage women to return to home and hearth, leaving the jobs they had taken on as part of the war effort.[1]As one telling example, consider Adlai Stevenson’s 1955 address to the Smith College graduating class urging these educated women not to define themselves by a profession but to participate in politics through the role of wife and mother. While McCarthyism rooted out political subversion, science and the media worked to instill proper gender roles. A 1956 Lifemagazine published interviews with five male psychiatrists who argued that female ambition was the root of mental illness in wives, emotional upsets in husbands, and homosexuality in boys.

But the increasing involvement of women in freedom marches and, somewhat later, the protests of the Vietnam War give rise to a budding awareness of gender injustices. Looking back in the 1975 edition to her landmark study of the U.S. Women’s Movement in 1959, Eleanor Flexner explains:

First in the South and eventually everywhere in this country, women were involved in these struggles. Some white women learned the degree to which black women were worse off than they were, or than black men. White and black women learned what the minority of women active in the organized labor movement had learned much earlier: that women were typically excluded from policy-making leadership roles of even the most radical movement, a lesson that would have to be relearned again and again in the political and peace campaigns of the late sixties (1975, xxix).

The National Organization for Women forms in 1966, petitioning to stop sex segregation of want ads and one year later to request federally funded childcare centers. By 1968 NOW begins to focus on legalizing abortion. In 1967 Eugene McCarthy introduces the Equal Rights Amendment in the Senate. In 1968 feminists in New York protest the Miss America pageant and crown a live sheep as Miss America and set up a ‘freedom trashcan’ in which to dispose of oppressive symbols, including bras, girdles, wigs, and false eyelashes. (Although there was no fire, it was this symbolic protest that the media transformed into the infamous ‘bra burning’ incident.) The Stonewall riot in 1969 marks the beginning of the gay and lesbian rights movement. In 1970 the San Francisco Women’s Liberation Front invades a CBS stockholders meeting to demand changes in how the network portrays women, and a model affirmative action plan is published by NOW and submitted to the Labor Department. In this same year three key texts of the U.S. feminist movement are published: Shulamith Firestone’s The Dialectic of Sex; Kate Millett’s Sexual Politics; and Robin Morgan’s Sisterhood is Powerful. In 1970 a press conference headed by women’s movement leaders Gloria Steinem, Ti-Grace Atkinson, Flo Kennedy, Sally Kempton, Susan Brownmiller, Ivy Bottini, and Dolores Alexander expressed solidarity with the struggles of gays and lesbians to attain liberation in a sexist society. However, in 1971, at a Women’s National Abortion conference, while adopting demands for repeal of all abortion laws, for no restrictions on contraceptives, and taking a stance against forced sterilization, the group votes down a demand for freedom of sexual expression, causing many in the audience to walk out in protest and seeding the development of a separatist movement within the feminist movement (See What is Feminism?).

It is out of this powerful social and political cauldron that feminist philosophy emerges in the U.S. While few would now dispute the claim that the development of ideas and theories in the sciences, as well as the social science and humanities, reflect and are influenced by their social, historical, and intellectual contexts, philosophers in the U.S. have, until recently, paid scant attention to the social contexts of twentieth century U.S. philosophy, particularly with how cultural and political factors have influenced the movements of philosophy within the academy (McCumber 2001). The emergence of feminist philosophy in the U.S. presents an excellent illustration of the close intersection between the development of philosophical positions and methods, and their social contexts.

The Rise of Feminist Philosophical Scholarship in the U.S.

Many of the early writings of U.S. feminist philosophers arose from attempts to grapple with issues that emerged from the women’s movement: the identification of the nature of sexism and the underlying causes of the oppression of women, questions of how to best obtain emancipation for women — e.g., equal rights within the current political and social structure vs. revolutionary changes of that structure, the issue of ‘woman’s nature,’ philosophical analyses of the morality of abortion, and so on. In this first decade of writing, feminist philosophers in the U.S. also turned their attention to the past to investigate how canonical philosophers dealt with the question of women, both to determine if their views might provide resources for addressing contemporary issues or whether the sexism of their theories continued to pervade contemporary philosophical and, perhaps, even social and political practices.

A snapshot, albeit a limited image, of the emergence of feminist philosophical scholarship in the U.S. and beyond can be obtained by looking at numbers of journal articles catalogued inThe Philosophers Index.[2] The Philosopher’s Index lists only three articles under the keyword ‘feminism’ until 1973 when the number leaps to eleven thanks in large part to a special issue of The Philosophical Forum edited by Carol Gould and Marx Wartofsky that became the basis for an important first anthology on feminist philosophy, Women and Philosophy: Toward a Theory of Liberation. From 1974 to 1980 these numbers increased to 109 entries for this seven year period, with the decade between 1981 to 1990 witnessing an explosion of work in the area of feminist philosophy with 718 entries listed in the Philosopher’s Index.In the following 12 years 2,058 more articles are added to the Index under this heading.

Clearly there are a number of reasons for the startling expansion of feminist philosophical work in the U.S. Although I cannot trace all of them, I would like to identify a few that are particularly significant. First is the fact that many philosophers in the U.S. were involved in the social justice movements of the 60s. Most of the philosophers who contributed to the emergence of feminist philosophy in the 70s in the U.S. were active in or influenced by the women’s movement. As a result of this participation, these philosophers were attentive to and concerned about the injustices caused by unfair practices emerging from the complex phenomena of sexism. Since their professional skills included the realm of philosophical scholarship and teaching, it comes as no surprise that they would turn the tools they knew best to feminist ends. Second, by the 1970s many women in traditionally male professions often experienced what Dorothy Smith called a ‘fault-line’ in which the expectations of the conventionally ‘proper role of women’ and their own professional experiences were in tension. As women moved through the profession of philosophy in the U.S. in increasing numbers, they often found themselves personally confronted by the sexism of the profession. Sexual harassment and other sexist practices contributed to creating a chilly climate for women in philosophy. But thanks to the consciousness raising of their involvement in the women’s movement, these women were less likely to internalize the message that women were, by nature, less capable of philosophical work or to give in to the sometimes unconscious efforts to exclude them from the profession.

In response to the sexism of the profession, U.S. feminist philosophers organized the Society for Women in Philosophy (SWIP) in 1972.[3] The emergence of SWIP is a third component in the swift rise in contemporary feminist philosophical scholarship in the U.S. SWIP was founded to promote and support women in philosophy. This goal took two forms: 1) working to overcome sexist practices in the profession and 2) supporting feminist philosophical scholarship. While the efforts of SWIP to overcome sexism in the profession certainly contributed to the inclusion and retention of more women in philosophy, it was in the latter goal that SWIP made a significant impact on scholarship. SWIP divisions were formed in a fashion parallel to the American Philosophical Association, with three divisions — Pacific SWIP, Midwest SWIP, and Eastern SWIP (plus a Canadian SWIP) — each of which held yearly or bi-yearly meetings that focused on feminist philosophical scholarship. In addition, the International Association of Feminist Philosophers (IAPh) was founded in 1974 in order to support international exchange of feminist philosophies.

After a decade of meetings, U.S. SWIP members decided to launch an academic journal, Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy. Hypatia was set up “to provide a forum for dialogue on the philosophical issues raised by the women’s liberation movement” and published feminist philosophical work committed “to understanding and ending the sexist oppression of women, and a sense of the relevance of philosophy to the task.”[4] While Hypatia was certainly not the only forum in which feminist philosophy was published, it contributed to the creation of a sustained dialogue amongst feminist philosophers in the U.S. and beyond, and a forum for developing feminist philosophical methods and approaches.

The Inheritance from Philosophy

Those who drafted the first wave of contemporary feminist philosophical scholarship in the U.S. were influenced by another very important context, their philosophical training. Until very recently one could not go to graduate school to study ‘feminist philosophy.’ While students and scholars could turn to the writings of Simone de Beauvoir or look back historically to the writings of ‘first wave’ feminists like Mary Wollstonecraft, most of the philosophers writing in the first decades of the emergence of feminist philosophical scholarship both in the U.S. and in other countries brought their particular training and expertise to bear on the development of this area of scholarship.

Although many of the writings of the first decade of feminist philosophical scholarship in the U.S. were devoted to analyzing issues raised by the women’s liberation movement, such as abortion, affirmative action, equal opportunity, the institutions of marriage, sexuality, and love, feminist philosophical scholarship increasingly focused on the very same types of issues philosophers had been and were dealing with. And since these feminist philosophers employed the philosophical tools they both knew best and found the most promising, U.S. feminist philosophy began to emerge from all the traditions of philosophy prevalent within the U.S. at the end of the twentieth century including analytic, Continental, and classical American philosophy. It should come as no surprise, and then that the thematic focus of their work was often influenced by the topics and questions highlighted by these traditions.

Feminist philosophical scholarship in the U.S. begins with attention to women, to their roles and locations. What are women doing? What social/political locations are they part of or excluded from? How do their activities compare to those of men? Are the activities or exclusions of some groups of women different from those of other groups and why? What do the various roles and locations of women allow or preclude? How have their roles been valued or devalued? How do the complexities of a woman’s situatedness, including her class, race, ability, and sexuality impact her locations? To this we add attention to the experiences and concerns of women. Have any of women’s experiences or problems been ignored or undervalued? How might attention to these transform our current methods or values?And from here we move to the realm of the symbolic. How is the feminine instantiated and constructed within the texts of philosophy? What role does the feminine play in forming, either through its absence or its presence, the central concepts of philosophy? And so on.

The ‘difference’ of feminist philosophical scholarship as it has developed in the U.S. proceeds not from a unique method but from the premise that gender is an important lens for analysis. Feminist philosophers in the U.S. and beyond have shown that taking gender seriously provides new insights in all the areas of philosophical scholarship: history of philosophy, epistemology, ethics, philosophy of science, aesthetics, social and political philosophy, metaphysics, etc.

Approaches to Feminist Philosophy: Overview of the Encyclopedia Sub-Entries

Feminist philosophical scholarship is not homogeneous either in methods or in conclusions. Indeed, there has been significant debate within feminist philosophical circles concerning the effectiveness of particular methods within philosophy for feminist goals. Some, for example, have found the methods of analytic philosophy to provide clarity of both form and argumentation not found in some schools of Continental philosophy, while others have argued that such alleged clarity comes at the expense of rhetorical styles and methodological approaches that provide insights into affective, psychic, or embodied components of human experience. Other feminists find approaches within American pragmatism to provide the clarity of form and argumentation sometimes missing in Continental approaches and the connection to real world concerns sometimes missing in analytic approaches.

While feminists have clearly embraced approaches from various traditions within philosophy, they have also argued for the reconfiguration of accepted structures and problematics of philosophy. For example, feminists have not only rejected the privileging of epistemological concerns over ethical concerns common to much of U.S. philosophy, they have argued that these two areas of concern are inextricably intertwined. This has often led to feminists using methods and approaches from more than one philosophical tradition.

The essays in this section provide overviews of the dominant approaches to feminist philosophy in the U.S. It is important to note that U.S. feminist philosophy has been influenced by feminist philosophical work in other countries. For example, analytic feminism in the U.S. has benefited from the work of feminist philosophers in the United Kingdom and Canada; U.S. Continental feminist scholarship has been richly influenced by the work of feminist philosophers in Europe and Australia. But it is also important to note that, with only a few exceptions, the work of feminist philosophers in Asia, South America, Africa, and Russia have not been the focus of attention of most U.S. feminist philosophers.

Characteristics of a Feminist Approach

Excerpt from Barbara F. McManus, Classics and Feminism: Gendering the Classics (New York: Twayne, 1997), 58-60:

I have never found a thoroughly satisfying “definition” of feminism in print, and in any case I believe that feminism is plural and dialogic rather than monolithic. I do think, however, that one can identify a sine qua non for feminism, and the following characteristics represent my criteria for distinguishing a feminist scholarly approach:

  • Feminist scholars differentiate sex from gender and view the latter as a socially/culturally constructed category. Gender is learned and performed; it involves the myriad and often normativemeanings given to sexual difference by various cultures. Feminists may differ in the importance they assign to sex, which is a biologically based category, but the idea that gender norms can be changed is central to feminist theory.
  • Although sex/gender systems differ cross-culturally, most known societies have used and still use sex/gender as a key structural principle organizing their actual and conceptual worlds, usually to the disadvantage of women. Hence feminist scholars argue that gender is a crucial category of analysis and that modes of knowledge which do not take gender into account are partial and incomplete.
  • Feminist scholars also seek to question and transform androcentric systems of thought which posit the male as the norm. In practice this means not only revealing and critiquing androcentric biases, but also attempting to examine beliefs and practices from the viewpoint of the “other,” treating women and other marginalized groups as subjects, not merely objects.
  • Feminists believe that existing inequalities between dominant and marginalized groups can and should be removed. Therefore feminist scholarship has an acknowledged and accepted political dimension, as opposed to the hidden political dimension of scholarship that claims to be “neutral” and “objective.” Although the commitment to feminist politics and organized feminist movements will not be equally stressed in all pieces of scholarship, it will never be denied or criticized (if it is, I would say that the approach is not feminist no matter what the author may claim). With regard to scholarship, the political goal of feminist work is broader than simply a stronger emphasis on women, though that is an important part of it; the goal is to revise our way of considering history, society, literature, etc. so that neither male nor female is taken as normative, but both are seen as equally conditioned by the gender constructions of their culture (as indeed we, the observers, are).

A scholarly focus on ancient women does not in itself make an approach feminist, since scholars can and do study women without accepting these premises. When I classify an approach as “nonfeminist,” I do not mean to imply that the scholarship is not valid or valuable; however, as a feminist who does accept the premises listed above, I will by definition see such scholarship as preliminary and incomplete.

QNO7:- Analyse the substance and significance of the ‘Environment – Development’ debate.OR Discuss the North-South Devide.

ANS:-Environmentalism is a broad philosophy and social movement regarding concerns for environmental conservation and improvement of the state of theenvironment. Environmentalism and environmental concerns are often represented by the color green.

Environmentalism as a social movement

Environmentalism can also be seen as a social movement that seeks to influence the political process by lobbying, activism, and education in order to protect natural resources and ecosystems. Anenvironmentalist is a person who may speak out about our natural environment and the sustainable management of its resources through changes in public policy or individual behavior by supporting practices such as not being wasteful. In various ways (for example, grassroots activism and protests), environmentalists and environmental organizations seek to give the natural world a stronger voice in human affairs.

 History of environmentalism

A concern for environmental protection has recurred in diverse forms, in different parts of the world, throughout history. For example, in the Middle East, the earliest known writings concerned with environmental pollution were Arabic medical treatises written during the “Arab Agricultural Revolution”, by writers such as Alkindus, Costa ben Luca, Rhazes, Ibn Al-Jazzar, al-Tamimi, al-Masihi,Avicenna, Ali ibn Ridwan, Isaac Israeli ben Solomon, Abd-el-latif, and Ibn al-Nafis. They were concerned with air contamination, water contamination, soil contamination, solid waste mishandling, andenvironmental assessments of certain localities.

In Europe, King Edward I of England banned the burning of sea-coal by proclamation in London in 1272, after its smoke had become a problem. The fuel was so common in England that this earliest of names for it was acquired because it could be carted away from some shores by the wheelbarrow. Air pollution would continue to be a problem in England, especially later during theIndustrial Revolution, and extending into the recent past with the Great Smog of 1952.

Environmental movement

The environmental movement (a term that sometimes includes the conservation and green movements) is a diverse scientific, social, and political movement. In general terms, environmentalists advocate the sustainable management of resources, and the protection (and restoration, when necessary) of the natural environment through changes in public policy and individual behavior. In its recognition of humanity as a participant in ecosystems, the movement is centered around ecology, health, and human rights. Though the movement is represented by a range of organizations, because of the inclusion of environmentalism in the classroom curriculum, the environmental movement has a younger demographic than is common in other social movements (see green seniors).

Environmentalism as a movement covers broad areas of institutional oppression. Examples of these oppressions are: consumption of ecosystems and natural resources into waste, dumping waste into disadvantaged communities, air pollution, and water pollution, and weak infrastructure, exposure of organic life to toxins, monoculture, and various other focuses. Because of these divisions, the environmental movement can be categorized into these primary focuses: Environmental Science, Environmental Activism, Environmental Advocacy, and Environmental Justice.

Free-market environmentalism

Free market environmentalism is a theory that argues that the free market, property rights, and tort law provide the best tools to preserve the health and sustainability of the environment. It considers environmental stewardship to be natural, as well as the expulsion of polluters and other aggressors through individual and class action.

Evangelical environmentalism

Evangelical environmentalism is an environmental movement in the United States in which some Evangelicals have emphasized biblical mandates concerning humanity’s role as steward and subsequent responsibility for the caretaking of Creation. While the movement has focused on different environmental issues, it is best known for its focus of addressing climate action from a biblically grounded theological perspective. The Evangelical Climate Initiative argues that human-induced climate change will have severe consequences and impact the poor the hardest, and that God’s mandate to Adam to care for the Garden of Eden also applies to evangelicals today, and that it is therefore a moral obligation to work to mitigate climate impacts and support communities in adapting to change.

Preservation and conservation

Environmental preservation in the United States and other parts of the world, including Australia, is viewed as the setting aside of natural resources to prevent damage caused by contact with humans or by certain human activities, such as logging, mining, hunting, and fishing, often to replace them with new human activities such as tourism and recreation. Regulations and laws may be enacted for the preservation of natural resources.

List of environmental organizations

Environmental organizations can be global, regional, national or local; they can be government-run or private (NGO). Environmentalist activity exists in almost every country. Moreover, groups dedicated to community development and social justice also focus on environmental concerns.

QNO8:- Explain the Environmental issues in India.

ANS:-Environmental issues in India

The rapid growing population and economic development is leading to a number of environmental issues in India because of the uncontrolled growth ofurbanization and industrialization, expansion and massive intensification of agriculture, and the destruction of forests.

Major environmental issues are Forest and Agricultural land degradation, Resource depletion (water, mineral, forest, sand, rocks etc.,), Environmental degradation, Public Health, Loss of Biodiversity,Loss of resilience in ecosystems, Livelihood Security for the Poor.

It is estimated that the country’s population will increase to about 1.26 billion by the year 2016. The projected population indicates that India will be the first most populous country in the world and China will be ranking second in the year 2050. India having 18% of the world’s population on 2.4% of world’s total area has greatly increased the pressure on its natural resources. Water shortages, soil exhaustion and erosion, deforestation, air and water pollution afflicts many areas.

India’s water supply and sanitation issues are related to many environmental issues.

Major issues

Environmental issues in India include various natural hazards, particularly cyclones and annual monsoon floods, population growth, increasing individual consumption, industrialization, infrastructural development, poor agricultural practices, and resource maldistribution have led to substantial human transformation of India’s natural environment. An estimated 60% of cultivated land suffers from soil erosion, waterlogging, and salinity. It is also estimated that between 4.7 and 12 billion tons of topsoil are lost annually from soil erosion. From 1947 to 2002, average annual per capita water availability declined by almost 70% to 1,822 cubic meters, and overexploitation of groundwater is problematic in the states of Haryana, Punjab, and Uttar Pradesh. Forest area covers 18.34% of India’s geographic area (637000 km²). Nearly half of the country’s forest cover is found in the state of Madhya Pradesh (20.7%) and the seven states of the northeast (25.7%); the latter is experiencing net forest loss. Forest cover is declining because of harvesting for fuel wood and the expansion of agricultural land. These trends, combined with increasing industrial and motor vehicle pollution output, have led to atmospheric temperature increases, shifting precipitation patterns, and declining intervals of drought recurrence in many areas.

The Indian Agricultural Research Institute of Parvati has estimated that a 3 °C rise in temperature will result in a 15 to 20% loss in annual wheat yields. These are substantial problems for a nation with such a large population depending on the productivity of primary resources and whose economic growth relies heavily on industrial growth. Civil conflicts involving natural resources—most notably forests and arable land—have occurred in eastern and northeastern states.

Water pollution

Out of India’s 3,119 towns and cities, just 209 have partial treatment facilities, and only 8 have full wastewater treatment facilities (WHO 1992). 114 cities dump untreated sewage and partially cremated bodies directly into the Ganges River. Downstream, the untreated water is used for drinking, bathing, and washing. This situation is typical of many rivers in India as well as other developing countries.

Open defecation is widespread even in urban areas of India.

Water resources have not therefore been linked to either domestic or international violent conflict as was previously anticipated by some observers. Possible exceptions include some communal violence related to distribution of water from the Kaveri River and political tensions surrounding actual and potential population displacements by dam projects, particularly on the Narmada River. Punjab is today another hotbed of pollution, for example, Buddha Nullah, a rivulet which run through Malwa region of Punjab, India, and after passing through highly populated Ludhiana district, before draining into Sutlej River, a tributary of the Indus river, is today an important case point in the recent studies, which suggest this as another Bhopal in making. A joint study by PGIMER and Punjab Pollution Control Board in 2008, revealed that in villages along the Nullah, calcium, magnesium, fluoride, mercury, beta-endosulphan and heptachlor pesticide were more than permissible limit (MPL) in ground and tap waters. Plus the water had high concentration of COD and BOD (chemical and biochemical oxygen demand), ammonia, phosphate, chloride, chromium, arsenic and chlorpyrifospesticide. The ground water also contains nickel and selenium, while the tap water has high concentration of lead, nickel and cadmium.[9]

The Mithi River, which flows through the city of Mumbai, is heavily polluted.

Air pollution

Indian cities are polluted by vehicles and industry emissions. Road dust due to vehicles also contributing up to 33% of air pollution In cities like Bangalore, around 50% of children suffer from asthma. India has emission standard of Bharat Stage II (Euro II) for vehicles since 2005.

One of the biggest causes of air pollution in India is from the transport system. Hundreds of millions of old diesel engines continuously burning away diesel which has anything between 150 to 190 times the amount of sulphur out European diesel has. Of course the biggest problems are in the big cities where there are huge concentrations of these vehicles. On the positive side, the government appears to have noticed this massive problem and the associated health risks for its people and is slowly but surely taking steps. The first of which was in 2001 when it ruled that its entire public transport system, excluding the trains, be converted from diesel to compressed gas (CPG). Electric rickshaws are being designed and will be subsidised by the government but the supposed ban on the cycle rikshaws in Delhi will require a huge increase on the reliance of other methods of transport, mainly those with engines.

Noise pollution

The Supreme Court of India gave a significant verdict on noise pollution in 2005. Unnecessary honking of vehicles makes for a high decibel level of noise in cities. The use of loudspeakers for political purposes and by temples and mosques make for noise pollution in residential areas.

Recently Government of India has set up norms of permissible noise levels in urban and rural areas. How they will be monitored and implemented is still not sure.

Land pollution

Land pollution in India is due to pesticides and fertilizers as well as corrosion In March 2009, the issue of Uranium poisoning in Punjab came into light, caused by fly ash ponds of thermal powerstations, which reportedly lead to severe birth defects in children in the Faridkot and Bhatinda districts of Punjab.


India, lying within the Indomalaya ecozone, hosts significant biodiversity; it is home to 7.6% of all mammalian, 12.6% of avian, 6.2% of reptilian, and 6.0% offlowering plant species.

In recent decades, human encroachment has posed a threat to India’s wildlife; in response, the system of national parks and protected areas, first established in 1935, was substantially expanded. In 1972, India enacted the Wildlife Protection Act and Project Tiger to safeguard crucial habitat; further federal protections were promulgated in the 1980s. Along with over 500 wildlife sanctuaries, India now hosts 14 biosphere reserves, four of which are part of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves; 25 wetlands are registered under the Ramsar Convention.

As the population in India is quite high it requires residence to live in for this builders destroy the greenery to make way for making buildings,colonies and complexes.

In the late 1980s, the Cold War came to a dramatic end. The economies of nations behind the Iron Curtain were in trouble. People in East Germany, for instance, could see the prosperity and wealth of their West German neighbors. In Russia, there were long lines of people waiting to buy food. They had to have coupons from the government just to buy socks. Some historians believe that the trillions of dollars that both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. spent on nuclear arms and conventional armies had caused the problems in Russia. There was also a lot of pent up demand for freedom in the citizens living behind the Iron Curtain.

These forces came to a head in the 1980s. Russia responded by electing Mikhail Gorbachev as the leader of the U.S.S.R. The new leader decided to loosen the repression on liberties that the old governments had used to keep people in line. The new leaders found they couldn’t control the desires of their people and those in Iron Curtain countries.

QNO9:- Describe the circumstances leading to the termination of the’Cold War’.OR Trace the origin and evolution of the ‘cold war’.OR Explain the End of the Cold War.

ANS:-In 1992, Offutt Air Base faced monumental changes when the easing of world tensions allowed the United States to reorganize its Air Force. After 46 years, SAC was deactivated on June 1, 1992, and a new, unified command, STRATCOM was activated. The beginning of STRATCOM coincided with the change from a world with two super-powers facing each other to a world with one super-power and many other powerful nations and coalitions of power.

STRATCOM controls the U.S. nuclear arsenal in case of another war. Offutt’s 55th Air Wing flies reconnaissance missions throughout the world. The 55th remains the largest wing in the U.S. Air Combat Command. STRATCOM has the responsibility for weapons on nuclear alert, including land- and sea-based ballistic missiles, long range bombers, and air-refueling tankers, controlling all of the nuclear weapons that are at the disposal of the U.S. Air Force and Navy around the world.

When STRATCOM began, theLooking Glass flights became a joint Air Force and Navy operation. Personnel from both services provide round-the-clock, survivable, alternate command of strategic forces during national emergencies.

In fact, all of STRATCOM is now a joint operation with personnel from all four services — Air Force, Navy, Army, and Marines. Yet, for all the changes, the mission remains the same — to deter a military attack on the United States and its allies, and should deterrence fail, employ forces so as to achieve national objectives. Other responsibilities include:

  • providing intelligence on countries and other entities possessing or seeking weapons of mass destruction
  • providing support to other combatant command commanders
  • developing a Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP) that fully satisfies national guidance
  • monitoring the readiness of SIOP committed forces
  • Commanding, controlling, and employing assigned forces.

Throughout the 1980s, the Soviet Union fought an increasingly frustrating war in Afghanistan. At the same time, the Soviet economy faced the continuously escalating costs of the arms race. Dissent at home grew while the stagnant economy faltered under the combined burden. Attempted reforms at home left the Soviet Union unwilling to rebuff challenges to its control in Eastern Europe. During 1989 and 1990, the Berlin Wall came down, borders opened, and free elections ousted Communist regimes everywhere in eastern Europe. In late 1991 the Soviet Union itself dissolved into its component republics. With stunning speed, the Iron Curtain was lifted and the Cold War came to an end.

During the Cold War, the United States invested heavily in submarine technology to counter a much larger Soviet submarine force. Technological superiority proved a winning but expensive strategy. How expensive is hard to say. Determining the cost of any advanced military technological system produced in relatively small numbers raises complex problems. There are no price lists for nuclear-powered submarines. A 1998 study estimated that the United States spent $2 trillion in 1996 dollars (to account for inflation) on all strategic nuclear forces throughout the Cold War. Submarines took about one-third the total: $320.5 billion for the ballistic-missile submarine program, plus $97 billion for the missiles; $46 billion for the submarine share of naval nuclear propulsion research, development, testing, production, and operations; and $220 billion for attack submarine construction, weapons, and related systems.

Nuclear-powered submarines also took almost one-third of the Navy’s shipbuilding funds between 1952 and 1991—19% for fast attacks, 12% for boomers—and, at peak strength, comprised just under one-third of the U.S. Navy’s fighting fleet. Although submarines cost relatively more than surface ships to buy, they are cheaper to operate. Not only do submarines have smaller crews, the purchase price includes the cost of fuel. Nuclear-powered submarines steam for years between refuelings while conventionally powered warships must refill their fuel tanks every few days.

American attempts to develop underwater boats achieved some success during the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. Unfortunately, such boats usually proved more dangerous to their crews than their targets. Only in the 1890s did John Holland and Simon Lake develop practical submersible boats. The U.S. Navy purchased its first submarine from Holland on 11 April 1900, the traditional birthday of the U.S. Submarine Force.

Quickly adopted by nations throughout the world, improved submarines influenced the course of both world wars, though they remained essentially surface ships able to hide only temporarily under water. During World War II, the U.S. force of large, fast, long-range fleet submarines played a major role in winning the Pacific war by sinking so much Japanese shipping. In the ten years after the war, a series of technological innovations, culminating in nuclear propulsion, transformed the submarine into a true underwater boat, faster beneath the surface than above and able to remain submerged indefinitely.

QNO:-10 Criticallv examine the post Cold’ War challenges to international peace & security. OR Critically examine the post-Second World War strategies to promote nuclear non-prolileration.

ANS:-Major Post-Cold War Issues

  • New Power Arrangement Replacing CW Competition?
  • �Dollar Block vs. German Mark Block vs. Yen Block?
  • �Role of NAFTA agreement & European Free Trade area
  • �British vs. German disagreement over currency rules
  • �Recent fall of dollar (Euro ($1.33 = 1 Euro as of 11/04)
  • �Clash of Civilizations (Samuel P. Huntingtons thesis)?
  • �Division along religious, ethnic, & cultural lines
  • �Role of Islamic Fundamentalism
  • �Counter arguments: sub-divisions within groups
  • �Iraqi Sunni vs. Iranian Shia
  • �Serbian Orthodox vs. Croatian Roman Catholics
  • �Age of Fragmentation (IAW Text)
  • �Role of the computer & Internet
  • �Rapid dissemination of info => Impact on power?
  • �New Communication of post-industrial era (1970s=>)
  • �Impact on Soviet Union why?
  • �Role of mega-corporations & $1.5T global movement
  • �Post Cold Wars fragmentation and its impact
  • �Money, ethnic rivalry, religious hatreds, territorial dispute
  • �Winners (North) vs. losers (South)
  • �Impact of unrestrained capitalism
  • �Social justice vs. unrestrained competition
  • �Globalization & its impact
  • �Free flow of capital, info, & trade
  • �Corporate leverage seeking cheap labor
  • �Economic dislocation (that sucking sound)
  • �Role of NGOs (impact on Nike & Reebok)
  • Can Nuclear Weapons be controlled?
  • �Spread of Nuclear Weapons to other states
  • �Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran (?)
  • �Potential crises close to surface=> catastrophe
  • �Attempted nuclear material smuggling
  • �Especially out of former USSR nuclear plants
  • �Chemical and Biological weapons stockpiles
  • �Libya, Egypt, Iran, China, & Iraq (?)
  • �US power to enforce NPT limited
  • �Israel, India, and Pakistan outside NPT
  • �Iran insists its nuclear use intentions are for energy
  • �any disconnect with that assertion?
  • �US moral authority questioned by Text (Lafeber)
  • �(US is worlds largest conventional arms supplier)
  • �$21 Billion sales in 1991
  • UN role in limiting rising disorder & nuclear proliferation?
  • �UN successful peacekeeping operations since 1980s
  • �El Salvador, Angola, Cambodia, Iran-Iraq War
  • �Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan
  • �Exception: Africa (Rwanda), and Bosnia failures
  • �UN main problem: member mistrust of UN HQ staff
  • �US- GOP critics (Led by Jesse Helms during 1990s)=>
  • �Inefficient bureaucracy with anti-US agenda
  • �Withheld $Billion+ of member dues in UN support
  • �Also condemned by Soviet critics as supranational
  • �Clinton admin initially optimistic=> then disappointed
  • �Fell short of expectations for US overseas policies

Ability to deal w/post-Cold Wars greatest danger (IAW Text)?

  • �Post Cold War nuclear disasters:
  • �Chernobyl (1986) + 3 major radioactive leaks (1993)
  • �Major oil spills (EXON Valdez) + others off Europe
  • �Persian Gulf War- Kuwaiti oil well fires by Iraqis (1991)
  • �Starvation of rising populations in Africa (Somalia/Sudan)
  • �Drought and disappearance of arable land for food
  • �Post Cold War Russia=> environmental threat to neighbors
  • �Half population of affected regions=> 33% has cancer
  • �Southern Urals=> 80% villagers suffer chronic illness
  • �Genetic code of Tatars altered=> malformed at birth
  • �North American environmental problems:
  • �Industrial & Agro toxins flow into Great Lakes
  • �Increased rates of male sterility link cited
  • �Physical disabilities in children & female breast cancer
  • �Waste gases such as CO2 into atmosphere by US
  • �Ineffective compliance w/1992 Rio Agreement
  • �Population growth=> global linkage & environment impact
  • �While natural resources decline, world populations grow:
  • �1960 (3 billion)=> 1990 (6 billion)=> 2050 (10 billion)
  • �Growing division between haves of North & poor of South
  • �Global village => 24% are hungry (European expert)
  • �20th Wars (especially in 3rdWorld) fought over what?
  • �What will 21stcentury wars are fought over? (Text)
  • �World Bank funding limitations for global (?) projects
  • �Increasing demand by developing world for oil & gas:
  • �Fossil fuels needed for industrialization (China especially)
  • �Impact on global supply available=> rising oil prices
  • �Recent decline in dollar (one $ = .75 Euro -11/04)
  • �Potential implications on US economy
  • �Oil producer’s potential shift to Euro?
  • �Impact on global environment=> Greenhousegases
  • �Exact cause debated butair temperatures are rising
  • �Another possible cause is deforestation & its impact
  • American peoples preparation for post-Cold War world?
  • �Changing nature of crises & the strength of US society
  • �Heeding the USSRs experience=> rotting from inside out
  • �Contrasted w/Japan & Germany rise to $ power (50-90s)
  • �Educated workforce, intelligent bureaucracy
  • �Long term economic planning & high savings rate
  • �Capital for economic investment(in US during 90s)
  • �Contrasted w/rising US consumer & government debt
  • �Inherent American problems rooted in US History:
  • �How to adjust to postindustrial technology=> deal with:
  • �Creation of instant communication
  • �Fragmentation of political & economic power
  • �Giant multinational corporations & cartels
  • �Past historical American experience with major change:
  • �Industrial revolution (1880s-1890s)=> results:
  • �Economic dislocation, crisis, and job loss
  • �Racial tensions & populist revolts
  • �new political parties & imperialist FP


  • �American political system & its intelligent implementation
  • �Balancing efficiency and fairness:
  • �Successful foreign policy (FP) requires:
  • �Consistency, secrecy, & concern for larger interests
  • �Tocquevilles observation of 1830s wrt diplomacy?
  • �Inconsistent public opinion (also rapidly changes)
  • �Public that tells what it knows (and doesnt know)
  • �Focus on individual (& factional) $$$ interests
  • �Creating consensus within democratic system:
  • �Major challenge for effective democratic support of FP
  • �Role of Truman Doctrine during 1947-1989
  • �Nation united to stop spread & threat of what?
  • �Ike through Reagan used for popular support of FP
  • �Bush & Clintons challenge after 1990 wrt FP?
  • �Role of Truman Doctrine during post-CW era?
  • �The Tocqueville problem=> creating consensus
  • �Rise of job losses (1970-2000) & Greece, NY solution?
  • �American peoples knowledge of the world & FP issues:
  • �Foreign aid as a percentage of the Federal Budget?
  • �Public opinion vs. percentage of Medicare costs?
  • �Three Stooges vs. three of 9 Supreme Court Justices?
  • �US schoolchildren ranking in history, math, & science?
  • �US politicians reflect above lack of FP understanding:
  • �GOP contract with America=> primary focus?
  • �Ignoring growing linkage between domestic & FP
  • �NATO expansion vs. 66% cut in NATO funding
  • �Recent measured reversal in above trend from 2000:
  • �US troops under UN commander for peacekeeping
  • �Still very controversial (especially with military)
  • �US Corporations recent requirements for job applicants:
  • �More knowledge and experience in global affairs
  • �Why? As result: growing gap grows between who?
  • �Post 11 September 2001 change in publics FP attitude
  • �More aware & involved=> Terror & war in Iraq
  • �Dealing with global unpredictability
  • �Greater reliance on US military superiority
  • �Initial willingness of Bush II Admin to go it alone
  • �Irony of post Cold War era?
  • �Less threat of Thermonuclear War & mass destruction
  • �Increasing political instability & greater terror threat
  • �Historic seedbeds of war: Central & Eastern Europe
  • �Seedbeds of Terror: Middle East & North Africa
  • �Gorbachevs warning at Fulton and its significance?
  • �Revisionist argument with some qualification
  • �Soviet post-WWII situation & Stalins error?
  • �How did West react and what resulted?
  • �Potential for falling victim to the 1914 model?
  • �Growing gap between wealthy North vs. poor South
  • �Growing problem of exaggerated nationalism?
  • �Do you agree or not with his call for stronger UN?
  • �How should we deal w/rising disorder & fragmentation?

QNO11:-Discuss the main approaches to understand middle powers. OR Explain the principle of behavioral middle powers. OR Discuss the relocation of the idea of middle powers & emerging powers. OR Discuss the main approaches for understanding the middle powers.

ANS:-The term emerging powers is a recognition of the rising, primarily economic, influence of a group of nations who have recently increased their presence in global affairs. They aspire to more assertive roles on the international stage and possess sufficient resources that such goals are potentially achievable.

Although there is no exact delineation of membership, the term is often used to include the eleven countries (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, South Africa,South Korea and Turkey) whom, along with the G8 members, form the G20.

Which countries, if any, will join the ranks of the great powers in the coming decades? The Emerging Powers Program attempts to answer this question by examining the strategic and economic prospects of three regional powers žIndia, Brazil, and South Africa žas they aspire toward a more assertive role on the world stage. To what extent do these countries have the size, the resources and the will to achieve great power status? They are the largest democracies with the biggest economies in their respective regions žSouth America, South Asia and Southern Africa. Each of these countries aspires to play a wider role at the global level. They all have the option of becoming nuclear weapons states, whether or not they exercise it. And though each counts the United States as an important foreign investor and trade partner, they have all asserted a more independent role vis-à-vis the superpower through new linkages and expanded trade relations with other parts of the world.

To address this issue, the program, directed by Senior Fellow Armando Bravo Martínez, has established a network of professionals from the academic, media, financial, business and NGO communities in Brazil, India, South Africa and the United States to explore differences and build consensus on a variety of global policy issues. This network includes three country teams made up of individuals and institutions from around the globe: Dr. Gilson Schwartz, the Center on International Relations, University of São Paulo; Drs. Kanti Bajpai and Varun Sahni, the School of International Affairs, Jawaharlal Nehru University; Dr. Mira Kamdar, Senior Fellow and India Director, World Policy Institute; and Dr. Chis Landsberg at the Center for Policy Studies, University of Witwatersrand.

These experts from Brazil, India and South Africa have made significant contributions to the program over the past three years, hosting in-country workshops, participating in electronic forums, and writing policy papers on important regional and global policy issues. An international advisory committee composed of scholars, business and finance professionals, and journalists and policymakers including the Honorable Bowman Cutter, Warburg Pincus; Dr. Joseph Stiglitz, Stanford University; and Marshall Bouton, president of the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, provides the program with interdisciplinary guidance and support.

The growing economic and demographic weight of Brazil, India, China, South Africa (BICS) and others, is source of uncertainties and is challenging the global governance system. Whether they will be cooperative or competitive powers in the international system is going to design the future global governance of public goods.

In order to provide new insights into the BICS and other new world leaders contribution to a range of sustainable development issues as well as thematic overview of key global public goods, the Institut du développement durable et des relations internationales (IDDRI, Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations), in partnership with the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University (SIPA), and the support of La Maison de l’Amérique Latine and Alliance program, will host a high level conference on Emerging powers in global governance in Paris, on 6-7 July 2007.
The conference will draw on the best available ideas at the international level and will provide the opportunity to interact with the incoming French government on international policy. This conference will gather speakers and participants coming from either academic, political, business or NGO sectors.
The conference will be organized in plenary sessions and workshops prepared in partnership with key NGOs or research centres.

QNO12:-Discuss the historical background of the Regional Groupings in the recent years. OR Give the reasons for the fornetion economic groupings in recent years. OR Explain briefly the reasons for the fornetion of political / security groupings.

ANS:-The member states of the United Nations are unofficially divided into five geopolitical regional groupings. What began as an informal means of sharing the distribution of posts for General Assembly committees has taken on a much more expansive role. Depending on the UN context, regional groups control elections to UN-related positions, dividing up the pie on the basis of geographic representation, as well as coordinate substantive policy, and form common fronts for negotiations and voting.

  • African Group
  • Asian Group
  • Eastern European Group
  • Latin American and Caribbean Group
  • Western European and Others Group
  • Non-UN state or territory

As of 2010, the 192 UN member states are divided into five groups:

  • the African Group, with 53 member states.
  • the Asian Group, with 53 member states;
  • the Eastern European Group, with 23 member states;
  • the Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC), with 33 member states;
  • the Western European and Others Group(WEOG), with 28 member states (plus

The regional groups

African Group

The African Group has 53 members (28% of all UN members), and as such shares the position of the largest regional group by number of member states with the Asian Group. It is the only regional group that has a territory that coincides with the traditional continent of which its name originates. The African Group has 3 seats on the Security Council, all non-permanent, and is eligible for having its nationals elected as President of the United Nations General Assembly in years ending with 4 and 9; most recently, Ali Treki of Libya was elected to this position in 2009.

Asian Group

The Asian Group has 53 members (28% of all UN members), and as such shares the position of the largest regional group by number of member states with the African Group. Its territory is mostly that of the continent from which it borrows its name; the differences arise from Russia and the Caucasian states being members of the Eastern European Group, all the UN members located in Oceania(except for Australia and New Zealand) being members of the Asian Group, while Israel and Turkey are members of the Western European and Others Group. The Asian Group has 3 seats on the Security Council: the permanent seat of China, and two non-permanent seats. It is eligible for having its nationals elected as President of the United Nations General Assembly in years ending with 1 and 6; most recently, Haya Rashed Al-Khalifa of Bahrain was elected to this position in 2006.

Eastern European Group

The Eastern European Group has 23 members (12% of all UN members), and as such is the regional group with the least number of member states. The Eastern European Group has 2 seats on the Security Council; the permanent seat of Russia and one non-permanent seat. It is eligible for having its nationals elected as President of the United Nations General Assembly in years ending with 2 and 7; most recently, Srgjan Kerim of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was elected to this position in 2007.

Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)

The Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC for short) has 33 members (17% of all UN members). Its territory is almost exactly that of South and Central America and the Caribbean; the differences arise from the presence of dependent territories of European countries. GRULAC has 2 non-permanent seats on the Security Council. It is eligible for having its nationals elected as President of the United Nations General Assembly in years ending with 3 and 8; most recently, Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann of Nicaragua was elected to this position in 2008.

Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

The Western European and Others Group (WEOG for short) has 28 members (15% of all UN members). It has a territory divided practically dispersed on all of the continents. WEOG has 5 seats on the Security Council, three permanent ones (France, United Kingdom, United States), and two non-permanent ones. It is eligible for having its nationals elected as President of the United Nations General Assembly in years ending with 0 and 5; most recently, Joseph Deiss of Switzerland is elected to this position in 2010.


A criticism of the regional grouping system is the pressure brought to bear on members to vote consistent with the majority of their regional group. For countries which may have political differences, this can weaken their negotiating positions on a number of issues and an inability to be elected to key leadership positions in the UN.

QNO13:- What in your view are the core characteristics of the current process of globalisation? OR What do you mean by Globalisation? Critically examine the contrasting protagonists & the critics of Globalization. OR Discuss the International Relations theory towards Globalization.

ANS:-Globalisation (or globalization) describes the process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have become integrated through a global network of political ideas through communication, transportation, and trade. The term is most closely associated with the term economic globalization: the integration of national economies into the international economy through trade,foreign direct investment, capital flows, migration, the spread of technology, and military presence. However, globalization is usually recognized as being driven by a combination of economic, technological, sociocultural, political, and biological factors. The term can also refer to the transnational circulation of ideas, languages, or popular culture through acculturation. An aspect of the world which has gone through the process can be said to be globalised.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word ‘globalization’ was first employed in a publication entitled Towards New Education in 1952, to denote a holistic view of human experience in education. An early description of globalization was penned by the American entrepreneur-turned-minister Charles Taze Russell who coined the term ‘corporate giants’ in 1897, although it was not until the 1960s that the term began to be widely used by economists and other social scientists. The term has since then achieved widespread use in the mainstream press by the later half of the 1980s. Since its inception, the concept of globalization has inspired numerous competing definitions and interpretations, with antecedents dating back to the great movements of trade and empire across Asia and the Indian Ocean from the 15th century onwards.

Effects summary

Globalization has various aspects which affect the world in several different ways

Industrial – emergence of worldwide production markets and broader access to a range of foreign products for consumers and companies. Particularly movement of material and goods between and within national boundaries. International trade in manufactured goods increased more than 100 times (from $95 billion to $12 trillion) in the 50 years since 1955. China’s trade with Africa rose sevenfold during 2000-07 alone.

Financial – emergence of worldwide financial markets and better access to external financing for borrowers. By the early part of the 21st century more than $1.5 trillion in national currencies were traded daily to support the expanded levels of trade and investment. As these worldwide structures grew more quickly than any transnational regulatory regime, the instability of the global financial infrastructure dramatically increased, as evidenced by the Financial crisis of 2007–2010.


Cultural effects

Globalization has influenced the use of language across the world. This street in Hong Kong, a former British colony, shows various signs, a few of which incorporate both Chinese and British English.

“Culture” is defined as patterns of human activity and the symbols that give these activities significance. Culture is what people eat, how they dress, the beliefs they hold, and the activities they practice. Globalization has joined different cultures and made it into something different.

Culinary culture has become extensively globalized. For example, Japanese noodles, Swedish meatballs, Indian curry, French cheese, and American burgers and fries have become popular outside their countries of origin. Two American companies, McDonald’s and Starbucks, are often cited as examples of globalization, with over 31,000 and 18,000 locations operating worldwide, respectively.

Another common practice brought about by globalization is the usage of Chinese characters in tattoos. These tattoos are popular with today’s youth despite the lack of social acceptance of tattoos in China. Also, there is a lack of comprehension in the meaning of Chinese characters that people get, making this an example of cultural appropriation.

The internet breaks down cultural boundaries across the world by enabling easy, near-instantaneous communication between people anywhere in a variety of digital forms and media. The Internet is associated with the process of cultural globalization because it allows interaction and communication between people with very different lifestyles and from very different cultures. Photo sharing websites allow interaction even where language would otherwise be a barrier.

The democratizing effect of communications (esp. the internet)

Exchange of information via the internet is playing a major role in the democratization of many countries.

Economic liberalization

According to Jagdish Bhagwati, a former adviser to the U.N. on globalization, although there are obvious problems with overly-rapid development, globalization is a very positive force that lifts countries out of poverty. According to him, it causes a virtuous economic cycle associated with faster economic growth. .

Workers in developing countries now have more occupational choices then ever before. Educated workers in developing countries are able to compete on the global job market for high paying jobs. Production workers in developing countries are not only able to compete; they have a strong advantage over their counterparts in the industrialized world. This translates into increased opportunity. Workers have the choice of emigrating and taking jobs in industrial countries or staying at home to work in outsourced industries. In addition, the global economy provides a market for the products of cottage industry, providing more opportunities.

Globalization has generated significant international opposition over concerns that it has increased inequality and environmental degradation. In theMidwestern United States, globalization has eaten away at its competitive edge in industry and agriculture, lowering the quality of life.

Some also view the effect of globalization on culture as a rising concern. Along with globalization of economies and trade, culture is being imported and exported as well. The concern is that thestronger, bigger countries such as the United States, may overrun the other, smaller countries’ cultures, leading to those customs and values fading away. This process is also sometimes referred to asAmericanization or McDonaldization.


Economic globalization can be measured in different ways. These centers around the four main economic flows that characterize globalization:

  • Goodsand services, e.g., exportsplus imports as a proportion of national income or per capita of population
  • Labor/people, e.g., net migrationrates; inward or outward migration flows, weighted by population
  • Capital, e.g., inward or outward direct investment as a proportion of national income or per head of population

Technology, e.g., international research & development flows; proportion of populations (and rates of change thereof) using particular inventions (especially ‘factor-neutral’ technological advances such as the telephone, motorcar, broadband)

As globalization is not only an economic phenomenon, a multivariate approach to measuring globalization is the recent index calculated by the Swiss think tank KOF. The index measures the three main dimensions of globalization: economic, social, and political. In addition to three indices measuring these dimensions, an overall index of globalization and sub-indices referring to actual economic flows, economic restrictions, and data on personal contact, data on information flows, and data on cultural proximity is calculated. Data is available on a yearly basis for 122 countries, as detailed in Dreher, Gaston and Martens (2008). According to the index, the world’s most globalized country is Belgium, followed by Austria, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The least globalized countries according to the KOF-index are Haiti, Myanmar, the Central African Republic and Burundi.

A.T. Kearney and Foreign Policy Magazine jointly publish another Globalization Index. According to the 2006 index, Singapore, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Canada and Denmark are the most globalized, while Indonesia, India and Iran are the least globalized among countries listed.

International social forum

The first World Social Forum in 2001 was an initiative of the administration of Porto Alegre, Brazil. The slogan of the forum was “Another World Is Possible”. It was here that the WSF’s Charter of Principles was adopted to provide a framework for the fora.

The WSF became a periodic meeting: in 2002 and 2003 it was held again in Porto Alegre and became a rallying point for worldwide protest against the American invasion of Iraq. In 2004 it was moved to Mumbai, India, to make it more accessible to the populations of Asia and Africa. This last appointment saw the participation of 75,000 delegates.

Regional fora took place following the example of the WSF, adopting its Charter of Principles. The first European Social Forum was held in November 2002 in Florence. The slogan was “Against thewar, against racism and against neo-liberalism”. It saw the participation of 60,000 delegates and ended with a huge demonstration against the war of 1,000,000 people according to the organizers. The other two ESFs took place in Paris and London, in 2003 and 2004 respectively.

Recentlythere has been some discussion behind the movement about the role of the social forums. Some see them as a “popular university”, an occasion to make many people aware of the problems of globalization. Others would prefer that delegates concentrate their efforts on the coordination and organization of the movement and on the planning of new campaigns. However it has often been argued that in the dominated countries (most of the world) the WSF is little more than an ‘NGO fair’ driven by Northern NGOs and donors most of which are hostile to popular movements of the poor.

QNO:-14 critically examine the issues which are bringing responsible for International Inequities. OR Describe the various processes of divergence leading to the International Inequities. OR critically evaluate the convergence processes of International Inequities.

ANS:-International relations theory attempts to provide a conceptual framework upon which international relations can be analyzed. Ole Holsti describes international relations theories act as a pair of coloured sunglasses, allowing the wearer to see only the salient events relevant to the theory. An adherent of realism may completely disregard an event that a constructivist might pounce upon as crucial, and vice versa. The three most popular theories are realism, liberalism and constructivism.

International relations theories can be divided into “positivist/rationalist” theories which focus on a principally state-level analysis, and “post-positivist/reflectivist” ones which incorporate expanded meanings of security, ranging from class, to gender, to postcolonial security. Many often conflicting ways of thinking exist in IR theory, including constructivism, institutionalism, Marxism, neo-Gramscianism, and others. However, two positivist schools of thought are most prevalent: realism and liberalism; though increasingly, constructivism is becoming mainstream and postpositivisttheories are increasingly popular, particularly outside the United States.

The study of International relations as theory can be traced to E.H. Carr’s “The Twenty Years’ Crisis” which was published in 1939 and to Hans Morgenthau’s “Politics Among Nations” published in 1948. International relations as a discipline are believed to have emerged after the First World War with the establishment of a Chair of International Relations at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth. Early international relations scholarship in the Interwar years focused on the need for the balance of power system to be replaced with a system of collective security. These thinkers were later described as “Idealists”. The leading critique of this school of thinking was the “realist” analysis offered by Carr.

Realism in international relations theory

Realism or political realism has been the dominant theory of international relations since the conception of the discipline. The theory claims to rely upon an ancient tradition of thought which includes writers such as Thucydides, Machiavelli, and Rousseau. Early realism can be characterized as a reaction against interwar idealist thinking. The outbreak of World War II was seen by realists as evidence of the deficiencies of idealist thinking. There are various strands of modern day realist thinking. However, the main tenets of the theory have been identified as statism, survival, and self-help.

Neorealism in international relations

Neorealism or structural realism is a development of realism advanced by Kenneth Waltz in Theory of International Politics. It is, however, only one strand of neorealism. Joseph Grieco has combined neo-realist thinking with more traditional realists. This strand of theory is sometimes called “modern realism”. Waltz’s neorealism contends that the effect of structure must be taken into account in explaining state behavior. Structure is defined twofold as a) the ordering principle of the international system which is anarchy and b) the distribution of capabilities across units. Waltz also challenges traditional realism’s emphasis on traditional military power, instead characterizing power in terms of the combined capabilities of the state.

Liberal international relations theory

The precursor to liberal international relations theory was “idealism”. Idealism (or utopianism) was a term applied in a critical manner by those who saw themselves as ‘realists’, for instance E. H. Carr. Idealism in international relations usually refers to the school of thought personified in American diplomatic history by Woodrow Wilson, such that it is sometimes referred to as “Wilsonianism.” Idealism holds that a state should make its internal political philosophy the goal of its foreign policy. For example, an idealist might believe that ending poverty at home should be coupled with tackling poverty abroad. Wilson’s idealism was a precursor to liberal international relations theory, which would arise amongst the “institution-builders” after World War II.

Neoliberalism in international relations

Neoliberalism, liberal institutionalism or neo-liberal institutionalism is an advancement of liberal thinking. It argues that international institutions can allow nations to successfully cooperate in the international system.

Constructivism in international relations

Constructivism, social constructivism or idealism has been described as a challenge to the dominance of neo-liberal and neo-realist international relations theories. Michael Barnett describes constructivist international relations theories as being concerned with how ideas define international structure, how this structure defines the interests and identities of states and how states and non-state actors reproduce this structure. The key tenet of constructivism is the belief that “International politics is shaped by persuasive ideas, collective values, culture, and social identities”. Constructivism argues that international reality is socially constructed by cognitive structures which give meaning to the material world. The theory emerged out of debates concerning the scientific method of international relations theories and theories role in the production of international power

Marxism and Critical Theory

Marxist and Neo-Marxist international relations theories are structuralist paradigms which reject the realist/liberal view of state conflict or cooperation; instead focusing on the economic and material aspects. Marxist approaches argue the position of historical materialism and make the assumption that the economic concerns transcend others; allowing for the elevation of class as the focus of study. Marxists view the international system as an integrated capitalist system in pursuit of capital accumulation. A sub-discipline of Marxist IR is Critical Security Studies. Gramscian approaches rely on the ideas of Italian Antonio Gramsci whose writings concerned the hegemony that capitalism holds as an ideology. Marxist approaches have also inspired Critical Theorists such as Robert Cox who argues that “Theory is always for someone and for some purpose”.

Feminism and international relations theory

Feminist approaches to international relations became popular in the early 1990s. Such approaches emphasises that women’s experiences continue to be excluded from the study of international relations. International Relations Feminists who argue that gender relations are integral to international relations focus on the role of diplomatic wives and marital relationship that facilitate sex trafficking. Early feminist IR approaches were part of the “Third Great Debate” between positivists and post-positivists. They argued against what they saw as the positivism and state-centrism of mainstream international relations. Argues that these approaches did not describe what a feminist perspective on world politics would look like.

English school of international relations theory

The ‘English School’ of international relations theory, also known as International Society, Liberal Realism, Rationalism or the British institutionalists, maintains that there is a ‘society of states’ at the international level, despite the condition of ‘anarchy’ (literally the lack of a ruler or world state). Despite being called the English School many of the academics from this school were neither English or from the United Kingdom. A great deal of the work of the English School concerns the examination of traditions of past international theory, casting it, as Martin Wight did in his 1950s-era lectures at the London School of Economics, into three divisions: 1. Realist or Hobbesian (after Thomas Hobbes), 2. Rationalist (or Grotian, after Hugo Grotius), 3. Revolutionist (or Kantian, after Immanuel Kant).In broad terms, the English School itself has supported the rationalist or Grotian tradition, seeking a middle way (or via media) between the ‘power politics’ of realism and the ‘utopianism’ of revolutionism. The English School rejects behavioralist approaches to international relations theory.

Functionalism in international relations

Functionalism is a theory of international relations that arose principally from the experience of European integration. Rather than the self-interest that realists see as a motivating factor, functionalists focus on common interests shared by states. Integration develops its own internal dynamic: as states integrate in limited functional or technical areas, they increasingly find that momentum for further rounds of integration in related areas. This “invisible hand” of integration phenomenon is termed “spill-over.” Although integration can be resisted, it becomes harder to stop integration’s reach as it progresses. This usage, and the usage in functionalism in international relations, is the less commonly used meaning of the term functionalism.

Post-structuralism in international relations theory

Post-structuralism differs from most other approaches to international politics because it does not see itself as a theory, school or paradigm which produces a single account of the subject matter. Instead, post-structuralism is an approach, attitude, or ethos that pursues critique in particular way. Post-structuralism sees critique as an inherently positive exercise that establishes the conditions of possibility for pursuing alternatives.

Postcolonialism and international relations theory

Postcolonialism is a non-mainstream approach within the IR discipline that looks at continued forms of colonial domination and oppression.

QNO15:- Criticalb examine the right of self-determination in the context of multi-ethnic societies. OR Explain the concept of self-determination & decolonization. What are its elements?

ANS:-The right of nations to self-determination (German: Selbstbestimmungsrecht der Völker), or in short form self determination is the principle in international law, that nations have the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no external compulsion or external interference. The principle does not state how the decision is to be made, or what the outcome should be, be it independence, federation, protection, some form of autonomy or even full assimilation. Neither does it state what the delimitation between nations should be — or even what constitutes a nation. In fact, there are conflicting definitions and legal criteria for determining which groups may legitimately claim the right to self-determination.

By extension the term self-determination has come to mean the free choice of one’s own acts without external compulsion.


Just as colonisation and colonialism have been practiced throughout recorded history, political self-determination, on an individual level, has been documented similarly and cherished highly by collective peoples despite them; ancient Mesopotamia and the later Greek city-states are early examples of its practice. The employment of imperialism, through the expansion of empires, and the concept of political sovereignty, as developed after the Treaty of Westphalia, also explain the emergence of self determination during the Modern Era. During, and after, the Industrial Revolution many groups of people recognized their shared history, geography, language, and customs. Nationalism emerged as a uniting ideology not only between competing powers, but also for groups that felt subordinated or disenfranchised inside larger states; in this situation self determination can be seen as a reaction to imperialism. Such groups often pursued independence and sovereignty over territory, but sometimes a different sense of autonomy has been pursued or achieved.

World War I and II

Europe, Asia and Africa

Woodrow Wilson revived the American commitment to self-determination, at least for European states, during World War I. When the Bolsheviks came to power in Russia in November 1917, they called for Russia’s immediate withdrawal as a member of the Allies of World War I. They also supported the right of all nations, including colonies, to self-determination.” The 1918 Constitution of the Soviet Union acknowledged the right of secession for its constituent republics.

The Cold War World

The UN Charter

In 1941 Allies of World War II signed the Atlantic Charter and accepted the principle of self-determination. In January 1942 twenty-six states signed the Declaration by United Nations, which accepted those principles. The ratification of the United Nations Charter in 1945 at then end of World War II placed the right of self-determination into the framework of international law and diplomacy.

Chapter 1, Article 1, part 2 states that purpose of the UN Charter is: “To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.”

Article 1 in both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Both read: “All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”

Self-determination versus territorial integrity

National self-determination challenges the principle of territorial integrity (or sovereignty) of states because it is the will of the people that makes a state legitimate. This implies a people should be free to choose their own state and its territorial boundaries. However, there are far more self-identified nations than there are existing states and there is no legal process to redraw state boundaries according to the will of these peoples.

Pavkovic and Radan describe three theories of international relations relevant to self-determination.

The realist theory of international relations insists that territorial sovereignty is more important than national self-determination. This policy was pursued by the major powers during the Cold War.

Liberal internationalism has become an alternative since that time. It promotes the abolition of war among states as well as increased individual liberty within states, and holds the expansion of global markets and cross-border cooperation diminishes the significance of territorial integrity, allowing for somewhat greater recognition of greater self-determination of peoples.

Self-determination versus majority rule/equal rights

Pavković explores how national self-determination, in the form of creation of a new state through secession, could override the principles of majority rule and of equal rights, which are primary liberal principles. This includes the question of how an unwanted state can be imposed upon a minority. He explores five contemporary theories of secession. In “anarcho-capitalist” theory only landowners have the right to secede. In communitarian theory, only those groups that desire direct or greater political participation have the right, including groups deprived of rights, per Allen Buchanan. In two nationalist theories, only national cultural groups have a right to secede. Australian professor Harry Beran’s democratic theory endorses the equality of the right of secession to all types of groups. Unilateral secession against majority rule is justified if the group allows secession of any other group within its territory.

Constitutional law

Most sovereign states do not recognize the right to self-determination through secession in their constitutions. Many expressly forbid it. However, there are several existing models of self-determination through greater autonomy and through secession.

In liberal constitutional democracies the principle of majority rule has dictated whether a minority can secede. In the United States Abraham Lincoln acknowledged that secession might be possible through amending the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court in Texas v White, held secession could occur “through revolution, or through consent of the States.” The British Parliamentin 1933 held that Western Australia only could secede from Australia upon vote of a majority of the country as a whole; the previous two-thirds majority vote for secession via referendum in Western Australia was insufficient.

QNO16:-What do you mean by Intervention? What are its types? OR Discuss the nature & frequency of Intervention since world war?

ANS:-Interventionism is a term for a policy of non-defensive (proactive) activity undertaken by a nation-state, or other geo-political jurisdiction of a lesser or greater nature, to manipulate an economy orsociety. The most common applications of the term are for economic interventionism (a state’s intervention in its own economy), and foreign interventionism (a state’s intervention in the affairs of another nation as part of its foreign policy).

The political government of a state decide actions of foreign intervention and foreign policy. Political interventionism can include methods such as sanctions on a foreign economy or international tradewith similar results to protectionism, or other international sanctions through international cooperation decisions guarding international law or global justice. Political support or political capital, such asnationalism or ethnic conflict also decide foreign intervention actions such as occupation, nation-building and national security policies.


The objectives of a policy for foreign intervention can be philosophical, religious or scientific based on the different ideological foundations supporting the policy. Example of objectives are national security, support for world government, scientific systemic concern of systemic bias in international relations theory, policy of balancing as a goal for balance of power in international relations orbalance of threat.


International relations are developed through international cooperation and international organizations giving rise to military alliance, cooperation through a trade pact or development of a trade bloc. These can set common policies of foreign intervention through bilateralism or multilateralism, and international agreement on a treaty.

The development of international law is also done through international cooperation and organizations with implications for foreign intervention actions.


There are varying methods on foreign intervention from participants including government, military, international, corporate, religious and public efforts reflecting their respective objectives, interests and ideologies.

Foreign intervention methods that are physically passive and do not use violence are non-aggressive.


Some methods that are used are various sanctions like economic sanctions, embargo, boycott, export restriction, trade sanctions, political sanctions, international sanctions. Promotion of efforts formedia or information methods may be used; such as information warfare, propaganda, advertising, political symbolism, media democracy, freedom of information to gain political capital and support for political reform. Publicly organized efforts also appear; like the peace movement and nonviolence organizations, sometimes by religious organizations.

United States military strategy like military operations other than war and Civil-Military Co-operation are examples of how to deal with asymmetric warfare in the War on Terrorism, as well as winninghearts and minds (Iraq)

Multilateral and international intervention

The most frequently used multilateral alternative is a policy through the United Nations Security Council, often for peacekeeping initiatives. There is also an International Police.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) also participates, for example through combating terrorist financing. This is also the case for Interpol. Other organisations are theOrganization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and NATO.

Canada’s International Policy Statement is an example of a multilateral policy.

Unilateral intervention

Throughout the last century there have been several unilateral and covert efforts by the United States like Operation Gladio, School of the Americas and other CIA activities in the Americas.

The Bush Doctrine and United States realpolitik are seen as promoting unilateral foreign intervention. There are also programs like the extraordinary rendition by the United States in the asymmetric warfare nature of the War on Terrorism. During the war in North-West Pakistan there are further Effects-Based Operations in a low intensity conflict, selective assassinations and a manhunt (military) forOsama bin Laden. The United States also defines a list of State Sponsors of Terrorism and an Axis of evil which are subject to various US foreign intervention policies like sanctions.


There are controversies to foreign interventionism policies with accusations of hegemony and world domination through expansionism or imperialism.

Some social criticism is directed as anti-imperialism. Others warn that militarism and inflated military spending will result in a permanent war economy. Critics of appeasement say it can result in world war. Also, Finlandization is the process of turning into a neutral country which, although maintaining national sovereignty, in foreign politics resolves not to challenge a more powerful neighbour. Ethnic conflict can result in Balkanization.

Human rights

Military intervention can result in accusations of war crimes like ethnic cleansing or genocide. The International Court of Justice handles some cases of such abuse. There is also public criticism oncollateral damage in conflicts such as public infrastructure and civilian casualties.

State terrorism

There are allegations of state terrorism by the United States from its history of foreign interventions and policies like low intensity conflict or covert operations.


The United States intervened in Iraq in the 2003 invasion of Iraq citing concerns for national security and adhering to the evolving Bush Doctrine based on neoconservatism and the democratic peace theory. Disputes from ethnic conflict and the question of self-determination and independence can lead to insurgency or military occupation. Russia intervened in the 2008 South Ossetia war, but has also voiced support for any of its citizens in places like Ukraine and elsewhere.


Neoliberalism points to the complex interdependence of foreign relations on economy, but there is criticism of the world economy globalization from the anti-globalization movement. Promoters of global governance and democratic mundialization organize and participate in political activism.

QNO17:-Discuss the concept of Humanitarian Intervention?

ANS:-Humanitarian intervention refers to the threat or use of force across state borders by a state (or group of states) aimed at preventing or ending widespread and grave violations of the fundamental human rights of individuals other than its own citizens. There is no one standard or legal definition of humanitarian intervention; the field of analysis (such as law, ethics, or politics) often influences the definition that is chosen. Differences in definition include variations in whether humanitarian interventions is limited to instances where there is an absence of consent from the host state; whether humanitarian intervention is limited to punishment actions; and whether humanitarian intervention is limited to cases where there has been explicit UN Security Council authorization for action. There is, however, a general consensus on some of its essential characteristics:

  • Humanitarian intervention involves the threat and use of military forces as a central feature
  • It is an intervention in the sense that it entails interfering in the internal affairs of a state by sending military forces into the territory or airspace of a sovereign state that has not committed an act of aggression against another state.
  • The intervention is in response to situations that do not necessarily pose direct threats to states’ strategic interests, but instead is motivated by humanitarian objectives.

The subject of humanitarian intervention has remained a compelling foreign policy issue, especially since NATO’s intervention in Kosovo in 1999, as it highlights the tension between the principle of state sovereignty – a defining pillar of the UN system and international law – and evolving international norms related to human rights and the use of force. Moreover, it has sparked normative and empirical debates over its legality, the ethics of using military force to respond to human rights violations, when it should occur, who should intervene, and whether it is effective. To its proponents, it marks imperative action in the face of human rights abuses, over the rights of state sovereignty, while to its detractors it is often viewed as a pretext for military intervention often devoid of legal sanction, selectively deployed and achieving only ambiguous ends. Its frequent use following the end of the Cold War suggested to many that a new norm of military humanitarian intervention was emerging in international politics, although some now argue that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the US ‘war on terror’ have brought the era of humanitarian intervention to an end.

QNO:-18 what do you understand by Invasion?

ANS:-An invasion is a military offensive consisting of all, or large parts of the armed forces of one geopolitical entity aggressively entering territory controlled by another such entity, generally with the objective of either conquering, liberating or re-establishing control or authority over a territory, forcing the partition of a country, altering the established government or gaining concessions from said government, or a combination thereof. An invasion can be the cause of a war, be a part of a larger strategy to end a war, or it can constitute an entire war in itself. Due to the large scale of the operations associated with invasions, they are usually strategic in planning and execution.

The term invasion usually denotes a strategic endeavor of substantial magnitude; because the goals of an invasion are usually large-scale and long-term, a sizeable force is needed to hold territory, and protect the interests of the invading entity.Smaller-scale, tactical cross-border actions,such as skirmishes, sorties, raids, infiltrations or guerrilla warfare, are not generally considered invasions. A military endeavor to take back territory that is tenuously held by an initial invader during the course of war is instead generally called a counter-offensive.


There are many different methods by which an invasion can take place, each method having arguments both in their favor and against. These include invasion by land, sea, or air, or any combination of these methods.

Invasion by land

Invasion over land is the straightforward entry of armed forces into an area using existing land connections, usually crossing borders or otherwise defined zones, such as a demilitarized zone, overwhelming defensive emplacements and structures. Although this tactic often results in a quick victory, troop movements are relatively slow and subject to disruption by terrain and weather. Furthermore, it is hard to conceal plans for this method of invasion, as most geopolitical entities take defensive positions in areas that are most vulnerable to the methods mentioned above.

Invasion by sea

Invasion by sea is the use of a body of water to facilitate the entry of armed forces into an area, often a landmass adjoining the body of water or an island. This is generally used either in conjunction with another method of invasion, and especially before the invention of flight, for cases in which there is no other method to enter the territory in question. Arguments in favor of this method usually consist of the ability to perform a surprise attack from sea, or that naval defenses of the area in question are inadequate to repel such an attack

Invasion by air

Invasion by air is an invention of the 20th century and modern warfare. The idea involves sending military units into a territory by aircraft. The aircraft either land, allowing the military units to debark and attempt their objective, or the troops exit the aircraft while still in the air, using parachutes or similar devices to land in the territory being invaded. Many times air assaults have been used to pave the way for a ground- or sea-based invasion, by taking key positions deep behind enemy lines such as bridges and crossroads, but an entirely air-based invasion has never succeeded. Two immediate problems are resupply and reinforcement. A large airborne force cannot be adequately supplied without meeting up with ground forces; an airborne force too small simply places themselves into an immediate envelopment situation. Arguments in favor of this method generally relate to the ability to target specific areas that may not necessarily be easily accessible by land or sea, a greater chance of surprising the enemy and overwhelming defensive structures, and, in many cases, the need for a reduced number of forces due to the element of surprise. Arguments against this method typically involve capacity to perform such an invasion—such as the sheer number of planes that would be needed to carry a sufficient number of troops—and the need for a high level of intelligence in order for the invasion to be successful.


Once political boundaries and military lines have been breached, pacification of the region is the final, and arguably the most important, goal of the invading force. After the defeat of the regular military, or when one is lacking, continued opposition to an invasion often comes from civilian or paramilitary resistance movements. Complete pacification of an occupied country can be difficult, and usually impossible, but popular support is vital to the success of any invasion.

QNO19:-Discuss the evolution of Non-Pro-liferation of nuclear weapons in the post- world war? OR Explain the main treaties in the nuclear explosions? OR Discuss the various arms limitation treaties.

ANS:-Nuclear proliferation is a term now used to describe the spread of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information, to nations which are not recognized as “Nuclear Weapon States” by the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons, also known as the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty or NPT.

Proliferation has been opposed by many nations with and without nuclear weapons, the governments of which fear that more countries with nuclear weapons may increase the possibility of nuclear warfare (up to and including the so-called “countervalue” targeting of civilians with nuclear weapons), de-stabilize international or regional relations, or infringe upon the national sovereignty of states.

Four nations besides the five recognized Nuclear Weapons States, none of which signed or ratified the NPT, have acquired, or are presumed to have acquired, nuclear weapons: India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Israel. One critique of the NPT is that it is discriminatory in recognizing as nuclear weapon states only those countries that tested nuclear weapons before 1968 and requiring all other states joining the treaty to forswear nuclear weapons.

Nuclear proliferation

Research into the development of nuclear weapons was undertaken during World War II by the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, and the USSR. The United States was the first and is the only country to have used a nuclear weapon in war, when it used two bombs against Japan in August 1945. With their loss during the war, Germany and Japan ceased to be involved in any nuclear weapon research. In August 1949, the USSR tested a nuclear weapon. The United Kingdom tested a nuclear weapon in October 1952. France developed a nuclear weapon in 1960. ThePeople’s Republic of China detonated a nuclear weapon in 1964. India exploded a nuclear device in 1974, and Pakistan tested a weapon in 1998. In 2006, North Korea conducted a nuclear test.

Non-proliferation efforts

Early efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation involved intense government secrecy, the wartime acquisition of known uranium stores (the Combined Development Trust), and at times even outrightsabotage—such as the bombing of a heavy-water facility thought to be used for a German nuclear program. None of these efforts were explicitly public, owing to the fact that the weapon developments themselves were kept secret until the bombing of Hiroshima.

Earnest international efforts to promote nuclear non-proliferation began soon after World War II, when the Truman Administration proposed the Baruch Plan] of 1946, named after Bernard Baruch, America’s first representative to the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission. The Baruch Plan, which drew heavily from the Acheson–Lilienthal Report of 1946, proposed the verifiable dismantlement and destruction of the U.S. nuclear arsenal (which, at that time, was the only nuclear arsenal in the world) after all governments had cooperated successfully to accomplish two things: (1) the establishment of an “international atomic development authority,” which would actually own and control all military-applicable nuclear materials and activities, and (2) the creation of a system of automatic sanctions, which not even the U.N. Security Council could veto, and which would proportionately punish states attempting to acquire the capability to make nuclear weapons or fissile material.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

At present, 189 countries are States Parties to the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons, more commonly known as the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty or NPT. These include the five Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) recognized by the NPT: the People’s Republic of China, France, Russian Federation, the UK, and the United States.

Notable non-signatories to the NPT are Israel, Pakistan, and India (the latter two have since tested nuclear weapons, while Israel is considered by most to be an unacknowledged nuclear weapons state). North Korea was once a signatory but withdrew in January 2003. The legality of North Korea’s withdrawal is debatable but as of 9 October 2006, North Korea clearly possesses the capability to make a nuclear explosive device.

International Atomic Energy Agency

The IAEA was established on 29 July 1957 to help nations develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Allied to this role is the administration of safeguards arrangements to provide assurance to the international community that individual countries are honoring their commitments under the treaty. Though established under its own international treaty, the IAEA reports to both the United Nations General Assembly and the Security Council.

The IAEA regularly inspects civil nuclear facilities to verify the accuracy of documentation supplied to it. The agency checks inventories, and samples and analyzes materials. Safeguards are designed to deter diversion of nuclear material by increasing the risk of early detection. They are complemented by controls on the export of sensitive technology from countries such as UK and United States through voluntary bodies such as the Nuclear Suppliers Group. The main concern of the IAEA is that uranium not be enriched beyond what is necessary for commercial civil plants, and that plutoniumwhich is produced by nuclear reactors not be refined into a form that would be suitable for bomb production.

Scope of safeguards

Traditional safeguards are arrangements to account for and control the use of nuclear materials. This verification is a key element in the international system which ensures that uranium in particular is used only for peaceful purposes.

Parties to the NPT agree to accept technical safeguard measures applied by the IAEA. These require that operators of nuclear facilities maintain and declare detailed accounting records of all movements and transactions involving nuclear material. Over 550 facilities and several hundred other locations are subject to regular inspection, and their records and the nuclear material being audited. Inspections by the IAEA are complemented by other measures such as surveillance cameras and instrumentation.

The inspections act as an alert system providing a warning of the possible diversion of nuclear material from peaceful activities. The system relies on;

Limitations of Safeguards

The greatest risk from nuclear weapons proliferation comes from countries which have not joined the NPT and which have significant unsafeguarded nuclear activities; India, Pakistan, and Israel fall within this category. While safeguards apply to some of their activities, others remain beyond scrutiny.

A further concern is that countries may develop various sensitive nuclear fuel cycle facilities and research reactors under full safeguards and then subsequently opt out of the NPT. Bilateral agreements, such as insisted upon by Australia and Canada for sale of uranium, address this by including fallback provisions, but many countries are outside the scope of these agreements. If a nuclear-capable country does leave the NPT, it is likely to be reported by the IAEA to the UN Security Council, just as if it were in breach of its safeguards agreement. Trade sanctions would then be likely.

IAEA safeguards, together with bilateral safeguards applied under the NPT can, and do, ensure that uranium supplied by countries such as Australia and Canada does not contribute to nuclear weapons proliferation. In fact, the worldwide application of those safeguards and the substantial world trade in uranium for nuclear electricity make the proliferation of nuclear weapons much less likely.

The Additional Protocol, once it is widely in force, will provide credible assurance that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in the states concerned. This will be a major step forward in preventing nuclear proliferation.

Total proliferation

In embryo, Waltz argues that the logic of mutually assured destruction (MAD) should work in all security environments, regardless of historical tensions or recent hostility. He sees the Cold War as the ultimate proof of MAD logic – the only occasion when enmity between two Great Powers did not result in military conflict. This was, he argues, because nuclear weapons promote caution in decision-makers. Neither Washington nor Moscow would risk nuclear Armageddon to advance territorial or power goals, hence a peaceful stalemate ensued (Waltz and Sagan (2003), p. 24). Waltz believes there to be no reason why this effect would not occur in all circumstances.

Selective proliferation

John Mearsheimer would not support Waltz’s optimism in the majority of potential instances; however, he has argued for nuclear proliferation as policy in certain places, such as post-Cold War Europe. In two famous articles, Professor Mearsheimer opines that Europe is bound to return to its pre-Cold War environment of regular conflagration and suspicion at some point in the future. He advocates arming both Germany and the Ukraine with nuclear weaponry in order to achieve a balance of power between these states in the east and France/Britain in the west. If this does not occur, he is certain that war will eventually break out on the European continent (Mearsheimer (1990), pp. 5–56 and (1993), pp. 50–66).

Proliferation begets proliferation

Proliferation begets proliferation is a concept described by Scott Sagan in his article, Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons? This concept can be described as a strategic chain reaction. If one state produces a nuclear weapon it creates almost a domino effect within the region. States in the region will seek to acquire nuclear weapons to balance or eliminate the security threat. Sagan describes this reaction best in his article when he states, “Every time one state develops nuclear weapons to balance against its main rival, it also creates a nuclear threat to another region, which then has to initiate its own nuclear weapons program to maintain its national security” (Sagan, pg. 70). Going back through history we can see how this has taken place. When the United States demonstrated that it had nuclear power capabilities after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Russians started to develop their program in preparation for the Cold War. With the Russian military buildup, France and Great Britain perceived this as a security threat and therefore they pursued nuclear weapons.



QNO20:- Define International Terrorism with reference to its major characteristics. OR What are the motives & method of International Terrorism.OR Identity various Terrorist groups & organisions what are their objections.OR Discuss the response of the world community to the growing incidence of terrorism. OR Global fight against Terrorism.

ANS:-Terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion. No universally agreed, legally binding, criminal law definition of terrorismcurrently exists. Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or ideological goal, deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians), and are committed by non-government agencies.

Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence and war. The history of terrorist organizations suggests that they do not select terrorism for its political effectiveness. Individual terrorists tend to be motivated more by a desire for social solidarity with other members of their organization than by political platforms or strategic objectives, which are often murky and undefined.

The word “terrorism” is politically and emotionally charged, and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. Studies have found over 100 definitions of “terrorism”. The concept of terrorism may itself be controversial as it is often used by state authorities to delegitimize political or other opponents, and potentially legitimize the state’s own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may itself be described as “terror” by opponents of the state).

Terrorism has been practiced by a broad array of political organizations for furthering their objectives. It has been practiced by right-wing and left-wing political parties, nationalistic groups, religious groups, revolutionaries, and ruling governments. An abiding characteristic is the indiscriminate use of violence against noncombatants for the purpose of gaining publicity for a group, cause, or individual.

“Terror” comes from the Latin verb terrere meaning “to frighten”. The terror cimbricus was a panic and state of emergency in Rome in response to the approach of warriors of the Cimbri tribe in 105 BC. The Jacobins cited this precedent when imposing a Reign of Terror during the French Revolution. After the Jacobins lost power, the word “terrorist” became a term of abuse. Although the Reign of Terror was imposed by a government, in modern times “terrorism” usually refers to the killing of innocent people by a private group in such a way as to create a media spectacle. This meaning can be traced back to Sergey Nechayev, who described himself as a “terrorist”. Nechayev founded the Russian terrorist group “People’s Retribution” (Народная расправа) in 1869.

In November 2004, a United Nations Secretary General report described terrorism as any act “intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act”.

The definition of terrorism has proved controversial. Various legal systems and government agencies use different definitions of terrorism in their national legislation. Moreover, the International community has been slow to formulate a universally agreed, legally binding definition of this crime. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term “terrorism” is politically and emotionally charged. In this regard, Angus Martyn, briefing the Australian Parliament, stated that “The international community has never succeeded in developing an accepted comprehensive definition of terrorism. During the 1970s and 1980s, the United Nations attempts to define the term floundered mainly due to differences of opinion between various members about the use of violence in the context of conflicts over national liberation and self-determination.”

Terrorism is defined as political violence in an asymmetrical conflict that is designed to induce terror and psychic fear (sometimes indiscriminate) through the violent victimization and destruction of noncombatant targets (sometimes iconic symbols). Such acts are meant to send a message from an illicit clandestine organization. The purpose of terrorism is to exploit the media in order to achieve maximum attainable publicity as an amplifying force multiplier in order to influence the targeted audience(s) in order to reach short- and midterm politicalgoals and/or desired long-term end states.”

The terms “terrorism” and “terrorist” (someone who engages in terrorism) carry strong negative connotations. These terms are often used as political labels, to condemn violence or the threat of violence by certain actors as immoral, indiscriminate, and unjustified or to condemn an entire segment of a population. Those labeled “terrorists” by their opponents rarely identify themselves as such, and typically use other terms or terms specific to their situation, such as separatist, freedom fighter, liberator, revolutionary, vigilante, militant, paramilitary, guerrilla, rebel, patriot, or any similar-meaning word in other languages and cultures. Jihadi, mujaheddin, and fedayeen are similar Arabic words which have entered the English lexicon. It is common for both parties in a conflict to describe each other as terrorists.

Types of terrorism

In early 1975, the Law Enforcement Assistant Administration in the United States formed the National Advisory Committee on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals. One of the five volumes that the committee wrote was entitled Disorders and Terrorism, produced by the Task Force on Disorders and Terrorism under the direction of H.H.A. Cooper, Director of the Task Force staff. The Task Force classified terrorism into six categories.

  • Civil disorder– A form of collective violence interfering with the peace, security, and normal functioning of the community.
  • Political terrorism– Violent criminal behaviour designed primarily to generate fear in the community, or substantial segment of it, for political purposes.
  • Non-Political terrorism– Terrorism that is not aimed at political purposes but which exhibits “conscious design to create and maintain a high degree of fear for coercive purposes, but the end is individual or collective gain rather than the achievement of a political objective.”
  • Quasi-terrorism– The activities incidental to the commission of crimes of violence that are similar in form and method to genuine terrorism but which nevertheless lack its essential ingredient. It is not the main purpose of the quasi-terrorists to induce terror in the immediate victim as in the case of genuine terrorism, but the quasi-terrorist uses the modalities and techniques of the genuine terrorist and produces similar consequences and reaction. For example, the fleeing felon who takes hostages is a quasi-terrorist, whose methods are similar to those of the genuine terrorist but whose purposes are quite different.
  • Limited political terrorism– Genuine political terrorism is characterized by a revolutionary approach; limited political terrorism refers to “acts of terrorism which are committed for ideological orpolitical motives but which are not part of a concerted campaign to capture control of the state.
  • Official or state terrorism–”referring to nations whose rule is based upon fear and oppression that reach similar to terrorism or such proportions.” It may also be referred to as Structural Terrorism defined broadly as terrorist acts carried out by governments in pursuit of political objectives, often as part of their foreign policy.

Several sources have further defined the typology of terrorism:

  • Political terrorism
  • Sub-state terrorism
  • Social revolutionary terrorism
  • Nationalist-separatist terrorism
  • Religious extremist terrorism
  • Religious fundamentalist Terrorism
  • New religions terrorism
  • Right-wing terrorism
  • Left-wing terrorism
  • Single-issue terrorism
  • State-sponsored terrorism
  • Regime or state terrorism
  • Criminal terrorism
  • Pathological terrorism

Democracy and domestic terrorism

The relationship between domestic terrorism and democracy is very complex. Terrorism is most common in nations with intermediate political freedom, and is least common in the most democratic nations. However, one study suggests that suicide terrorism may be an exception to this general rule. Evidence regarding this particular method of terrorism reveals that every modern suicide campaign has targeted a democracy–a state with a considerable degree of political freedom. The study suggests that concessions awarded to terrorists during the 1980s and 1990s for suicide attacks increased their frequency.

Religious terrorism

Religious terrorism is terrorism performed by groups or individuals, the motivation of which is typically rooted in the faith based tenets. Terrorist acts throughout the centuries have been performed on religious grounds with the hope to either spread or enforce a system of belief, viewpoint or opinion. Religious terrorism does not in itself necessarily define a specific religious standpoint or view, but instead usually defines an individual or a group view or interpretation of that belief system’s teachings.

Terrorist groups

State-sponsored terrorism

A state can sponsor terrorism by funding or harboring a terrorist organization. Opinions as to which acts of violence by states consist of state-sponsored terrorism vary widely. When states provide funding for groups considered by some to be terrorist, they rarely acknowledge them as such.

State terrorism

The concept of “state terrorism” is controversial. The Chairman of the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Committee has stated that the Committee was conscious of 12 international Conventions on the subject, and none of them referred to State terrorism, which was not an international legal concept. If States abused their power, they should be judged against international conventions dealing with war crimes, international human rights and international humanitarian law

State terrorism has been used to refer to terrorist acts by governmental agents or forces. This involves the use of state resources employed by a state’s foreign policies, such as using its military to directly perform acts of terrorism.

State terrorism has also been used to describe peacetime actions by governmental agents such as the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. Charles Stewart Parnell described William Ewart Gladstone’s Irish Coercion Act as terrorism in his “no-Rent manifesto” in 1881, during the Irish Land War. The concept is also used to describe political repressions by governments against their own civilian population with the purpose to incite fear. For example, taking and executing civilian hostages or extrajudicial elimination campaigns are commonly considered “terror” or terrorism, for example during the Red Terror or Great Terror. Such actions are often also described as democide or genocide which has been argued to be equivalent to state terrorism. Empirical studies on this have found that democracies have little democide.


Responses to terrorism are broad in scope. They can include re-alignments of the political spectrum and reassessments of fundamental values.

Specific types of responses include:

  • Targeted laws, criminal procedures, deportations, and enhanced police powers
  • Target hardening, such as locking doors or adding traffic barriers
  • Preemptive or reactive military action
  • Increased intelligence and surveillance activities
  • Preemptive humanitarian activities
  • More permissive interrogation and detention policies

The term counter-terrorism has a narrower connotation, implying that it is directed at terrorist actors.

Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States.

History of terrorism

The term “terrorism” itself was originally used to describe the actions of the Jacobin Club during the “Reign of Terror” in the French Revolution. “Terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible,” said Jacobin leader Maximilien Robespierre. In 1795, Edmund Burke denounced the Jacobins for letting “thousands of those hell-hounds called Terrorists…loose on the people” of France.

In January 1858, Italian patriot Felice Orsini threw three bombs in an attempt to assassinate French Emperor Napoleon III. Eight bystanders were killed and 142 injured. The incident played a crucial role as an inspiration for the development of the early Russian terrorist groups. Russian Sergey Nechayev, who founded People’s Retribution in 1869, described himself as a “terrorist”, an early example of the term being employed in its modern meaning Nechayev’s story is told in fictionalized form by Fyodor Dostoevsky in the novel The Possessed. German anarchist writer Johann Most dispensed “advice for terrorists” in the 1880s.

Terrorism databases

The following terrorism databases are or were made publicly available for research purposes, and track specific acts of terrorism:

  • MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base
  • Global Terrorism Database
  • Worldwide Incidents Tracking System
  • Tocsearch(dynamic database)

The following publicly available resource indexes electronic and bibliographic resources on the subject of terrorism:

  • Human Security Gateway

The following terrorism databases are maintained in secrecy by the United State Government for intelligence and counter-terrorism purposes:

  • Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment
  • Terrorist Screening Database

The War on Terror (also known as the Global War on Terror or the War on Terrorism) is an ongoing international military campaign led by the United States of America and the United Kingdom with the support of other NATO and non-NATO countries. The campaign was launched in 2001 with the US/UK invasion of Afghanistan in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks. Since then, other operations have commenced, the largest being the War in Iraq, beginning with a 2003 invasion. Originally, it was waged against al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations with the purpose of eliminating them.

The phrase War on Terror was first used by former US President George W. Bush and other high-ranking US officials to denote a global military, political, legal and ideological struggle against organizations designated as terrorist and regimes that were accused of having a connection to them or providing them with support or were perceived, or presented as posing a threat to the US and its allies in general. It was typically used with a particular focus on militant Islamists and al-Qaeda.

Although the term is not officially used by the administration of US President Barack Obama (which instead uses the term Overseas Contingency Operation), it is still commonly used by politicians, in the media and officially by some aspects of government, such as the Army’s Global War on Terrorism Service Medal.

The notion of a “war on terror” has been criticized for lacking a defined and identifiable enemy, thus making it a potential framework for perpetual military action pursuing other goals.

QNO21:-Explain the role of science & technology in international relations?

ANS:-Science, Technology, & International Affairs (STIA) is the study of how science and technology affect diplomacy and international relations, especially in the areas of security, environment, energy,health, business, and development.

As a university subject, STIA is found primarily at the graduate level in master’s degree programs. The notable exception is Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, where undergraduate students can major in STIA. The mission statement of the Georgetown STIA program reads:

Science, Technology, and International Affairs (STIA) are an interdisciplinary academic Program of the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. The Program’s educational and research missions focus on the interactions of science, technology, society, and international affairs within the areas of business, development, security, international health, energy, and the environment. Since 1982 the School of Foreign Service has offered an undergraduate major and certificate in STIA in the liberal arts tradition. STIA approaches its mission through the integration of multiple academic perspectives, drawing from the theory and practice of the natural sciences, the social sciences, and science and technology studies. STIA’s goal is to link these perspectives to policy and practice as a resource for the next generation of ethically and socially conscious leaders in science, business, government, medicine, and civil society. To achieve this goal, the Program draws upon the rich resources of the Washington, DC area for courses, internships, lectures, and research opportunities. STIA’s mission is to develop and transmit critical knowledge needed to meet the challenges of a global future in which economic development, improved human health, international security, energy efficiency, and the environment are sustainable and equitably achieved.


Numerous indicators point to the growth of international cooperation in science and technology and the growing importance of science and technology in international relations.  The study of these important issues – especially with regard to patterns of conflict and cooperation – is only in its infancy. The discussion below is intended to provide an outline for thinking about how further studies might be conceptualized.  I start with a set of assumptions which I have found useful in teaching and research in the general field of science, technology, and international relations.

  1. The context of globalization. Globalization is the background for contemporary discussions of science technology and international relations.  Globalization is understood as the product of two forces.  First, we have seen a steady liberalization of the obstacles to trade and investment in countries around the world – in other words, the reduction of institutional “separation fences” blocking trade and investment.  Second, the revolution in information and communications technologies (ICT) has dramatically reduced the costs of international commercial and academic interactions.  These two factors-one institutional, one technological-permit the higher levels of techno-economic integration which is central to globalization.  However, we are left with the question of whether or not it is primarily the sociopolitical factors associated with institutional change, or the technological factors, which are the drivers of globalization.  This basic question of primary causation is evident in most important phenomena in the realm of science technology and international relations.  Successful analysis of the latter usually involves the development of a perspective which shows an appreciation of the interactions between the sociopolitical and technical in a process of co-evolving sociotechnical change. It is important to avoid simple technological determinism by giving due attention to the institutional contexts in which international relations occur. At the same time, we must also avoid the mistake common among many students of international relations of ignoring the causal importance of scientific advances and technological change for transforming the international order.
  2. The “triad” of issues. The phenomena which are the objects of analysis in the general area of science, technology and international relations can be thought of as falling into one of three broad categories – security issues, competitiveness and international political economy issues, and environmental issues. However, as suggested in Figure 1, these categories are not entirely separate from one another and some of the more interesting subjects of analysis are at the places where these categories overlap – security and environment, environment and competitiveness, competitiveness and security.


  1. The matrix of players. Any framework for analyzing the patterns of conflict and cooperation in international science and technology must also recognize that international relations can no longer be understood solely in terms of the relations between governments.  Instead, in the 21st century we see the stage of international relations being occupied by numerous actors –  multinational corporations, representatives of universities and research institutes, and NGOs, as well as governments.  This leads to an expanded array of possible relationships in international science and technology, as illustrated in Figure 2.

The Drivers of International Cooperation in Science and Technology (ICST).

A variety of factors, which vary by circumstances, can be identified as drivers of cooperation in international science and technology.  These include burden, or cost, sharing in large expensive projects, as seen for instance in the area of space exploration. The global diffusion of competencies which has been evident in recent years also is a force for international cooperation.  Capabilities in research and innovation are no longer concentrated only in a small number of countries, and as competencies have diffused, the possibilities of finding complementary capabilities through international cooperation has increased.  For academic researchers, who are driven by the building and maintaining of professional reputations (among other things), international collaborations offer opportunities to work with leaders in specialized fields and such leaders, in turn, are anxious to build networks of talented collaborators. Thus, the social dynamics of the research community also figure prominently in driving expanded international cooperation.

The operation of these various drivers is facilitated by a number of factors.  In some cases, the foreign policy objectives of nation states lead to the creation of formal agreements providing frameworks for expanded cooperation. The ease of communication, made possible by the ICT revolution, also shapes the context for cooperation.  More recently, in light of the growth of diasporic professional communities, common ethnic ties have also emerged as an important facilitator for international cooperation, especially within the Chinese and Indian diasporas.

The Context of Conflict.

In spite of the remarkable growth of international cooperation in science and technology, we also see that science and technology have created a context in which new international conflicts can emerge.  To understand this context, it is helpful in the first instance to recognize that cooperation in science is often more conflict-free than is cooperation and technology, where high-value issues of national security and wealth creation are often more in evidence.  This generalization requires some qualification, however, in light of the shortening of time between basic research achievements and useful applications.  Thus, in many fields, we have seen the commercial or security implications of basic science becoming far more prominent, far earlier, than in the past, with the result that conflicts over this valuable “useful knowledge” are more likely. Similarly, with the growing ubiquity of “dual use” technologies, leading to the overlap of the commercial and the security realms, cooperative schemes that are rational in a commercial context often become highly problematic when national security considerations are introduced.

One of the ironies of this age of the globalization of science and technology is the expanded commitment of national governments to promote national scientific and technological capabilities in the interest of building national wealth and enhancing national security.  Such efforts, in the form of national technology and industrial policies, often introduce an element of techno-nationalism into international science and technology, a techno-nationalism which can at times undercut the basis of cooperation and lead to a more conflictual environment.

Finally, the context of conflict in international science and technology is increasingly shaped by the unequal distribution of scientific and technological capabilities around the world.  While such capabilities have indeed diffused widely, in a sense, we are still far from a true globalization of science and technology.  As the importance of science and technology for human well-being becomes better understood, international inequalities in scientific and technological capabilities are beginning to get more attention, and demands for correcting these inequalities are growing.  These demands offer opportunities for new forms of cooperation, but we should also recognize that they hold the potential for considerably more conflict as well.An especially interesting case of conflict and cooperation in international science and technology is that of the world of technical standards.  It is widely recognized that the development of international standards is critical for economic integration in the global economy, especially with regard to the achievement of interoperability of the many devices and components of today’s high technology.  At the same time, it is also becoming evident that effective control over standards can be source of great wealth, especially when the standards embody proprietary technology.  Competition for leadership in standard setting, therefore, is intensifying.

The ways in which cooperative and conflictual behavior in the world of standards is worked out is closely related to the institutional settings for standardization, of which there is considerable diversity.  Officially recognized international standards bodies, such as the International Organization for Standards (ISO) coexist with more informal, less institutionalized bodies such as the many consortia one sees in the fast-moving world of ICT.  In addition, successful high-technology firms such as Microsoft or Intel become de facto standard setters by virtue of their extensive control of global markets.  In the face of this institutional diversity, we see standard setting occurring through formal voting mechanisms, informal consensus building, and through market control.  There are powerful incentives for cooperation but also many opportunities for conflict as the desire for control over standards intensifies among firms, standards organizations, and national governments.

QNO22:-Explain the term International Relations in the field of political science?

ANS:-International relations (IR) (occasionally referred to as International Studies (IS))  is the study of relationships between countries, including the roles ofstates, inter-governmental organizations (IGOs), international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and multinational corporations (MNCs). It is both an academic and public policy field, and can be either positive or normative as it both seeks to analyze as well as formulate theforeign policy of particular states. It is often considered a branch of political science (especially after 1988 UNESCO nomenclature), but an important sector ofacademia prefer to treat it as an interdisciplinary field of study.

Recent changes in world politics are rendering our nation-based business and public policies obsolete. The interactions of global economies and politics, coupled with ecological concerns for the planet, have given rise to new educational needs that are international in scope.

Apart from political science, IR draws upon such diverse fields as economics, history, international law, philosophy, geography, social work, sociology & social sciences, anthropology, psychology, women’s studies/gender studies, queer studies and cultural studies / culturology. It involves a diverse range of issues including but not limited to: globalization, state sovereignty, ecological sustainability, nuclear proliferation, nationalism, economic development, global finance, terrorism,organized crime, human security, foreign interventionism and human rights.

The history of international relations is often traced back to the Peace of Westphalia of 1648, where the modern state system was developed. Prior to this, the European medieval organization of political authority was based on a vaguely hierarchical religious order. Westphalia instituted the legal concept of sovereignty, which essentially meant that rulers, or the legitimate sovereigns, had no internal equals within a defined territory and no external superiors as the ultimate authority within the territory’s sovereign borders. A simple way to view this is that sovereignty says, “I’m not allowed to tell you what to do and you are not allowed to tell me what to do.” Classical Greek and Roman authority at times resembled the Westphalian system, but both lacked the notion of sovereignty.

Westphalia encouraged the rise of the independent nation-state, the institutionalization of diplomacy and armies. This particular European system was exported to the Americas, Africa, and Asia viacolonialism and the “standards of civilization”. The contemporary international system was finally established through decolonization during the Cold War. However, this is somewhat over-simplified. While the nation-state system is considered “modern”, many states have not incorporated the system and are termed “pre-modern”.

Further, a handful of states have moved beyond the nation-state system and can be considered “post-modern”. The ability of contemporary IR discourse to explain the relations of these different types of states is disputed. “Levels of analysis” is a way of looking at the international system, which includes the individual level, the domestic nation-state as a unit, the international level of transnational and intergovernmental affairs, and the global level.

What is explicitly recognized as International Relations theory was not developed until after World War I, and is dealt with in more detail below. IR theory, however, has a long tradition of drawing on the work of other social sciences. The use of capitalizations of the “I” and “R” in International Relations aims to distinguish the academic discipline of International Relations from the phenomena of international relations. Many cite Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War as the inspiration for realist theory, with Hobbes’ Leviathan and Machiavelli’s The Prince providing further elaboration.

Similarly, liberalism draws upon the work of Kant and Rousseau, with the work of the former often being cited as the first elaboration of democratic peace theory. Though contemporary human rights is considerably different than the type of rights envisioned under natural law, Francisco de Vitoria, Hugo Grotius and John Locke offered the first accounts of universal entitlement to certain rights on the basis of common humanity. In the twentieth century, in addition to contemporary theories of liberal internationalism, Marxism has been a foundation of international relations.

International relations theory

IR theories can be roughly divided into one of two epistemological camps: “positivist” and “post-positivist”. Positivist theories aim to replicate the methods of the natural sciences by analysing the impact of material forces. They typically focus on features of international relations such as state interactions, size of military forces, balance of powers etc. Post-positivist epistemology rejects the idea that the social world can be studied in an objective and value-free way. It rejects the central ideas of neo-realism/liberalism, such as rational choice theory, on the grounds that the scientific method cannot be applied to the social world and that a ‘science’ of IR is impossible.

Positivist Theories


Realism focuses on state security and power above all else. Early realists such as E.H. Carr and Hans Morgenthau argued that states are self-interested, power-seeking rational actors, who seek to maximize their security and chances of survival. Cooperation between states is a way to maximize each individual state’s security (as opposed to more idealistic reasons). Similarly, any act of war must be based on self-interest, rather than on idealism. Many realists saw World War II as the vindication of their theory.

Political realism believes that politics, like society in general, is governed by objective laws that have their roots in human nature. To improve society, it is first necessary to understand the laws by which society lives. The operation of these laws being impervious to our preferences, men will challenge them only at the risk of failure. Realism, believing as it does in the objectivity of the laws of politics, must also believe in the possibility of developing a rational theory that reflects, however imperfectly and one-sidedly, these objective laws. It believes also, then, in the possibility of distinguishing in politics between truth and opinion-between what is true objectively and rationally, supported by evidence and illuminated by reason, and what is only a subjective judgment, divorced from the facts as they are and informed by prejudice and wishful thinking.

The placement of Realism under positivism is far from unproblematic however. E.H. Carr’s ‘What is History’ was a deliberate critique of positivism, and Hans Morgenthau’s aim in ‘Scientific Man vs Power Politics’ – as the title implies – was to demolish any conception that international politics/power politics can be studied scientifically.

Liberalism/idealism/Liberal Internationalism

Liberal international relations theory arose after World War I in response to the inability of states to control and limit war in their international relations. Early adherents include Woodrow Wilson andNorman Angell, who argued vigorously that states mutually gained from cooperation and that war was so destructive to be essentially futile.

Liberalism was not recognized as a coherent theory as such until it was collectively and derisively termed idealism by E. H. Carr. A new version of “idealism” that focused on human rights as the basis of the legitimacy of international law was advanced by Hans Köchler.


Neoliberalism seeks to update liberalism by accepting the neorealist presumption that states are the key actors in international relations, but still maintains that non-state actors (NSAs) andintergovernmental organizations (IGOs) matter. Proponents such as Maria Chattha argue that states will cooperate irrespective of relative gains, and are thus concerned with absolute gains. This also means that nations are; in essence, free to make their own choices as to how they will go about conducting policy without any international organizations blocking a nation’s right to sovereignty.

Neoliberalism also contains an economic theory that is based on the use of open and free markets with little, if any, government intervention to prevent monopolies and other conglomerates from forming. The growing interdependence throughout and after the Cold War through international institutions led to neo-liberalism being defined as institutionalism, this new part of the theory being fronted by Robert Keohane and also Joseph Nye.

Regime Theory

Regime theory is derived from the liberal tradition that argues that international institutions or regimes affect the behavior of states (or other international actors). It assumes that cooperation is possible in the anarchic system of states; indeed, regimes are by definition, instances of international cooperation.

While realism predicts that conflict should be the norm in international relations, regime theorists say that there is cooperation despite anarchy. Often they cite cooperation in trade, human rights and collective security among other issues. These instances of cooperation are regimes. The most commonly cited definition of regimes comes from Stephen Krasner. Krasner defines regimes as “institutions possessing norms, decision rules, and procedures which facilitate a convergence of expectations.”

Post-positivist/reflectivist theories

International society theory (the English school)

International society theory, also called the English School, focuses on the shared norms and values of states and how they regulate international relations. Examples of such norms include diplomacy, order, and international law. Unlike neo-realism, it is not necessarily positivist. Theorists have focused particularly on humanitarian intervention, and are subdivided between solidarists, who tend to advocate it more, and pluralists, who place greater value in order and sovereignty. Nicholas Wheeler is a prominent solidarist, while Hedley Bull and Robert H. Jackson are perhaps the best known pluralists.

Social Constructivism

Social Constructivism encompasses a broad range of theories that aim to address questions of ontology, such as the Structure and agency debate, as well as questions of epistemology, such as the “material/ideational” debate that concerns the relative role of material forces versus ideas. Constructivism is not a theory of IR in the manner of neo-realism, but is instead a social theory which is used to better explain the actions taken by states and other major actors as well as the identities that guide these states and actors.

Constructivism in IR can be divided into what Hopf (1998) calls ‘conventional’ and ‘critical’ constructivism. Common to all varieties of constructivism is an interest in the role that ideational forces play. The most famous constructivist scholar, Alexander Wendt noted in a 1992 article in International Organization (later followed up by a book, Social Theory of International Politics (1999)), that “anarchy is what states make of it”. By this he means that the anarchical structure that neo-realists claim governs state interaction is in fact a phenomenon that is socially constructed and reproduced by states.

Critical international relations theory

Critical international relations theory is the application of ‘critical theory’ to international relations. Proponents such as Andrew Linklater, Robert W. Cox and Ken Booth focus on the need for humanemancipation from States. Hence, it is “critical” of mainstream IR theories that tend to be state-centric.

Leadership Theories

Interest Group perspective

Interest Group theory posits that the driving force behind state behavior is sub-state interest groups. Examples of interest groups include political lobbyists, the military, and the corporate sector. Group theory argues that although these interest groups are constitutive of the state, they are also causal forces in the exercise of state power.

Strategic Perspective

Strategic Perspective is a theoretical approach that views individuals as choosing their actions by taking into account the anticipated actions and responses of others with the intention of maximizing their own welfare.

Poststructuralist theories

Poststructuralist theories of IR developed in the 1980s from postmodernist studies in political science. Post-structuralism explores the deconstruction of concepts traditionally not problematic in IR, such as ‘power’ and ‘agency’ and examines how the construction of these concepts shapes international relations. The examination of ‘narratives’ plays an important part in poststructuralist analysis, for example feminist poststructuralist work has examined the role that ‘women’ play in global society and how they are constructed in war as ‘innocent’ and ‘civilians’.

Concepts in international relations


In decision making in international relations, the concept of International Conjuncture, together with freedom of action and equality are important elements. Decision makers must take into account the set of international conditions in taking initiatives that would create different types of responses.

Systemic level concepts

International relations are often viewed in terms of levels of analysis, the systemic level concepts are those broad concepts that define and shape an international milieu, characterised by Anarchy.


Darkest blue countries most often considered to besuperpowers, dark blue countries most often considered to be great powers, pale blue countries most often considered to be middle powers, and palest blue countries also sometimes considered to be middle powers.

The concept of power in international relations can be described as the degree of resources, capabilities, and influence in international affairs. It is often divided up into the concepts of hard power and soft power, hard power relating primarily to coercive power, such as the use of force, and soft power commonly covering economics, diplomacy and cultural influence. However, there is no clear dividing line between the two forms of power.


Polarity in International Relations refers to the arrangement of power within the international system. The concept arose from bipolarity during the Cold War, with the international system dominated by the conflict between two superpowers, and has been applied retrospectively by theorists. However, the term bipolar was notably used by Stalin who said he saw the international system as a bipolar one with two opposing powerbases and ideologies. Consequently, the international system prior to 1945 can be described as multi-polar, with power being shared among Great powers.

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 had led to what some would call unipolarity, with the United States as a sole superpower. However, due to China’s surge of economic success after joining the World Trade Organization in 2001, combined with the respectable international position they hold within political spheres and the power that the Chinese Government exerts over their people (consisting of the largest population in the world), there is debate over whether China is now a superpower or a possible candidate in the future.

Several theories of international relations draw upon the idea of polarity.
The balance of power was a concept prevalent in Europe prior to the First World War, the thought being that by balancing power blocs it would create stability and prevent war. Theories of the balance of power gained prominence again during the Cold War, being a central mechanism of Kenneth Waltz’s Neorealism. Here, the concepts of balancing (rising in power to counter another) and bandwagonning (siding with another) are developed.

Hegemonic stability theory (developed by Robert Gilpin) also draws upon the idea of Polarity, specifically the state of unipolarity. Hegemonyis the preponderance of power at one pole in the international system, and the theory argues this is a stable configuration because of mutual gains by both the dominant power and others in the international system. This is contrary to many Neorealist arguments, particularly made by Kenneth Waltz, stating that the end of the Cold War and the state of unipolarity is an unstable configuration that will inevitably change.

This can be expressed in Power transition theory, which states that it is likely that a great power would challenge a hegemon after a certain period, resulting in a major war. It suggests that while hegemony can control the occurrence of wars, it also results in the creation of one. Its main proponent, A.F.K. Organski, argued this based on the occurrence of previous wars during British, Portuguese and Dutch hegemony.


Many advocate that the current international system is characterized by growing interdependence; the mutual responsibility and dependency on others. Advocates of this point to growing globalization, particularly with international economic interaction. The role of international institutions, and widespread acceptance of a number of operating principles in the international system, reinforces ideas that relations are characterized by interdependence.


Dependency theory is a theory most commonly associated with Marxism, stating that a set of Core states exploit a set of weaker Periphery states for their prosperity. Various versions of the theory suggest that this is either an inevitability (standard dependency theory), or use the theory to highlight the necessity for change (Neo-Marxist).

Systemic tools of international relations

Diplomacy is the practice of communication and negotiation between representatives of states. To some extent, all other tools of international relations can be considered the failure of diplomacy. Keeping in mind, the use of other tools are part of the communication and negotiation inherent within diplomacy. Sanctions, force, and adjusting trade regulations, while not typically considered part of diplomacy, are actually valuable tools in the interest of leverage and placement in negotiations.

Sanctions are usually a first resort after the failure of diplomacy, and are one of the main tools used to enforce treaties. They can take the form of diplomatic or economic sanctions and involve the cutting of ties and imposition of barriers to communication or trade.

War, the use of force, is often thought of as the ultimate tool of international relations. A widely accepted definition is that given by Clausewitz, with war being “the continuation of politics by other means”. There is a growing study into ‘new wars’ involving actors other than states. The study of war in International Relations is covered by the disciplines of ‘War Studies’ and ‘Strategic studies’.

The mobilization of international shame can also be thought of as a tool of International Relations. This is attempting to alter states’ actions through ‘naming and shaming’ at the international level. This is mostly done by the large human rights NGOs such as Amnesty International (for instance when it called Guantanamo Bay a “Gulag”), or Human Rights Watch. A prominent use of was the UN Commission on Human Rights 1235 procedure, which publicly exposes state’s human rights violations. The current Human Rights Council has yet to use this Mechanism

The allotment of economic and/or diplomatic benefits. An example of this is the European Union’s enlargement policy. Candidate countries are allowed entry into the EU only after the fulfillment of the Copenhagen criteria.

Democratic Peace Theory is a theory that suggests that the nature of democracy means that democratic countries will not go to war with each other. The justifications for this are that democracies externalise their norms and only go to war for just causes, and that democracy encourages mutual trust and respect.

Communism justifies a world revolution, which similarly would lead to peaceful coexistence, based on a proletarian global society.

Institutions in international relations

International institutions form a vital part of contemporary International Relations. Much interaction at the system level is governed by them, and they outlaw some traditional institutions and practices of International Relations, such as the use of war (except in self-defence).

As humanity enters the Planetary phase of civilization, some scientists and political theorists see a global hierarchy of institutions replacing the existing system of sovereign nation-states as the primary political community. They argue that nations are an imagined community that cannot resolve such modern challenges as the “Dogville” effect (strangers in a homogeneous community), the legal and political status of stateless people and refugees, and the need to address worldwide concerns like climate change and pandemics.

Futurist Paul Raskin has hypothesized that a new, more legitimate form of global politics could be based on “constrained pluralism.” This principle guides the formation of institutions based on three characteristics: irreducibility, where some issues must be adjudicated at the global level; subsidiarity, which limits the scope of global authority to truly global issues while smaller-scope issues are regulated at lower levels; and heterogeneity, which allows for diverse forms of local and regional institutions as long as they meet global obligations.

International inequality is inequality between countries (cf. Milanovic 2002). Economic differences between rich and poor countries are considerable. According to the United Nations Human Development Report 2004, the GDP per capita in countries with high, medium and low human development (a classification based on the UN Human Development Index) was 24,806, 4,269 and 1,184 PPP$, respectively (PPP$ = purchasing power parity measured in United States dollars).

A study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research at United Nations University reports that the richest 1% of adults alone owned 40% of global assets in the year 2000, and that the richest 10% of adults accounted for 85% of the world total. The bottom half of the world adult population owned barely 1% of global wealth. Extensive statistics, many indicating the growing world disparity, are included in the available report, press releases, Excel tables and Powerpoint slides.

The major component of the world’s income inequality (the global Gini coefficient) is comprised by two groups of countries (called the “twin peaks” by Quah [1997]).

  • The first group has 13% of the world’s population and receives 45% of the world’s PPP income. This group includes the United States, Japan, Australia, Germany, France and the United Kingdom, and comprises 500 million people with an annual income level over 11,500 PPP$.
  • The second group has 42% of the world’s population and receives only 9% of the world PPP income. This group includes India, Indonesia and rural China, and comprises 2,100 million people with an income level under 1,000 PPP$. (See Milanovic 2001, p. 38).

Economic inequality very closely matches lognormal distribution as one traverse the strata of national and world societies from top-to-bottom.

During the 20th century there was considerable divergence between the economic wealth of developed and developing countries. Richer countries like the United States and many European countries converged together towards a GDP per capita much greater than developing countries such as India and Ethiopia.

The evolution of the income gap between poor and rich countries is related to convergence. Convergence can be defined as “the tendency for poorer countries to grow faster than richer ones and, hence, for their levels of income to converge” . Convergence is a matter of current research and debate, but most studies have shown lack of evidence for absolute convergence based on comparisons among countries (with regard to this debate see for instance Cole and Newmayer (2003) or).

According to current research, global income inequality peaked approximately in 1970s when world income was distributed bimodally into “rich” and “poor” countries with little overlap. Since then inequality have been rapidly decreasing, and this trend seems to be accelerating. Income distribution is now unimodal, with most people living in middle-income countries.

Causes of international inequality

There are many hypotheses about what may cause international inequality. For example, poor countries may have been subjected in the past or present to exploitation, colonialism, neocolonialism orimperialism. In this context, the dependency theory, the Marxian point of view on imperialism and even the anti-globalization movement may be relevant. Internal national inequality may also be an important factor in underdevelopment. Many other causes may play a role, as is the case with poverty. With limited academic success, even national mean IQ differences have been proposed as hypothetical causes (see IQ and the Wealth of Nations) though this has received much criticism. Several factors have been recognized as being important for a country to grow faster economically, a requirement to “converge” to the status of richer countries. One of these factors is the institutions. Some economists (for example Hernando de Soto and New institutional economist Douglass North) emphasize the role of certain institutions, like those protecting property rights, in the development of rich nations. Corruption (V.G. ) has an associated role which can deform economic incentives. Another factor is education, including technology and human development. A third factor is international commerce, and a fourth factor geographic advantage.

Perspectives regarding economic inequality.

There are various schools of thought regarding economic inequality. Marxism favors an eventual society where distribution is based on an individual’s needs rather than social class or other such factors. Meritocracy favors an eventual society where an individual’s success is a direct function of contribution reflecting an individual’s skills and effort, and detrimental inasmuch as it represent inherited or unjustified wealth or opportunities. Classical liberals and libertarians generally do not take a stance on wealth inequality, but believe in equality under the law regardless of whether it leads to unequal wealth distribution. Arguments based on social justice favor a more equal distribution making claims economic inequality weakens societies, although counter-arguments are made that inequality might benefit societies.

QNO23:-Explain the term Corporatism? What are its types?

ANS:-Corporatism, also known as corporativism, is a system of economic, political, or social organization that views a community as a body based upon organicsocial solidarity and functional distinction and roles among individuals. The term corporatism is based on the Latin word “corpus” meaning “body”. Formalcorporatist models are based upon the contract of corporate groups, such as agricultural, business, ethnic, labor, and military, patronage, scientific, or religious affiliations, into a collective body.

One of the most prominent forms of corporatism is economic tripartism involving negotiations between business, labour, and state interest groups to set economic policy.

Corporatism is related to the sociological concept of structural functionalism. Corporate social interaction is common within kinship groups such as families,clans and ethnicities. Aside from humans, certain animal species are known to exhibit strong corporate social organization, such as penguins. In nature, cellsin organisms are recognized as involving corporate organization and interaction.

Corporatist views of community and social interaction are common in many major world religions such as Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism andConfucianism. Corporatism has been utilized by many ideologies across the political spectrum, including: absolutism, capitalism, conservatism, fascism,liberalism, progressivism, reactionism, social democracy, socialism, and syndicalism.

Corporatism is sometimes considered a synonym for fascism owing to the corporatist structures created by Mussolini’s regime as well as in the latter years of the Third Reich under Albert Speer’s direction. Corporatism was viewed by some as an appropriate strategy to prevent worker unrest, as well as a potentially and effective economic strategy. Franklin D. Roosevelt was one such proponent. While Roosevelt was not a fascist – he declared a loathing for authoritarianism – hisliberal corporatism was part of his vision for a “third way”, reflected in the New Deal.

Corporatism in social relations

Kinship corporatism

Kinship-based corporatism focused upon clan, ethnic, and family identification has been a common phenomenon in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Confucianist group-based societies based upon families and clans in East Asia and Southeast Asia have been considered forerunners to modern corporatism. China has strong elements of clan corporatism in its society involving legal norms surrounding family relations. Islamic societies often have strong clan, tribal, that form the basis for a community-based corporatist society.

Corporatism in religion and spiritualism.

During the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church sponsored the creation of various institutions including brotherhoods, monasteries, religious orders, and military associations, especially during the Crusades to sponsor connection between these groups. In Italy, various function-based groups and institutions were created in the Middle Ages, such as universities, guilds for artisans and craftspeople, and other professional associations. The creation of the guild system is a particularly important aspect of the history of corporatism because it involved the allocation of power to regulate trade and prices to guilds, which is an important aspect of corporatist economic models of economic management and class collaboration.

Corporatism in science

Penguins are known to reside in breeding colonies defined by corporate social organization.

Corporatist scientific interpretations of phenomena have occurred.


Cells in organisms are defined by corporate organization. The behaviour of individual cells is influenced by the actions of other cells, including during processes of division of cells. Corporate activity of cells can cause rapid organic growth of natural substances. An example of such rapid growth caused by corporate activity of cells occurs in animals with antlers.

In social psychology and biology, researchers have found the presence of corporate group social organization amongst animal species. Research has shown that Penguins are known to reside in densely populated corporate breeding colonies.

Corporatism in politics and political economy

Communitarian corporatism

Ancient Greece developed early concepts of corporatism. Plato developed the concept of a totalitarian and communitariancorporatist system of natural-based classes and natural social hierarchies that would be organized based on function, whereby the groups would cooperate to achieve social harmony by emphasizing collective interests while rejecting individual interests.

Aristotle in Politics also viewed society as being divided along natural classes and functional purposes that were priests, rulers, slaves, and warriors. Ancient Rome copied Greek concepts of corporatism into their own version of corporatism but also added the concept of political representation on the basis of function that divided up representatives into military, professional, and religious groups and created institutions for each group called collegios.

Absolutist corporatism

Absolute monarchies in the Middle Ages gradually subordinated corporatist systems and corporate groups to the authority of centralized and absolutist governments, resulting in corporatism being used to uphold social hierarchy.

In the aftermath of the French Revolution, the existing absolutist corporatist system was completely dismantled due to its support of social hierarchy and special “corporate privilege” for the Roman Catholic Church. The new French government saw corporatism’s emphasis on group rights as inconsistent with the government’s promotion of individual rights. Subsequently corporatist systems and corporate privilege throughout Europe were abolished in response to the French Revolution. From 1789 to the 1850s, most supporters of corporatism were reactionaries. A number of reactionary corporatists favoured corporatism in order to end liberal capitalism and restore the feudal system.

Progressive corporatism

From the 1850s onward progressive corporatism rose in response to classical liberalism and Marxism. These corporatists supported providing group rights to members of the middle classes and working classes in order to secure class harmony. This was in opposition to the Marxist conception of class conflict. By the 1870s and 1880s, corporatism experienced a revival in Europe with the creation of workers’ unions that were committed to class harmony and negotiations with employers.

Ferdinand Tönnies in his work Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft (“Community and Society”) of 1887 marked a major revival of corporatist thinking including sparking the rise of Neo-medievalism, rise of support for guild socialism, and causing major changes in the field of sociology. Tönnies claims that organic communities based upon clans, communes, families, and professional groups are disrupted by the mechanical society of economic classes imposed by capitalism. The Nazis used Tönnies’ theory to promote their notion of Volksgemeinschaft (“people’s community”). However Tönnies opposed Nazism and joined the Social Democratic Party of Germany in 1932 to oppose the rise of fascism in Germany and was stripped of his honorary professorship by Adolf Hitler in 1933.

The creation of liberal corporatism has been traced back to English liberal philosopher John Stuart Mill who spoke of corporatist-like economic associations as needing to “predominate” in society to create equality for labourers and give them a voice in management through economic democracy. Unlike a number of other forms of corporatism, liberal corporatism does not reject capitalism or individualism, but believes that the capitalist firm is a social institution that requires its managers to go beyond achieving the bottom line, by recognizing the needs of their members.

This liberal corporatist ethic is similar to Taylorism but calls for democratization of the capitalist firm. Liberal corporatists believe that inclusion of all members in the election of management brings them into the process of management and in effect “reconcile ethics and efficiency, freedom and order, liberty and rationality”. Liberal corporatism began to gain adherents in theUnited States in the late 19th century.

Liberal corporatism was an influential component of the Progressivism in the United States that has been referred to as “interest group liberalism”.The support by U.S. labour movement leaders’ advocacy of liberal corporatism of the U.S. progressives is believed to have been influenced by an attraction to the syndicalismand particularly the anarcho-syndicalism at the time in Europe. In the United States, economic corporatism involving capital-labour cooperation was influential in the New Deal economic program of the United States in the 1930s as well as in Fordism and Keynesianism.

Fascist corporatism

Fascism’s theory of economic corporatism involved the management of sectors of the economy via government or privately controlled organizations (corporations). Each trade union or employer corporation would, in theory, represent its professional concerns, especially through negotiation of labor contracts and the like. This approach, it was theorized, could result in harmony amongst social classes. Authors have noted, however, that de facto economic corporatism was used in specific instances of silencing opposition and rewarding political loyalty.


In the post-World War II reconstruction period in Europe, corporatism was favored by Christian democrats, national conservatives, and social democrats in opposition to liberal capitalism. This type of corporatism faded but revived again in the 1960s and 1970s as “neo-corporatism” in response to the new economic threat of stagflation. Neo-corporatism favored economic tripartism which involved strong and centralized labor unions, employers’ unions, and governments that cooperated as “social partners” to negotiate and manage a national economy.

Asian corporatism

Asian corporatism, as described by Jonathan Unger and Anita Chan in their essay China, Corporatism, and the East Asian Model,

“…at the national level the state recognizes one and only one organization (say, a national labour union, a business association, a farmers’ association) as the sole representative of the sectoral interests of the individuals, enterprises or institutions that comprise that organization’s assigned constituency. The state determines which organizations will be recognized as legitimate and forms an unequal partnership of sorts with such organizations. The associations sometimes even get channelled into the policy-making processes and often help implement state policy on the government’s behalf.”

Russian corporatism

On October 9, 2007, an article signed by Viktor Cherkesov, head of the Russian Drug Enforcement Administration, was published in Kommersant, where he used the term “corporativist state” in a positive way to describe the evolution of Russia. He claimed that the administration officials detained on criminal charges earlier that month are the exception rather than the rule and that the only development scenario for Russia that is both realistic enough and relatively favorable is to continue evolution into a corporativist state ruled by security service officials.

U.S. corporatism

In the United States, Republican President Ronald Reagan echoed Republican President Herbert Hoover and others who claimed that Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal programs represented a move in the direction of a corporatist state. In particular, these critics focused on the National Recovery Administration. In 1935, Herbert Hoover describedsome of the New Deal measures as “Fascist regimentation.” In his 1951 memoirs he used the phrases “early Roosevelt fascist measures”, and “this stuff was pure fascism”, and “a remaking of Mussolini’s corporate state”. For sources and more information, see The New Deal and corporatism.

QNO24:-Explain the term state sovereignty in the field political science?

ANS:-State sovereignty has, for the past several hundred years, been a defining principle of interstate relations and a foundation of world order. The concept lies at the heart of both customary international law and the United Nations (UN) Charter and remains both an essential component of the maintenance of international peace and security and a defence of weak states against the strong. At the same time, the concept has never been as inviolable, either in law or in practice, as a formal legal definition might imply. According to former Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, “The time of absolute sovereignty … has passed; its theory was never matched by reality.”

Empirically, sovereignty has routinely been violated by the powerful. In today’s globalizing world, it is generally recognized that cultural, environmental, and economic influences neither respect borders nor require an entry visa. The concept of state sovereignty is well entrenched in legal and political discourse. At the same time, territorial boundaries have come under stress and have diminished in significance as a result of contemporary international relations. Not only have technology and communications made borders permeable, but the political dimensions of internal disorder and suffering have also often resulted in greater international disorder.Consequently, perspectives on the range and role of state sovereignty have, particularly over the past decade, evolved quickly and substantially.

The purpose of this essay is to set out the scope and significance of state sovereignty as a foundation on which to explore contemporary debates on intervention. Students and scholars are aware of the enormous and contentious literature on this subject. As one scholar has summarized,

Few subjects in international law and international relations are as sensitive as the notion of sovereignty. Steinberger refers to it in the Encyclopedia of Public International Law as “the most glittering and controversial notion in the history, doctrine and practice of international law.” On the other hand, Henkin seeks to banish it from out vocabulary and Lauterpacth calls it a “word which has an emotive quality lacking meaningful specific content,” while Verzijl notes that any discussion on this subject risks degenerating into a Tower of Babel. More affirmatively, Brownlie sees sovereignty as “the basic constitutional doctrine of the law of nations” and Alan James sees it as “the one and only organising principle in respect of the dry surface of the globe, all that surface now … being divided among single entities of a sovereign or constitutionally independent kind.” As noted by Falk, “There is little neutral ground when it comes to sovereignty.”

Nevertheless, a quick review of the basics is useful for less specialized readers. The analysis begins with a review of the origins of the concept and its role in the evolution of state practice. This is followed by a discussion of the legal meaning of sovereignty and of its counterpart principle, nonintervention in domestic affairs. Together they comprise the fundamental bedrock of the contemporary international order. The widely acknowledged limits of state sovereignty are then examined, before turning to four contemporary challenges.


State sovereignty denotes the competence, independence, and legal equality of states. The concept is normally used to encompass all matters in which each state is permitted by international law to decide and act without intrusions from other sovereign states. These matters include the choice of political, economic, social, and cultural systems and the formulation of foreign policy. The scope of the freedom of choice of states in these matters is not unlimited; it depends on developments in international law (including agreements made voluntarily) and international relations.

The concept of sovereign rule dates back centuries in the context of regulated relationships and legal traditions among such disparate territorial entities as Egypt, China, and the Holy Roman Empire. However, the present foundations of international law with regard to sovereignty were shaped by agreements concluded by European states as part of the Treaties of Westphalia in 1648.4 After almost 30 years of war, the supremacy of the sovereign authority of the state was established within a system of independent and equal units, as a way of establishing peace and order in Europe.5 The core elements of state sovereignty were codified in the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. They include three main requirements: a permanent population, a defined territory, and a functioning government. An important component of sovereignty has always been an adequate display of the authority of states to act over their territory to the exclusion of other states.

The post-1945 system of international order enshrined in the UN Charter inherited this basic model. Following decolonization, what had been a restrictive and Eurocentric (that is, Western) order became global. There were no longer “insiders” and “outsiders” because virtually every person on Earth lived within a sovereign state. At the same time, the multiplication of numbers did not diminish the controversial character of sovereignty.

In accordance with Article 2 (1) of the UN Charter, the world organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all member states. While they are equal in relation to one another, their status of legal equality as a mark of sovereignty is also the basis on which intergovernmental organizations are established and endowed with capacity to act between and within states to the extent permitted by the framework of an organization. In 1949 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) observed that “between independent States, respect for territorial sovereignty is an essential foundation of international relations.”6 Thirty years later, the ICJ referred to “the fundamental principle of state sovereignty on which the whole of international law rests.”7

As a hallmark of statehood, territorial sovereignty underlies the system of international order in relations among states. An act of aggression is unlawful, not only because it undermines international order, but also because states have exercised their sovereignty to outlaw war. In addition, the failure or weakening of state capacity that brings about a political vacuum within states leads to human tragedies and international and regional insecurity. Repressive, aggressive, or collapsed states may result in threats to international peace and security.

The principle of noninterference in affairs that are within the domestic jurisdiction of states is the anchor to state sovereignty within the system of international relations and obligations. Jurisdiction broadly refers to the power, authority, and competence of a state to govern persons and property within its territory. It is labelled “prescriptive” and “enforcement.” Prescriptive jurisdiction relates to the power of a state to make or prescribe law within and outside its territory, and enforcement jurisdiction is about the power of the state to implement the law within its territory. Jurisdiction exercised by states is then the corollary of their sovereignty. Jurisdiction is clearly founded on territorial sovereignty but extends beyond it. Jurisdiction is prima facie exclusive over a state’s territory and population, and the general duty of nonintervention in domestic affairs protects both the territorial sovereignty and the domestic jurisdiction of states on an equalBasis.

Within the Charter of the UN, there is an explicit prohibition on the world organization from interfering in the domestic affairs of member states. What may be the Charter’s most frequently cited provision, Article 2 (7), provides that “[n]othing contained in the present Charter shall authorise the United Nations to intervene in matters that are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.”

In sum, sovereignty is a key constitutional safeguard of international order. Despite the pluralization of international relations through the proliferation of nonstate actors — evidenced by an accelerated rate of economic globalization, democratization, and privatization worldwide — the state remains the fundamental guarantor of human rights locally, as well as the building block for collectively ensuring international order.

The equality in legal status of sovereignty also offers protection for weaker states in the face of pressure from the more powerful. This sentiment was captured by Algerian President Boueteflika, who, as President of the Organization for African Unity (OAU), addressed the UN General Assembly in 1999, immediately after the Secretary-General, and called sovereignty “our final defense against the rules of an unjust world.”


There are important and widely accepted limits to state sovereignty and to domestic jurisdiction in international law. First, the Charter highlights the tension between the sovereignty, independence, and equality of individual states, on the one hand, and collective international obligations for the maintenance of international peace and security, on the other.According to Chapter VII, sovereignty is not a barrier to action taken by the Security Council as part of measures in response to “a threat to the peace, a breach of the peace or an act of aggression.” In other words, the sovereignty of states, as recognized in the UN Charter, yields to the demands of international peace and security. And the status of sovereign equality only holds effectively for each state when there is stability, peace, and order among states.

Second, state sovereignty may be limited by customary and treaty obligations in international relations and law. States are legally responsible for the performance of their international obligations, and state sovereignty therefore cannot be an excuse for their nonperformance. Obligations assumed by states by virtue of their membership in the UN and the corresponding powers of the world organization presuppose a restriction of the sovereignty of member states to the extent of their obligations under the Charter.

Specifically, Article 1 (2) stipulates that “[a]ll Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.” Furthermore, under “Purposes and Principles,” this same article obliges member states to achieve international cooperation in solving problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion. This article further recognizes the UN as a centre for harmonizing the actions of states in the attainment of these common ends. Thus, the Charter elevates the solution of economic, social, cultural, and humanitarian problems, as well as human rights, to the international sphere. By definition, these matters cannot be said to be exclusively domestic, and solutions cannot be located exclusively within the sovereignty of states.

Sovereignty therefore carries with it primary responsibilities for states to protect persons and property and to discharge the functions of government adequately within their territories. The quality and range of responsibilities for governance have brought about significant changes in state sovereignty since 1945. In particular, since the signing of the UN Charter, there has been an expanding network of obligations in the field of human rights. These create a dense set of state obligations to protect persons and property, as well as to regulate political and economic affairs. Sovereignty is incapable, then, of completely shielding internal violations of human rights that contradict international obligations.

Similarly, Article 2 (7) of the Charter is also subject to widely accepted limits. In the first place, this article is concerned chiefly with the limits of the UN as an organization. In the second place, the words “essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of States” refer to those matters that are not regulated by international law. As the ICJ has concluded, “[T]he question whether a certain matter is or is not solely within the domestic jurisdiction of a State is an essentially relative question; it depends on the development of international relations.”10 The ICJ has further concluded that it hardly seems conceivable that terms like “domestic jurisdiction” were intended to have a fixed content, regardless of the subsequent evolution of international law.

Sovereignty has been eroded by contemporary economic, cultural, and environmental factors. Interference in what would previously have been regarded as internal affairs — by other states, the private sector, and nonstate actors — has become routine. However, the preoccupation here is not these routine matters but the potential tension when the norm of state sovereignty and egregious human suffering coexist. As Kofi Annan suggested, in his opening remarks at the 1999 General Assembly, “States bent on criminal behaviour [should] know that frontiers are not the absolute defence.” In this respect, events in the last decade have broken new ground.

QNO25:- Human Rights as an agenda in Contemporaty ternational Relations.OR How are human rights violated by forces of international trade? Discuss.

ANS:-Human rights are “rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled.” Proponents of the concept usually assert that everyone is endowed with certain entitlements merely by reason of being human. Human rights are thus conceived in a Universalist and egalitarian fashion. Such entitlements can exist as shared norms of actual human moralities, as justified moral norms or natural rights supported by strong reasons, or as legal rights either at a national level or within international law. However, there is no consensus as to the precise nature of what in particular should or should not be regarded as a human right in any of the preceding senses, and the abstract concept of human rights has been a subject of intense philosophical debate and criticism.

The human rights movement emerged in the 1970s, especially from former socialists in eastern and western Europe, with major contributions also from the United States and Latin America. The movement quickly jelled as social activism and political rhetoric in many nations put it high on the world agenda. By the 21st century, Moyn has argued, the human rights movement expanded beyond its original anti-totalitarianism to include numerous causes involving humanitarianism and social and economic development in the Third World.

Many of the basic ideas that animated the movement developed in the aftermath of the Second World War, culminating in its adoption by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. While the phrase “human rights” is relatively modern the intellectual foundations of the modern concept can be traced through the history of philosophy and the concepts of natural law rights and liberties as far back as the city states of Classical Greece and the development of Roman Law. The true forerunner of human rights discourse was the enlightenment concept of natural rights developed by figures such as John Locke and Immanuel Kantand through the political realm in the United States Bill of Rights and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

History of human rights

Although ideas of rights and liberty have existed for much of human history, it is unclear to what degree such concepts can be described as “human rights” in the modern sense. The concept of rights certainly existed in pre-modern cultures; ancient philosophers such as Aristotle wrote extensively on the rights (to dikaion in ancient Greek, roughly a ‘just claim’) of citizens to property and participation in public affairs. However, neither the Greeks nor the Romans had any concept of universal human rights; slavery, for instance, was justified in both ancient and modern times as a natural condition. Medieval charters of liberty such as the English Magna Carta were not charters of human rights, let alone general charters of rights: they instead constituted a form of limited political and legal agreement to address specific political circumstances, in the case of Magna Carta later being mythologized in the course of early modern debates about rights

Philosophy of human rights

The philosophy of human rights attempts to examine the underlying basis of the concept of human rights and critically looks at its content and justification. Several theoretical approaches have been advanced to explain how and why human rights become part of social expectations.

International human rights law

Modern international conceptions of human rights can be traced to the aftermath of World War II and the foundation of the United Nations. Article 1(3) of the United Nations charter states that one of the purposes of the UN is: “to achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion”. The rights espoused in the UN charter would be codified in the International Bill of Human Rights, composing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted by the United Nations General Assemblyin 1948, partly in response to the atrocities ofWorld War II. Although the UDHR was a non-binding resolution, it is now considered by some to have acquired the force of international customary law which may be invoked in appropriate circumstances by national and other judiciaries. The UDHR urges member nations to promote a number of human, civil, economic and social rights, asserting these rights as part of the “foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.” The declaration was the first international legal effort to limit the behaviour of states and press upon them duties to their citizens following the model of the rights-duty duality.

Humanitarian Law

The Geneva Conventions came into being between 1864 and 1949 as a result of efforts by Henry Dunant, the founder of the International Committee of the Red Cross. The conventions safeguard the human rights of individuals involved in armed conflict, and build on the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions, the international community’s first attempt to formalize the laws of war and war crimes in the nascent body of secular international law. The conventions were revised as a result of World War II and readopted by the international community in 1949.

Human Rights Council

The United Nations Human Rights Council, created at the 2005 World Summit to replace the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, has a mandate to investigate violations of human rights. The Human Rights Council is a subsidiary body of the General Assembly and reports directly to it. It ranks below the Security Council, which is the final authority for the interpretation of the United Nations Charter. Forty-seven of the one hundred ninety-one member states sit on the council, elected by simple majority in a secret ballot of the United Nations General Assembly. Members serve a maximum of six years and may have their membership suspended for gross human rights abuses. The Council is based in Geneva, and meets three times a year; with additional meetings to respond to urgent situations.

Independent experts (rapporteurs) are retained by the Council to investigate alleged human rights abuses and to provide the Council with reports.

The Human Rights Council may request that the Security Council take action when human rights violations occur. This action may be direct actions, may involve sanctions, and the Security Council may also refer cases to the International Criminal Court (ICC) even if the issue being referred is outside the normal jurisdiction of the ICC.[34]

The United Nations Security Council has the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security and is the only body of the UN that can authorize the use of force. It has been criticised for failing to take action to prevent human rights abuses, including the Darfur crisis, the Srebrenica massacreand the Rwandan Genocide.[35] For example, critics blamed the presence of non-democracies on the Security Council for its failure regarding.

Regional human rights

The three principal regional human rights instruments are the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the American Convention on Human Rights (the Americas) and the European Convention on Human Rights.


Although both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights emphasize the importance of a right to work, neither of these documents explicitly mention trade as a mechanism for ensuring this fundamental right. And yet trade plays a key role in providing jobs.

Some experts argue that trade is inherent to human nature and that when governments inhibit international trade they directly inhibit the right to work and the other indirect benefits, like the right to education, that increased work and investment help accrue. Others have argued that the ability to trade does not affect everyone equally—often groups like the rural poor, indigenous groups and women are less likely to access the benefits of increased trade.

On the other hand, others think that it is no longer primarily individuals but companies that trade, and therefore it cannot be guaranteed as a human right.[ Additionally, trying to fit too many concepts under the umbrella of what qualifies as a human right has the potential to dilute their importance. Finally, it is difficult to define a right to trade as either “fair” or “just” in that the current trade regime produces winners and losers but its reform is likely to produce (different) winners and losers.

QNO:-26Explain the term International Trade in the field of political science? What are its models?

ANS:-International trade is exchange of capital, goods, and services across international borders or territories. In most countries, it represents a significant share of gross domestic product (GDP). While international trade has been present throughout much of history (see Silk Road, Amber Road), it’s economic, social, and political importance has been on the rise in recent centuries.

Industrialization, advanced transportation, globalization, multinational corporations, and outsourcing are all having a major impact on the international trade system. Increasing international trade is crucial to the continuance of globalization. Without international trade, nations would be limited to the goods and services produced within their own borders.

International trade is in principle not different from domestic trade as the motivation and the behavior of parties involved in a trade do not change fundamentally regardless of whether trade is across a border or not. The main difference is that international trade is typically more costly than domestic trade. The reason is that a border typically imposes additional costs such as tariffs, time costs due to border delays and costs associated with country differences such as language, the legal system or culture.

Another difference between domestic and international trade is that factors of production such as capital and labour are typically more mobile within a country than across countries. Thus international trade is mostly restricted to trade in goods and services, and only to a lesser extent to trade in capital, labor or other factors of production. Then trade in goods and services can serve as a substitute for trade in factors of production.

Instead of importing a factor of production, a country can import goods that make intensive use of the factor of production and are thus embodying the respective factor. An example is the import of labor-intensive goods by the United States from China. Instead of importing Chinese labor the United States is importing goods from China that were produced with Chinese labor.

International trade is also a branch of economics, which, together with international finance, forms the larger branch of international economics.


Several different models have been proposed to predict patterns of trade and to analyze the effects of trade policies such as tariffs.

Ricardian model

The Ricardian model focuses on comparative advantage, perhaps the most important concept in international trade theory. In a Ricardian model, countries specialize in producing what they produce best. Unlike other models, the Ricardian framework predicts that countries will fully specialize instead of producing a broad array of goods.

Heckscher-Ohlin model

In the early 1900s an international trade theory called factor proportions theory emerged by two Swedish economists, Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin. This theory is also called the Heckscher-Ohlin theory. The Heckscher-Ohlin theory stresses that countries should produce and export goods that require resources (factors) that are abundant and import goods that require resources in short supply. This theory differs from the theories of comparative advantage and absolute advantage since those theories focus on the productivity of the production process for a particular good. On the contrary, the Heckscher-Ohlin theory states that a country should specialize production and export using the factors that are most abundant, and thus the cheapest. Not to produce, as earlier theories stated, the goods it produces most efficiently.

Specific factors model

In this model, labor mobility between industries is possible while capital is immobile between industries in the short-run. Thus, this model can be interpreted as a ‘short run’ version of the Heckscher-Ohlin model. The specific factors name refers to the given that in the short-run, specific factors of production such as physical capital are not easily transferable between industries. The theory suggests that if there is an increase in the price of a good, the owners of the factor of production specific to that good will profit in real terms.

New Trade Theory

New Trade Theory tries to explain empirical elements of trade that comparative advantage-based models above have difficulty with. These include the fact that most trade is between countries with similar factor endowment and productivity levels, and the large amount of multinational production (i.e. foreign direct investment) which exists. New Trade theories are often based on assumptions likemonopolistic competition and increasing returns to scale. One result of these theories is the home-market effect, which asserts that, if an industry tends to cluster in one location because of returns to scale and if that industry has high transportation costs, the industry will be located in the country with most of its demand to minimize.

Gravity model

The Gravity model of trade presents a more empirical analysis of trading patterns rather than the more theoretical models discussed above. The gravity model, in its basic form, predicts trade based on the distance between countries and the interaction of the countries’ economic sizes. The model mimics the Newtonian law of gravity which also considers distance and physical size between two objects. The model has been proven to be empirically strong through econometric analysis. Other factors such as income level, diplomatic relationships between countries.

Ricardian theory of international trade (modern development)

The Ricardian theory of comparative advantage became a basic constituent of neoclassical trade theory. Any undergraduate course in trade theory includes expansions of Ricardo’s example of four numbers in for form of a two commodity, two country model.

Contemporary theories

Ricardo’s idea was even expanded to the case of continuum of goods by Dornbusch, Fischer, and Samuelson this formulation is employed for example by Matsuyama and others. This theory uses the special property which is applicable only for the two country case.

Neo-Ricardian trade theory

Inspired by Piero Sraffa, a new strand of trade theory emerged and was named neo-Ricardian trade theory. The main contributors include Ian Steedman (1941-) and Stanley Metcalfe (1946-). They have criticized neoclassical international trade theory, namely the Heckscher-Ohlin model on the basis that the notion of capital as primary factor has no method of measuring it before the determination of profit rate (thus trapped in a logical vicious circle). This was a second round of the Cambridge capital controversy, this time in the field of international trade.

Ricardo-Sraffa trade theory

John Chipman observed in his survey that McKenzie stumbled upon the questions of intermediate products and discovered that “introduction of trade in intermediate product necessitates a fundamental alteration in classical analysis.” It took many years until recently Y. Shiozawa succeeded to remove this deficiency. The Ricardian trade theory was now constructed in a form to include intermediate input trade for the most general case of many countries and many goods. This new theory is called Ricardo-Sraffa trade theory.

Regulation of international trade

Traditionally trade was regulated through bilateral treaties between two nations. For centuries under the belief in mercantilism most nations had high tariffs and many restrictions on international trade. In the 19th century, especially in the United Kingdom, a belief infree trade became paramount. This belief became the dominant thinking among western nations since then. In the years since the Second World War, controversial multilateral treaties like the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and World Trade Organization have attempted to promote free trade while creating a globally regulated trade structure. These trade agreements have often resulted in discontent and protest with claims of unfair trade that is not beneficial to developing countries.

Risk in international trade

Companies doing business across international borders face many of the same risks as would normally be evident in strictly domestic transactions. For example,

  • Buyer insolvency (purchaser cannot pay);
  • Non-acceptance (buyer rejects goods as different from the agreed upon specifications);
  • Credit risk (allowing the buyer to take possession of goods prior to payment);
  • Regulatory risk (e.g., a change in rules that prevents the transaction);
  • Intervention (governmental action to prevent a transaction being completed);
  • Political risk (change in leadership interfering with transactions or prices); and
  • War and other uncontrollable events.

In addition, international trade also faces the risk of unfavorable exchange rate movements (and, the potential benefit of favorable movements).

QNO27:- Explain the China as an Emerging Power in the field of political science?

ANS:-The history of China is both fascinating and complex. Its culture has been described as both peaceful and warlike. China was created by conquest and has essentially been ruled by a series of warlords. However, China has also experienced periods of peace and active trade with its neighbors. There have also been extensive periods where China isolated itself from outside influence and became a closed society. These experiences have profoundly shaped Chinese culture and strategic thought.

The last century has been extremely difficult for China. The occupation by the Japanese in the 1930s and 1940s and the civil war, which brought Mao Zedong and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to power in 1949, were extremely turbulent times in China’s history. From this civil war the People’s Republic of China (PRC) emerged. However, this was the beginning of another period of isolation where China attempted to revitalize itself. Under Mao, China was successful in becoming self-sufficient in nearly all resources and technologies; however, it was twenty to thirty years behind modern technical standards.

Following Mao’s death in 1976, the new leader, Deng Xiaoping, commenced a series of reforms that radically changed China. Deng encouraged international trade and allowed foreign capital investment. The result has been China’s phenomenal entry into world markets and a booming economy. The specific aim of these policies was to obtain large foreign exchange earnings, which would allow China to both modernize and become more independent. Following Deng’s death in February 1997, the current leader, Jiang Zemin, consolidated his political power base with the completion of the CCP’s Fifteenth Congress in September 1997. Under Jiang’s leadership it looks like economic reforms will continue, however, there seems to be little prospect for political change. This is exemplified by his call for stricter control of the press.

As China emerges as a global power it is important to understand what role it will play and the security perceptions it has of both Asia and the world. The most important issue for China today is political stability at home. Any attempt to influence the status quo is not welcome and is deemed to be interference in China’s internal affairs. Many Chinese believe that the United States represents the core values of Western civilization and is in conflict with Eastern civilization which is represented by China. As a result, Chinese leadership views any American influence as a challenge to China’s political stability.

The Western view of China’s emergence is mixed. Following a period of condemnation after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, Western countries have sought to normalize relations with China. Canada’s policy has been to maximize trade and economic links while adopting a moderate, low-key approach in discussing human rights. US-China relations have been more difficult. However, the US ultimately granted China most-favoured-nation (MFN) trading status and a 1995 decision determined that human rights would be no longer tied to commerce. The issue of China’s military modernization has attracted attention. Some analysts believe this modernization is overdue and is just updating old equipment. Others are concerned about the combined effect of this modernization and the assertive nature China has displayed recently concerning claims in the South China Sea and Taiwan.

The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that China’s economic and military transformation, under the current Communist regime, has the potential to seriously threaten the future security of Canada and the West. The paper will look at both the economic and military reforms underway in China and the strategic direction they are taking. The Western strategic view of China will be presented. Potential problem areas will be investigated to reveal why China may adopt a threatening posture.

As China emerges as the next superpower, public opinion in the West seems split over how this event should be treated. A policy of openly engaging China encourages establishing a wide range of contacts with the hope of having some influence. However, it can also be viewed as giving concessions when a more firm policy is required. The contrasting option of containment implies a policy of distrust and suspicion. The ideal solution is an open and transparent China, which is both peaceful and stable. Unfortunately the secrecy of the regime, and the problems described above, do not provide a promising outlook. As the West engages China, it must be aware of the security threat China will potentially become in the future and ensure an appropriate security system is maintained to balance the power in the region.

China’s history in the 20th century has been marked by occupation and civil war. This experience has fueled its strong desire for Great Power status and at the same time put it decades behind the West in technological development. Under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping, China has undergone a transformation, which has produced a tremendous economic turnaround. China is now a major trading nation which has built up an impressive foreign currency holding and is predicted to be the world’s largest economy by 2010. The Chinese leadership has recognized that economic reform is the only way to achieve the status it desires on its own terms.

Despite not facing any threat to its security, China has embarked on a path of radical change to both its military strategy and capabilities. The realization in the 1980s that the Soviet Union was no longer a threat for major conflict and the Gulf War have had a profound effect on Chinese military thinking. The strategic focus has now shifted to the offensive. The main theme is power projection and the ability to fight a modern war with advanced technology.

China has also used its economic boom and change in military strategy to commence an ambitious military modernization program. The PLAAF is acquiring some of the most advanced fighter/bomber aircraft and weapons in the world. They are also purchasing state of the art air defence systems and developing supporting aircraft roles such as in-flight refueling and airborne early warning. The PLAN is also upgrading its fleet with power projection in mind. China has an active submarine replacement program in place and has purchased Russian Kilo-class submarines. New surface vessels are being built and the PLAN is paying more attention to replenishment at sea capability. While the PLA has not received the same attention as the navy or air force, it has formed a large RRU of well-equipped soldiers. China has also continued to upgrade its nuclear weapons and has developed a solid fuel missile with a MIRV capability. A space program has also been active and there is a program to trial a space shuttle by 2005.

It is clear that China’s economic and military transformation has been aimed at challenging the balance of power that has existed in the region since World War Two. China has demonstrated hegemonic intentions through its territorial claims in the South China Sea and in its recent actions against Taiwan. A more aggressive and expansionist policy may occur as China faces more pressure to provide food and resources for one quarter of the world’s population. If the current transformation continues, China will have, in the future, the economic and military might to threaten both the countries in the region and the West. The closer ties with Russia have already resulted in a strategic relationship that is designed to counter the influence of the US. How long this relationship will be required is unknown. With its ongoing effort to develop a high technology economic system, China has set the foundation that will likely ensure that it is much stronger than the former Soviet Union and perhaps even more powerful than the US.

A communist government, that has demonstrated that it is unhappy with its status in the world, also rules China. While Western governments have devoted a great deal of time and thought on how to treat China, their policies have not had any effect on the current regime’s respect for human rights or democracy. The fundamental issue is that the stability of the CCP itself represents a concern for both Asia-Pacific and world security. Any movement by the West to promote human rights and democracy in China represents a direct threat to the existing regime. The brutality of the Tiananmen massacre should serve as a warning of the importance the CCP places on maintaining power. China more and more sees itself as a counter to Western values and way of life. In its effort to emerge as a great power, China has changed its security strategy from defensive to offensive. If China wants to be a dominant world power, and chooses to act based on the example of the former Soviet Union, it will have the potential to seriously undermine the current world order.

The economic and military transformation of China is well underway. It is critical that the West not be naive to its intentions. With its ambitions concerning territorial claims, the challenges it will face providing for its population and the insecure and suspicious nature of its communist government, Canada and the West face a potentially serious threat from China in the future.

QNO28:- Discuss the emergence of Central Asia Republics?

ANS:-Central Asia is a core region of the Asian continent from the Caspian Sea in the west, China in the east, Afghanistan in the south, and Russia in the north. It is also sometimes known as Middle Asia, Inner Asia and, colloquially, “the ‘stans” and is within the scope of the wider Eurasian continent.

Various definitions of its exact composition exist, and no one definition is universally accepted. Despite this uncertainty in defining borders, it does have some important overall characteristics. For one, Central Asia has historically been closely tied to its nomadic peoples and the Silk Road. As a result, it has acted as a crossroads for the movement of people, goods, and ideas between Europe, West Asia, South Asia, and East Asia.

In modern contexts, all definitions of Central Asia consensually include these five republics of the former Soviet Union: Kazakhstan (pop. 16.0 million),Kyrgyzstan (5.5 million), Tajikistan (7.3 million), Turkmenistan (5.1 million), and Uzbekistan (27.6 million), for a total population of 61.5 million as of 2009. Other areas often included are Mongolia, Afghanistan, northern and western Pakistan, northeastern Iran, Kashmir, and sometimes parts of Western China(Xinjiang, earlier called East Turkestan) and southern Siberia in Russia.

During pre-Islamic and early Islamic times, Central Asia was a predominantly Iranian region that included sedentary Sogdians, Chorasmians and semi-nomadic Scythians, Alans. The ancient sedentary population played an important role in the history of Central Asia. After expansion by Turkic peoples, Central Asia also became the homeland for many Turkic peoples, including the Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, and Uyghurs, and Central Asia is sometimes referred to as Turkestan.

The idea of Central Asia as a distinct region of the world was introduced in 1843 by the geographer Alexander von Humboldt. The borders of Central Asia are subject to multiple definitions. Many textbooks still refer to this area as Turkestan, which was the name used prior to Stalin’s rule.

The most limited definition was the official one of the Soviet Union, which defined Middle Asia as consisting solely of Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan,Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. This definition was also often used outside the USSR during this period.

However, the Russian language has two distinct terms: Средняя Азия (Srednjaja Azija or “Middle Asia”, the narrower definition, which includes only those traditionally non-Slavic, Central Asian lands that were incorporated within those borders of historical Russia) and Центральная Азия(Central’naja Azija or “Central Asia”, the wider definition, which includes Central Asian lands that have never been part of historical Russia). However, there lacks a meaningful distinction between the two in the English language; so “Central Asia” is used for both Russian usages, thus creating some confusion.

Soon after independence, the leaders of the four former Soviet Central Asian Republics met in Tashkent and declared that the definition of Central Asia should include Kazakhstan as well as the original four included by the Soviets. Since then, this has become the most common definition of Central Asia.

The UNESCO general history of Central Asia, written just before the collapse of the USSR, defines the region based on climate and uses far larger borders. According to it, Central Asia includes Mongolia, Tibet, northeast Iran (Golestan, North Khorasan and Razavi provinces), Afghanistan, Northern Areas and the N.W.F.P. province of Pakistan, Kashmir and Ladakh, central-east Russia south of the Taiga, and the former Central Asian Soviet republics (the five “Stans” of the former Soviet Union).

An alternative method is to define the region based on ethnicity, and in particular, areas populated by Eastern Turkic, Eastern Iranian, orMongolian peoples. These areas include Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, the Turkic regions of southern Siberia, the five republics, and Afghan Turkestan. Afghanistan as a whole, the Northern Areas of Pakistan and the Kashmir Valley may also be included. TheTibetans and Ladakhi are also included. Insofar, most of thementioned peoples are considered the “indigenous” peoples of the vast region.

There are several places that claim to be the geographic center of Asia, for example Kyzyl, the capital of Tuva in the Russian Federation, and a village 200 miles (320 km) north of Ürümqi, the capital of the Xinjiang region of China.

The history of Central Asia is defined by the area’s climate and geography. The aridness of the region made agriculture difficult, and its distance from the sea cut it off from much trade. Thus, few major cities developed in the region; instead, the area was for millennia dominated by the nomadic horse peoples of the steppe.

Relations between the steppe nomads and the settled people in and around Central Asia were long marked by conflict. The nomadic lifestyle was well suited towarfare, and the steppe horse riders became some of the most militarily potent peoples in the world, limited only by their lack of internal unity. Any internal unity that was achieved was most probably due to the influence of the Silk Road, which traveled along Central Asia. Periodically, great leaders or changing conditions would organize several tribes into one force and create an almost unstoppable power. These included the Hun invasion of Europe, the Wu Hu attacks on China and most notably the Mongol conquest of much of Eurasia.

During pre-Islamic and early Islamic times, southern Central Asia was inhabited predominantly by speakers of Iranian languages. Among the ancient sedentaryIranian peoples, the Sogdians and Chorasmians played an important role, while Iranian peoples such as Scythians and the later on Alans lived a nomadic or semi-nomadic lifestyle. The well-preserved Tarim mummies with Caucasoid features have been found in the Tarim Basin.

The main migration of Turkic peoples occurred between the 5th and 10th centuries, when they spread across most of Central Asia. During the 13th and 14th centuries, the Mongols conquered and ruled the largest contiguous empire in recorded history.

The dominance of the nomads ended in the 16th century, as firearms allowed settled peoples to gain control of the region. Russia, China, and other powers expanded into the region and had captured the bulk of Central Asia by the end of the 19th century. After the Russian Revolution, the Central Asian regions were incorporated into the Soviet Union. Mongolia remained independent but became a Soviet satellite state. However, Afghanistan remained independent of any influence by the Russian empire.

The Soviet areas of Central Asia saw much industrialization and construction of infrastructure, but also the suppression of local cultures, hundreds of thousands of deaths from failed collectivization programs, and a lasting legacy of ethnic tensions and environmental problems. Soviet authorities deported millions of people, including entire nationalities, from western areas of the USSR to Central Asia and Siberia. From 1959 to 1970, about two million people from various parts of the Soviet Union migrated to Central Asia, of which about one million moved to Kazakhstan.

Islam is the religion most common in the Central Asian Republics, Afghanistan, Xinjiang and the peripheral western regions, such as Bashkiria. Most Central Asian Muslims are Sunni, although there are sizable Shia minorities in Afghanistan and Tajikistan.

Buddhism was prominent in Central Asia prior to the arrival of Islam, and the transmission of Buddhism along the Silk Road eventually brought the religion to China. Amongst the Turkic peoples, Tengrianism was the popular religion before arrival of Islam. Tibetan Buddhism is most common in Tibet, Mongolia,Ladakh and the southern Russian regions of Siberia, where Shamanism is also popular (including forms of divination, such as Kumalak). Increasing Han Chinese migration westward since the establishment of the PRC has brought Confucianism and other beliefs into the region.

Nestorianism was the form of Christianity most practiced in the region in previous centuries, but now the largest denomination is the Russian Orthodox Church, with many members in Kazakhstan. The Bukharan Jews were once a sizable community in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, but nearly all have emigrated since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Central Asian Republics

Geographical region covering the territory of five nation-states: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. These republics were part of the Soviet Union before gaining their independence in 1991. Central Asia is bordered on the north by the Russian Federation, on the south by Iran and Afghanistan, and on the east by the Chinese region of Xinjiang Uygur. The western boundary of Central Asia is marked by the Caspian Sea. The topography of the region is characterized by several major mountain ranges, including the Tien Shan range and the Pamirs, and extensive deserts, principally the Kara-Kum and Kyzyl-Kum. The people of Central Asia are predominantly Muslim.

Central Asia covers a large part of the geographical region of Turkestan. The principal rivers of the area are the Amu Darya and the Syr Darya. The territories of Central Asia first came under the influence of Russia only in the mid- to late 19th century. The division of the region along nationalist lines during the Soviet era has resulted in the emergence of a number of inter-ethnic tensions since independence.

QNO29:-Explain the term Aborigional/Indigenous Movements?

ANS:-Aborigine or aboriginal refers to indigenous peoples. The name derives from the Aborigines in Roman mythology. The word “Aborigine” though used is in fact an incorrect singular. Aboriginal is the correct word.

Aboriginal peoples

  • Indigenous Australians
  • Australian Aborigines
  • Tasmanian Aborigines
  • Victorian Aborigines
  • Torres Strait Islanders

Indigenous peoples of Oceania

  • Pacific Islanders
  • Polynesians
  • Melanesians
  • Micronesians

Aboriginal peoples in Canada

  • First Nations
  • Inuit
  • Métis
  • Native Americans in the United States
  • Indigenous peoples of the Americas
  • Scheduled castes and scheduled tribesin India.
  • Aboriginal guanchesof Tenerife, Spain.
  • Bushmenand pygmies of southern Africa.
  • Taiwanese aborigines
  • Indigenous peoples of the Philippines
  • Ainuof Japan.

Indigenous peoples

Indigenous peoples are people, communities, and nations who claim a historical continuity and cultural affinity with societies predating contact with Western culture. These peoples consider their local cultures to be distinctly separate from contemporary Westernized cultures, and many continue to assert their sovereignty and right to cultural self-determination.

Many indigenous cultures represent a prominent minority within Westernized majority-culture societies, and they are usually intentioned towards preserving, reviving, and enhancing the cohesion and uniqueness of their traditional social values and customs, along with a conscientious effort to transmit this knowledge to future generations. Several widely accepted formulations, however, which seek to variously define the term indigenous peoples have been put forward by a couple of other prominent and internationally recognized organizations, such as the International Labour Organization and the World Bank.

The adjective indigenous has the common meaning of “from” or “of the original origin”. Therefore, in a purely adjectival sense any given people, ethnic group or community may be described as being indigenous in reference to some particular region or location.


Population and distribution

Indigenous societies range from those who have been significantly exposed to the colonizing or expansionary activities of other societies (such as the Maya peoples of Mexico and Central America) through to those who as yet remain in comparative isolation from any external influence (such as the Sentinelese and Jarawa of theAndaman Islands).

Contemporary distinct indigenous groups survive in populations ranging from only a few dozen to hundreds of thousands and more. Many indigenous populations have undergone a dramatic decline and even extinction, and remain threatened in many parts of the world. Some have also been assimilated by other populations or have undergone many other changes. In other cases, indigenous populations are undergoing a recovery or expansion in numbers.

Certain indigenous societies survive even though they may no longer inhabit their “traditional” lands, owing to migration, relocation, forced resettlement or having been supplanted by other cultural groups. In many other respects, the transformation of culture of indigenous groups is ongoing, and includes permanent loss of language, loss of lands, encroachment on traditional territories, and disruption in traditional lifeways due to contamination and pollution of waters and lands.

Common characteristics

Characteristics common across many Indigenous groups include present or historical reliance upon subsistence-based production (based on pastoral, horticultural and/or hunting and gatheringtechniques), and a predominantly non-urbanized society. Indigenous societies may be either settled in a given locale/region or exhibit a nomadic lifestyle across a large territory. Indigenous societies are found in every inhabited climate zone and continent of the world.

Common concerns

Indigenous peoples confront a diverse range of concerns associated with their status and interaction with other cultural groups, as well as changes in their inhabited environment. Some challenges are specific to particular groups; however, other challenges are commonly experienced. Bartholomew Dean and Jerome Levi (2003) explore why and how the circumstances of indigenous peoples are improving in some places of the world, while their human rights continue to be abused in others.

Indigenous populations are distributed in regions throughout the globe. The numbers, condition and experience of indigenous groups may vary widely within a given region. A comprehensive survey is further complicated by sometimes contentious membership and identification.

QNO30:- NGOs. and their relerance ln lnternational Relations. OR Campaign for an effective role of NGOS in International Relations?

ANS:-A Non-governmental Organization (NGO) is a legally constituted organization created by natural or legal persons that operates independently from any government and a term usually used by governments to refer to entities that have no government status. In the cases in which NGOs are funded totally or partially by governments, the NGO maintains its non-governmental status by excluding government representatives from membership in the organization. The term is usually applied only to organizations that pursue some wider social aim that has political aspects, but that are not overtly political organizations such as political parties. Unlike the term “intergovernmental organization”, the term “non-governmental organization” has no generally agreed legal definition. In many jurisdictions, these types of organization are called “civil society organizations” or referred to by other names.

The number of internationally operating NGOs is estimated at 40,000. National numbers are even higher: Russia has 277,000 NGOs; India is estimated to have around 3.3 million NGOs.

NGOs are defined by the World Bank as “private organizations that pursue activities to relieve suffering, promote the interests of the poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services, or undertake community development”.

Common usage varies between countries – for example NGO is commonly used for domestic organizations in Australia that would be referred to as non-profit organizations in the United States. Such organizations that operate on the international level are fairly consistently referred to as “non-governmental organizations”, in the United States and elsewhere.

International non-governmental organizations have a history dating back to at least 1839. It has been estimated that by 1914 there were 1083 NGOs. International NGOs were important in the anti-slavery movement and the movement for women’s suffrage, and reached a peak at the time of the World Disarmament Conference. However, the phrase “non-governmental organization” only came into popular use with the establishment of the United Nations Organization in 1945 with provisions in Article 71 of Chapter 10 of the United Nations Charter for a consultative role for organizations which are neither governments nor member states—see Consultative Status. The definition of “international NGO” (INGO) is first given in resolution 288 (X) of ECOSOC on February 27, 1950: it is defined as “any international organization that is not founded by an international treaty”. The vital role of NGOs and other “major groups” in sustainable development was recognized in Chapter 27ofAgenda 21, leading to intense arrangements for a consultative relationship between the United Nations and non-governmental organizations.

NGO areas of activity focus

NGOs are involved in a very diverse range of human activities, and human influence on the environment. These activities are usually topical, but oriented at different strata of societies they are involved in: local, popular, economic or political.

  • Children & Youth
  • Communications & Media
  • Conflict Resolution
  • Development
  • Education
  • Environment
  • Family
  • Governance
  • Health & Nutrition
  • Human Rights
  • Indigenous People
  • International Organization
  • Labour
  • Law & Legal Affairs
  • Narcotics, Drugs & Crime
  • Peace and Security
  • Population & Human Settlements
  • Refugees
  • Relief Services
  • Religion, Belief & Ethics
  • Science and Technology
  • Social and Cultural Development
  • Sports & Recreation
  • Trade & International Finance
  • Transportation
  • Women`s Status & Issues

Types of NGOs

NGO type can be understood by orientation and level of co-operation.

NGO type by orientation

  • Charitable orientation;
  • Service orientation;
  • Participatory orientation;
  • Empowering orientation;

NGO type by level of co-operation

  • Community- Based Organization;
  • City Wide Organization;
  • National NGOs;
  • International NGOs;

Apart from “NGO”, often alternative terms are used as for example: independent sector, volunteer sector, civil society, grassroots organizations, transnational social movement organizations, private voluntary organizations, self-help organizations and non-state actors (NSA’s).

Non-governmental organizations are a heterogeneous group. A long list of acronyms has developed around the term “NGO”.

These include:

  • BINGO, short for business-friendly international NGO or big international NGO;
  • CSO, short for civil society organization;
  • DONGO: Donor Organized NGO;
  • ENGO: short for environmental NGO, such as Greenpeaceand WWF
  • GONGOsare government-operated NGOs, which may have been set up by governments to look like NGOs in order to qualify for outside aid or promote the interests of the government in question;
  • INGOstands for international NGO; Oxfam ,[INSPAD] is an international NGO;
  • QUANGOsare quasi-autonomous non-governmental organizations, such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (The ISO is actually not purely an NGO, since its membership is by nation, and each nation is represented by what the ISO Council determines to be the ‘most broadly representative’ standardization body of a nation. That body might itself be a nongovernmental organization; for example, the United States is represented in ISO by the American National Standards Institute, which is independent of the federal government. However, other countries can be represented by national governmental agencies; this is the trend in Europe.)
  • TANGO: short for technical assistance NGO;
  • TNGO: short for transnational NGO;
  • GSO: Grassroots Support Organization
  • MANGO: short for market advocacy NGO


NGOs vary in their methods. Some act primarily as lobbyists, while others primarily conduct programs and activities. For instance, an NGO such as Oxfam, concerned with poverty alleviation, might provide needy people with the equipment and skills to find food and clean drinking water, whereas an NGO like the FFDA helps through investigation and documentation of human rights violations and provides legal assistance to victims of human rights abuses. Others, such as Afghanistan Information Management Services, provide specialized technical products and services to support development activities implemented on the ground by other organizations.

Public relations

Non-governmental organisations need healthy relationships with the public to meet their goals. Foundations and charities use sophisticated public relations campaigns to raise funds and employ standard lobbying techniques with governments. Interest groups may be of political importance because of their ability to influence social and political outcomes. A code of ethics was established in 2002 by The World Association of Non Governmental NGOs.


Large NGOs may have annual budgets in the hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. For instance, the budget of the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) was over US$540 million in 1999. Funding such large budgets demands significant fundraising efforts on the part of most NGOs. Major sources of NGO funding are membership dues, the sale of goods and services, grants from international institutions or national governments, and private donations. Several EU-grants provide funds accessible to NGOs.

Government funding of NGOs is controversial, since, according to David Rieff, writing in The New Republic, “the whole point of humanitarian intervention was precisely that NGOs and civil society had both a right and an obligation to respond with acts of aid and solidarity to people in need or being subjected to repression or want by the forces that controlled them, whatever the governments concerned might think about the matter.” Some NGOs, such as Greenpeace do not accept funding from governments or intergovernmental organizations.

Legal status

The legal form of NGOs is diverse and depends upon homegrown variations in each country’s laws and practices. However, four main family groups of NGOs can be found worldwide:

  • Unincorporated and voluntary association
  • Trusts, charitiesand foundations
  • Companies not just for profit
  • Entities formed or registered under special NGO or nonprofitlaws

NGOs are not subjects of international law, as states are. An exception is the International Committee of the Red Cross, which is subject to certain specific matters, mainly relating to the Geneva Convention.

The Council of Europe in Strasbourg drafted the European Convention on the Recognition of the Legal Personality of International Non-Governmental Organizations in 1986, which sets a common legal basis for the existence and work of NGOs in Europe. Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to freedom of association, which is also a fundamental norm for NGOs.

Steps in establishing NGOs

The first step in the establishment of the NGO is to identify the area of peculiar needs of the society, such as health, HIV/AIDS, Maternal Mortality, and Polio, food, shelter, education, civil liberty and poverty alleviation among others.

The second step is to identify people of similar minds; there must be a unity of purpose. The third step is to engage the services of a qualified legal practitioner for guidance for the Registration process. Some NGOs can be registered with the regional or central government and that depends on the scope of the operations of the proposed NGO. The next important step also is to identify the internal or external partners with a clearly stated objectives and plan of actions.

QNO31:- What are Justice & its types? In the field of International Relations.

ANS:-Justice is the concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, fairness, or equity, along with the punishment of the breach of said ethics.

According to most theories of justice, it is overwhelmingly important: [John Rawls] claims that “Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought.” Justice can be thought of as distinct from and more fundamental than benevolence, charity, mercy, generosity or compassion. Justice has traditionally been associated with concepts of fate, reincarnation or Divine Providence, i.e. with a life in accordance with the cosmic plan. The association of justice with fairness has thus been historically and culturally rare and is perhaps chiefly a modern innovation [in western societies].

Variations of justice

Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, where punishment is forward-looking. Justified by the ability to achieve future social benefits resulting in crime reduction, the moral worth of an action is determined by its outcome.

Retributive justice regulates proportionate response to crime proven by lawful evidence, so that punishment is justly imposed and considered as morally correct and fully deserved. The law of retaliation (lex talionis) is a military theory of retributive justice, which says that reciprocity should be equal to the wrong suffered; “life for life, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.”

Restorative justice is concerned not so much with retribution and punishment as with (a) making the victim whole and (b) reintegrating the offender into society. This approach frequently brings an offender and a victim together, so that the offender can better understand the effect his/her offense had on the victim.

Distributive justice is directed at the proper allocation of things — wealth, power, reward, respect — between different people.

Oppressive Law exercises an authoritarian approach to legislation that is “totally unrelated to justice”, a tyrannical interpretation of law is one in which the population lives under restriction from unlawful legislation.

Some theorists, such as the classical Greeks and Romans, conceive of justice as a virtue—a property of people, and only derivatively of their actions and the institutions they create. Others emphasize actions or institutions, and only derivatively the people who bring them about. The source of justice has variously been attributed to harmony, divine command, natural law, or human creation.

Justice as harmony

Justice is a proper, harmonious relationship between the warring parts of the person or city. Hence Plato’s definition of justice is that justice is the having and doing of what is one’s own. A just man is a man in just the right place, doing his best and giving the precise equivalent of what he has received. This applies both at the individual level and at the universal level. A person’s soul has three parts – reason, spirit and desire. Similarly, a city has three parts – Socrates uses the parable of the chariot to illustrate his point: a chariot works as a whole because the two horses’ power is directed by the charioteer.

Justice as divine command

Justice as a divine law is commanding, and indeed the whole of morality, is the authoritative command. Killing is wrong and therefore must be punished and if not punished what should be done? A famous paradox called the Euthyphro dilemma essentially asks: is something right because God commands it, or does God command it because it’s right? If the former, then justice is arbitrary; if the latter, then morality exists on a higher order than God, who becomes little more than a passer-on of moral knowledge. Some Divine command advocates respond by pointing out that the dilemma is false: goodness is the very nature of God and is necessarily expressed in His commands.

Justice as natural law

For advocates of the theory that justice is part of natural law (e.g., John Locke), it involves the system of consequences that naturally derives from any action or choice. In this, it is similar to the laws of physics: in the same way as the Third of Newton’s laws of Motion requires that for every action there must be an equal and opposite reaction, justice requires according individuals or groups what they actually deserve, merit, or are entitled to. Justice, on this account, is a universal and absolute concept: laws, principles, religions, etc., are merely attempts to codify that concept, sometimes with results that entirely contradict the true nature of justice.

Justice as human creation

In contrast to the understandings canvassed so far, justice may be understood as a human creation, rather than a discovery of harmony, divine command, or natural law. This claim can be understood in a number of ways, with the fundamental division being between those who argue that justice is the creation of some humans, and those who argue that it is the creation of all humans.

Justice as authoritative command

According to thinkers including Thomas Hobbes, justice is created by public, enforceable, authoritative rules, and injustice is whatever those rules forbid, regardless of their relation to morality. Justice is created, not merely described or approximated, by the command of an absolute sovereign power. This position has some similarities with divine command theory (see above), with the difference that the state (or other authority) replaces God.

Justice as trickery

In Republic, the character Thrasymachus argues that justice is the interest of the strong—merely a name for what the powerful or cunning ruler has imposed on the people.

Justice as mutual agreement

According to thinkers in the social contract tradition, justice is derived from the mutual agreement of everyone concerned; or, in many versions, from what they would agree to under hypothetical conditions including equality and absence of bias. This account is considered further below, under ‘Justice as fairness’.

Justice as a subordinate value

According to utilitarian thinkers including John Stuart Mill, justice is not as fundamental as we often think. Rather, it is derived from the more basic standard of rightness,consequentialism: what is right is what has the best consequences (usually measured by the total or average welfare caused). So, the proper principles of justice are those that tend to have the best consequences. These rules may turn out to be familiar ones such as keeping contracts; but equally, they may not, depending on the facts about real consequences. Either way, what is important is those consequences, and justice is important, if at all, only as derived from that fundamental standard.


According to the egalitarian, justice can only exist within the coordinates of equality. This basic view can be elaborated in many different ways, according to what goods are to be distributed—wealth, respect, opportunity—and what they are to be distributed equally between—individuals, families, nations, races, species. Commonly held egalitarian positions include demands for equality of opportunity and for equality of outcome. It affirms that freedom and justice without equality are hollow and that equality itself is the highest justice.


In his A Theory of Justice, John Rawls used a social contract argument to show that justice, and especially distributive justice, is a form of fairness: animpartial distribution of goods. Rawls asks us to imagine ourselves behind a veil of ignorance that denies us all knowledge of our personalities, social statuses, moral characters, wealth, talents and life plans, and then asks what theory of justice we would choose to govern our society when the veil is lifted, if we wanted to do the best that we could for ourselves. We don’t know who in particular we are, and therefore can’t bias the decision in our own favour. So, the decision-in-ignorance models fairness, because it excludes selfish bias. Rawls argues that each of us would reject the utilitarian theory of justice that we should maximize welfare (see below) because of the risk that we might turn out to be someone whose own good is sacrificed for greater benefits for others. Instead, we would endorse Rawls’s two principles of justice:

  • Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all.
  • Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both
  • to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged, consistent with the just savings principle, and
  • Attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.


According to the utilitarian, justice requires the maximization of the total or average welfare across all relevant individuals. This may require sacrifice of some for the good of others, so long as everyone’s good is taken impartially into account. Utilitarianism, in general, argues that the standard of justification for actions, institutions, or the whole world, is impartial welfare consequentialism, and only indirectly, if at all, to do with rights, property, need, or any other non-utilitarian criterion. These other criteria might be indirectly important, to the extent that human welfare involves them. But even then, such demands as human rights would only be elements in the calculation of overall welfare, not uncrossable barriers to action.


According to the utilitarian, as already noted, justice requires the maximization of the total or average welfare across all relevant individuals. Punishment is bad treatment of someone, and therefore can’t be good in it, for the utilitarian. But punishment might be a necessary sacrifice that maximizes the overall good in the long term, in one or more of three ways:

  • Deterrence. The credible threatof punishment might lead people to make different choices; well-designed threats might lead people to make choices that maximize welfare.
  • Rehabilitation. Punishment might make bad people into better ones. For the utilitarian, that entire ‘bad person’ can mean is ‘person who’s likely to cause bad things (like suffering) ’. So, utilitarianism could recommend punishment that changes someone such that they are less likely to cause bad things.

Retributive justice

The retributivist will think the utilitarian’s argument disastrously mistaken. If someone does something wrong, we must respond to it, and to him or her, as an individual, not as a part of a calculation of overall welfare. To do otherwise is to disrespect him or her as an individual human being. If the crime had victims, it is to disrespect them, too. Wrongdoing must be balanced or made good in some way, and so the criminal deserves to be punished. Retributivism emphasizes retribution – payback – rather than maximization of welfare. Like the theory of distributive justice as giving everyone what they deserve (see above), it links justice with desert. It says that all guilty people, and only guilty people, deserve appropriate punishment. This matches some strong intuitions about just punishment: that it should be proportional to the crime and that it should be of only and all of the guilty. However, it is sometimes argued that retributivism is merely revenge in disguise. Despite this criticism, there are numerous differences between retribution and revenge: the former is impartial, has a scale of appropriateness and corrects a moral wrong, whereas the latter is personal, unlimited in scale, and often corrects a slight.

QNO32:-Explain the term Human Security in the field of International Relations?

ANS:-Human security is an emerging paradigm for understanding global vulnerabilities whose proponents challenge the traditional notion of national security by arguing that the proper referent for security should be the individual rather than the state. Human security holds that a people-centered view of security is necessary for national, regional and global stability.

The concept emerged from a post-Cold War, multi-disciplinary understanding of security involving a number of research fields, including development studies, international relations, strategic studies, and human rights. The United Nations Development Programme’s 1994 Human Development Report is considered a milestone publication in the field of human security, with its argument that insuring “freedom from want” and “freedom from fear” for all persons is the best path to tackle the problem of global insecurity. Frequently referred to in a wide variety of global policy discussions and scholarly journals, human security is often taught in universities as part of international relations, globalization, or human rights studies.

Critics of the concept argue that its vagueness undermines its effectiveness; that it has become little more than a vehicle for activists wishing to promote certain causes; and that it does not help the research community understand what security means or help decision makers to formulate good policies.


UNDP’s 1994 definition

Dr. Mahbub ul Haq first drew global attention to the concept of human security in the United Nations Development Programme’s 1994 Human Development Report and sought to influence the UN’s 1995 World Summit on Social Development in Copenhagen. The UNDP’s 1994 Human Development Report’s definition of human security argues that the scope of global security should be expanded to include threats in seven areas:

Coloured world map indicating Human Development Index (as of 2008). Countries coloured green exhibit high human development, those coloured yellow/orange exhibit medium human development, and those coloured red exhibit low human development.

  • Economic security— Economic security requires an assured basic income for individuals, usually from productive and remunerative work or, as a last resort, from a publicly financed safety net. In this sense, only about a quarter of the world’s people are presently economically secure. While the economic security problem may be more serious in developing countries, concern also arises in developed countries as well. Unemployment problems constitute an important factor underlying political tensions and ethnic
  • Food security— Food security requires that all people at all times have both physical and economic access to basic food. According to theUnited Nations, the overall availability of food is not a problem; rather the problem often is the poor distribution of food and a lack ofpurchasing power. In the past, food security problems have been dealt with at both national and global levels. However, their impacts are limited. According to UN, the key is to tackle the problems relating to access to assets, work and assured income (related to economic security).
  • Health security— Health Security aims to guarantee a minimum protection from diseases and unhealthy lifestyles. In developing countries, the major causes of death traditionally were infectious and parasitic diseases, whereas in industrialized countries, the major killers were diseases of the circulatory system. Today, lifestyle-related chronic diseases are leading killers worldwide, with 80 percent of deaths from chronic diseases occurring in low- and middle-income countries. According to the United Nations, in both developing and industrial countries, threats to health security are usually greater for poor people in rural areas, particularly children. This is due to malnutrition and insufficient access to health services, clean water and other basic necessities.
  • Environmental security— Environmental security aims to protect people from the short- and long-term ravages of nature, man-made threats in nature, and deterioration of the natural environment. In developing countries, lack of access to clean water resources is one of the greatest environmental threats. In industrial countries, one of the major threats is air pollution. Global warming, caused by the emission ofgreenhouse gases, is another environmental security issue.
  • Personal security— Personal security aims to protect people from physical violence, whether from the state or external states, from violent individuals and sub-state actors, from domestic abuse, or from predatory adults. For many people, the greatest source of anxiety is crime, particularly violent crime.
  • Community security— Community security aims to protect people from the loss of traditional relationshipsand values and from sectarian and ethnic violence. Traditional communities, particularly minority ethnic groups are often threatened. About half of the world’s states have experienced some inter-ethnic strife. The United Nations declared 1993 the Year of Indigenous People to highlight the continuing vulnerability of the 300 million aboriginal people in 70 countries as they face a widening spiral of violence.
  • Political security— Political security is concerned with whether people live in a society that honors their basic human rights. According to a survey conducted by Amnesty International, political repression, systematic torture, ill treatment or disappearancewas still practised in 110 countries. Human rights violations are most frequent during periods of political unrest. Along with repressing individuals and groups, governments may try to exercise control over ideas and information.

Since then, human security has been receiving more attention from the key global development institutions, such as the World Bank. Tadjbakhsh, among others, traces the evolution of human security in international organizations, concluding that the concept has been manipulated and transformed considerably since 1994 to fit organizational interests.

Relationship with traditional security

Human security emerged as a challenge to ideas of traditional security, but human and traditional or national security are not mutually exclusive concepts. Without human security, traditional state security cannot be attained and vice-versa.

Traditional security is about a state’s ability to defend itself against external threats. Traditional security (often referred to as national securityor state security) describes the philosophy of international security predominance since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 and the rise of thenation-states. While international relations theory includes many variants of traditional security, from realism to idealism, the fundamental trait that these schools share is their focus on the primacy of the nation-state.

Relationship with human rights

Human security is indebted to the human rights tradition (the ideas of natural law and natural rights). The development of the human security model can be seen to have drawn upon ideas and concepts fundamental to the human rights tradition. Both approaches use the individual as the main referent and both argue that a wide range of issues (i.e. civil rights, cultural identity, access to education and healthcare) are fundamental to human dignity. A major difference between the two models is in their approach to addressing threats to human dignity and survival. Whilst the human rights framework takes a legalistic approach, the human security framework, by utilizing a diverse range of actors, adopts flexible and issue-specific approaches, which can operate at local, national or international levels.

Gender and human security

Human security focuses on the serious neglect of gender concerns under the traditional security model. Traditional security’s focus on external military threats to the state has meant that the majority of threats women faces have been overlooked. By focusing on the individual, the human security model aims to address the security concerns of both women and men equally. Women are often the worst victims of violence and conflict: they form the majority of civilian deaths; the majority of refugees; and, are often the victims of cruel and degrading practices, such as rape. Women’s security is also threatened by unequal access to resources, services and opportunities. Human security seeks to empower women, through education, participation and access, as gender equality is seen as a necessary precondition for peace, security and a prosperous society.

Humanitarian intervention

The application of human security is highly relevant within the area of humanitarian intervention, as it focuses on addressing the deep rooted and multi-factorial problems inherent in humanitarian crises, and offers more long term resolutions. In general, the term humanitarian intervention generally applies to when a state uses force against another state in order to alleviate suffering in the latter state.

Under the traditional security paradigm humanitarian intervention is contentious. As discussed above, the traditional security paradigm places emphasis on the notion of states. Hence, the principles of state sovereignty and non-intervention that are paramount in the traditional security paradigm make it difficult to justify the intervention of other states in internal disputes. Through the development of clear principles based on the human security concept, there has been a step forward in the development of clear rules of when humanitarian intervention can occur and the obligations of states that intervene in the internal disputes of a state.

These principles on humanitarian intervention are the product of a debate pushed by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan. He posed a challenge to the international community to find a new approach to humanitarian intervention that responded to its inherent problems.[30] In 2001, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) produced the “The Responsibility to protect”, a comprehensive report detailing how the “right of humanitarian intervention” could be exercised. It was considered a triumph for the human security approach as it emphasized and gathered much needed attention to some of its main principles:

  • The protection of individual welfare is more important than the state. If the security of individuals is threatened internally by the state or externally by other states, state authority can be overridden.
  • Addressing the root causes of humanitarian crises (e.g. economic, political or social instability) is a more effective way to solve problems and protect the long-term security of individuals.
  • Prevention is the best solution. A collective understanding of the deeper social issues along with a desire to work together is necessary to prevent humanitarian crises, thereby preventing a widespread absence of human security within a population (which may mean investing more in development projects).

QNO33:- Describe the role of the World Bank and IMF ln the management of global economy?

ANS:-The World Bank is an international financial institution that provides loansto developing countries for capital programmes. The World Bank has a stated goal of reducing poverty. By law, all of its decisions must be guided by a commitment to promote foreign investment, international trade and facilitate capital investment.

The World Bank differs from the World Bank Group, in that the World Bank comprises only two institutions: the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA), whereas the latter incorporates these two in addition to three more: International Finance Corporation (IFC), Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), and International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).

The World Bank is one of five institutions created at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944. The International Monetary Fund, a related institution, is the second. Delegates from many countries attended the Bretton Woods Conference. The most powerful countries in attendance were the United States andUnited Kingdom, which dominated negotiations.

Although both are based in Washington, D.C., the World Bank is, by custom, headed by an American, while the IMF is led by a European.


From its conception until 1967 the bank undertook a relatively low level of lending. Fiscal conservatism and careful screening of loan applications was common. Bank staff attempted to balance the priorities of providing loans for reconstruction and development with the need to instill confidence in the bank.


From 1968 to 1980, the bank concentrated on meeting the basic needs of people in the developing world. The size and number of loans to borrowers was greatly increased as loan targets expanded from infrastructure into social services and other sectors.


In 1980, A.W. Clausen replaced McNamara after being nominated by US President Jimmy Carter. Clausen replaced a large number of bank staffers from the McNamara era and instituted a new ideological focus in the bank. The replacement of Chief Economist Hollis B. Chenery by Anne Krueger in 1982 marked a notable policy shift at the bank. Krueger was known for her criticism of development funding as well as third world governments as rent-seeking states.


From 1989, World Bank policy changed in response to criticism from many groups. Environmental groups and NGOs were incorporated in the lending of the bank in order to mitigate the effects of the past that prompted such harsh criticism. Bank projects “include” green concerns.

List of World Bank members

The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) has 187 member countries, while the International Development Association (IDA) has 168 members. Each member state of IBRD should be also a member of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and only members of IBRD are allowed to join other institutions within the Bank (such as IDA).

Voting power

In 2010, voting powers at the World Bank were revised to increase the voice of developing countries, notably China. The countries with most voting power are now the United States (15.85%), Japan(6.84%), China (4.42%), Germany (4.00%), the United Kingdom (3.75%), and France (3.75%). Under the changes, known as ‘Voice Reform – Phase 2′, other countries that saw significant gains included South Korea, Turkey, Mexico, Singapore, Greece, Brazil, India, and Spain. Most developed countries’ voting power was reduced, along with a few poor countries such as Nigeria. United States’, Russia’s and Saudi Arabia’s voting power was unchanged.

Poverty reduction strategies

For the poorest developing countries in the world, the bank’s assistance plans are based on poverty reduction strategies; by combining a cross-section of local groups with an extensive analysis of the country’s financial and economic situation the World Bank develops a strategy pertaining uniquely to the country in question. The government then identifies the country’s priorities and targets for the reduction of poverty, and the World Bank aligns its aid efforts correspondingly.

Forty-five countries pledged US$25.1 billion in “aid for the world’s poorest countries”, aid that goes to the World Bank International Development Association (IDA) which distributes the gifts to eighty poorer countries. While wealthier nations sometimes fund their own aid projects, including those for diseases, and although IDA is the recipient of criticism, Robert B. Zoellick, the president of the World Bank, said when the gifts were announced on December 15, 2007, that IDA money “is the core funding that the poorest developing countries rely on”.

Clean Technology Fund management

The World Bank has been assigned temporary management responsibility of the Clean Technology Fund (CTF), focused on making renewable energy cost-competitive with coal-fired power as quickly as possible, but this may not continue after UN’s Copenhagen climate change conference in December, 2009, because of the Bank’s continued investment in coal-fired power plants.

Clean Air Initiative

Clean Air Initiative (CAI) is a World Bank initiative to advance innovative ways to improve air quality in cities through partnerships in selected regions of the world by sharing knowledge and experiences. It includes electric vehicles.


The World Bank has long been criticized by non-governmental organizations, such as the indigenous rights group Survival International, and academics, including its former Chief Economist Joseph Stiglitz who is equally critical of the International Monetary Fund, the US Treasury Department, US and other developed country trade negotiators. Critics argue that the so-called free market reform policies which the Bank advocates are often harmful to economic development if implemented badly, too quickly (“shock therapy”), in the wrong sequence or in weak, uncompetitive economies.

Knowledge production

The World Bank has been criticised for the manner in which it engages in “the production, accumulation, circulation and functioning” of knowledge. The Bank’s production of knowledge has become integral to the funding and justification of large capital projects. The Bank relies on “a growing network of translocal scientists, technocrats, NGOs, and empowered citizens to help generate data and construct discursive strategies”.Its capacity to produce authoritative knowledge is a response to intense scrutiny of Bank projects resulting from the successes of growing anti-Bank and alternative-development movements. “Development has relied exclusively on one knowledge system, namely, the modern Western one. The dominance of this knowledge system has dictated the marginalization and disqualification of non-Western knowledge systems”. It has been remarked that in these alternative knowledge systems, researchers and activists might find alternative rationales to guide interventionist action away from Western (Bank-produced) ways of thinking. Knowledge production has become an asset to the Bank, and “it is generated and used in highly strategic ways”to provide justifications for development.

QNO34:-Explain the term International Monetary Fund?

ANS:-The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is the intergovernmental organization that oversees the global financial system by following the macroeconomic policies of its member countries, in particular those with an impact on exchange rate and the balance of payments. It is an organization formed with a stated objective of stabilizing international exchange rates and facilitating development through the enforcement of liberalising economic policies on other countries as a condition for loans, restructuring or aid. It also offers loans with varying levels of conditionality, mainly to poorer countries. Its headquarters are in Washington, D.C., United States. The IMF’s relatively high influence in world affairs and development has drawn heavy criticism from some sources.

The International Monetary Fund was conceived in July 1944 originally with 45 members and came into existence in December 1945 when 29 countries signed the agreement, with a goal to stabilize exchange rates and assist the reconstruction of the world’s international payment system. Countries contributed to a pool which could be borrowed from, on a temporary basis, by countries with payment imbalances (Condon, 2007). The IMF was important when it was first created because it helped the world stabilize the economic system. The IMF works to improve the economies of its member countries. The IMF describes itself as “an organization of 187 countries (as of July 2010), working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty”.

The International Monetary Fund was conceived in July 1944 during the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference. The representatives of 45 governments met in the Mount Washington Hotel in the area of Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, United States, with the delegates to the conference agreeing on a framework for international economic cooperation. The IMF was formally organized on December 27, 1945, when the first 29 countries signed its Articles of Agreement. The statutory purposes of the IMF today are the same as when they were formulated in 1943.

The IMF’s influence in the global economy steadily increased as it accumulated more members. The number of IMF member countries has more than quadrupled from the 44 states involved in its establishment, reflecting in particular the attainment of political independence by many developing countries and more recently the collapse of the Soviet bloc. The expansions of the IMF’s membership, together with the changes in the world economy, have required the IMF to adapt in a variety of ways to continue serving its purposes effectively.

In 1995, the International Monetary Fund began work on data dissemination standards with the view of guiding IMF member countries to disseminate their economic and financial data to the public. The International Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFC) endorsed the guidelines for the dissemination standards and they were split into two tiers: The General Data Dissemination System (GDDS) and the Special Data Dissemination Standard (SDDS).

The International Monetary Fund executive board approved the SDDS and GDDS in 1996 and 1997 respectively and subsequent amendments were published in a revised “Guide to the General Data Dissemination System”. The system is aimed primarily at statisticians and aims to improve many aspects of statistical systems in a country. It is also part of theWorld Bank Millennium Development Goals and Poverty Reduction Strategic Papers.

The IMF established a system and standard to guide members in the dissemination to the public of their economic andfinancial data. Currently there are two such systems: General Data Dissemination System (GDDS) and its superset Special Data Dissemination System (SDDS), for those member countries having or seeking access to international capital markets.

The primary objective of the GDDS is to encourage IMF member countries to build a framework to improve data quality and increase statistical capacity building. This will involve the preparation of meta data describing current statistical collection practices and setting improvement plans. Upon building a framework, a country can evaluate statistical needs, set priorities in improving the timeliness, transparency, reliability and accessibility of financial and economic data.

The primary mission of the IMF is to provide financial assistance to countries that experience serious financial and economic difficulties using funds deposited with the IMF from the institution’s 187 member countries. Member states with balance of payments problems, which often arise from these difficulties, may request loans to help fill gaps between what countries earn and/or are able to borrow from other official lenders and what countries must spend to operate, including covering the cost of importing basic goods and services. In return, countries are usually required to launch certainreforms, which have often been dubbed the “Washington Consensus”. These reforms are thought to be beneficial to countries with fixed exchange rate policies that may engage in fiscal, monetary, and political practices which may lead to the crisis itself. For example, nations with severe budget deficits, rampant inflation, strict price controls, or significantly over-valued or under-valued currencies run the risk of facing balance of payment crises. Thus, the structural adjustment programs are at least ostensibly intended to ensure that the IMF is actually helping to prevent financial crises rather than merely funding financial recklessness.

Historically the IMF’s managing director has been European and the president of the World Bank has been from the United States. However, this standard is increasingly being questioned and competition for these two posts may soon open up to include other qualified candidates from any part of the world. Executive Directors, who confirm the managing director, are voted in by Finance Ministers from countries they represent. The First Deputy Managing Director of the IMF, the second-in-command, has traditionally been (and is today) an American.



QNO35:- Examine the role of transrntional corporations (TNCs) in the development process of Third World countries.

ANS:-Transnational corporations — those corporations which operate in more than one country or nation at a time — have become some of the most powerful economic and political entities in the world today.  From Joshua Karliner, in his book, The Corporate Planet: Ecology and Politics in the Age of Globalization [Sierra Club Books, 1997], we can gleam a host of fundamental realizations, including the fact that many of these companies have far more power than the nation-states across whose borders they operate.

For example, the combined revenues of just General Motors and Ford — the two largest automobile corporations in the world — exceed the combined Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for all of sub-Saharan Africa.  The combined sales of Mitsubishi, Mitsui, ITOCHU, Sumitomo, Marubeni, and Nissho Iwai, Japan’s top six Sogo Sosha or trading companies, are nearly equivalent to the combined GDP of all of South America.  Overall, fifty-one of the largest one-hundred economies in the world are corporations.  The revenues of the top 500 corporations in the U.S. equal about 60 percent of the country’s GDP.  Transnational corporations hold ninety percent of all technology and product patents worldwide, and are involved in 70 percent of world trade. More than thirty percent of this trade is “intra- firm”; in other words, it occurs between units of the same corporation.

The number of transnational corporations in the world has jumped from 7,000 in 1970 to 40,000 in 1995.  While global in reach, these corporations’ home bases are concentrated in the Northern industrialized countries, where ninety percent of all transnationals are based.  More than half come from just five nations: France, Germany, the Netherlands, Japan and the United States. But despite their growing numbers, power is concentrated at the top. i.e., the 300 largest corporations account for one-quarter of the world’s productive assets.

The United Nations has justly described these corporations as “the productive core of the globalizing world economy.” Their 250,000 foreign affiliates account for most of the world’s industrial capacity, technological knowledge, international financial transactions, and ultimately the power of control.  In terms of energy, they mine, refine and distribute most of the world’s oil, gasoline, diesel and jet fuel, as well as build most of the world’s oil, coal, gas, hydroelectric and nuclear power plants. They extract most of the world’s minerals from the ground.  They manufacture and sell most of the world’s automobiles, airplanes, communications satellites, computers, home electronics, chemicals, medicines and biotechnology products.  They harvest much of the world’s wood and make most of its paper.  They grow many of the world’s major agricultural crops, while processing and distributing much of its food.

Given their dominance of politics, economics and technology, it is not surprising to find the big transnationals deeply involved in most of the world’s serious environmental crises.

Transnational corporations exert significant influence over the domestic and foreign policies of the Northern industrialized government that host them.  Surprise!  Indeed, the interests of the most powerful governments in the world are often intimately intertwined with the expanding pursuits of the transnationals that they charter.  At the same time, transnational corporations are moving to circumvent national governments. The borders and regulatory agencies of most governments are caving in (or being paid off) to the New World Order of globalization, allowing corporations to assume an ever more stateless quality, leaving them less and less accountable to any government anywhere.

These corporations, together with their host governments, are reorganizing the world economic structures — and thus the balance of political power — through a series of intergovernmental trade and investment accords.  These treaties serve as the frameworks within which globalization is evolving — allowing international corporate investment and trade to flourish across the Earth.

QNO36:- Explain the theory of ‘balance of power’ in the study of International Reiations.

ANS:-In international relations, a balance of power exists when there is parity or stability between competing forces. The concept “describes a state of affairs in the international system and explains the behaviour of states in that system” (Fry, Goldstein & Langhorn, 2004). As a term in international law for a ‘just equilibrium’ between the members of the family of nations, it expresses the doctrineintended to prevent any one nation from becoming sufficiently strong so as to enable it to enforce its will upon the rest.

“BoP” is a central concept in neorealist theory. Within a balance of power system, a state may choose to engage in either balancing or bandwagoning behavior. In a time of war, the decision to balance or to bandwagon may well determine the survival of the state.

Kenneth Waltz, a major contributor to neorealism, expressed in his book, “Theory of International Politics” that “if there is any distinctively political theory of international politics, balance-of-power theory is it.”. However, this assertion has come under criticism from other schools of thought within the international relations field, such as the constructivists and the political economists.

The basic principle involved in a balancing of political power, as Charles Davenant pointed out in his Essay on the Balance of Power, is as old as history, and was familiar to the ancients both as political theorists and as practical statesmen. In its essence it is no more than a precept ofcommon sense, born of experience and the instinct of self-preservation.

More precisely, the theory of Balance of Power has certain key aspects that have been agreed upon throughout the literature on the subject. First of all, the main objective of states, according to the Balance of Power theory is to secure their own safety, consistent with political realismor the realist world-view. Secondly, states reach equilibrium because of this objective of self-preservation. States, by trying to avoid the dominance of one particular state, will ally themselves with other states until equilibrium is reached.

QNO37:- Identify and examine the key arguments of the’dependency’ approach.

ANS:-Dependency or dependent may refer to:

Medicine and psychology

  • Substance dependence, a need for a substance so strong that it becomes necessary to have this substance to function properly
  • Codependence, a pattern of detrimental, behavioral interactions within a dysfunctional relationship
  • Dependence (behavioral medicine), a continuum of physical and psychological attachments related to the concept of behavioral addiction
  • Dependent personality disorder, a personality disorder characterized by a pervasive psychological dependence on other people
  • Dependency need, the real need of the organism, or something that individuals can not provide for themselves

Applied mathematics and computer science

  • Coupling (computer science), also called dependency, a state in which one object uses a functionality of another object
  • Data dependency, which describes a dependence relation between statements in a program
  • Dependency relation, a type of binary relation in mathematics and computer science.
  • Dependency (UML), a relationship between two elements in the Unified Modeling Language
  • Dependent type, in computer science and logic, a type which depends on a value
  • Dependent and independent variables, in mathematics, the variable that is dependent on the independent variable
  • Other
  • Dependency (project management), a link amongst a project’s terminal elements
  • Dependent territory, a classification of territory, especially a region that is not a sovereign state, but the possession of such
  • Dependant(British English) (Dependent – American English), a person who depends on another as a primary source of income
  • Dependency theory, an economic worldview which states that resources flow from poor states to wealthy states
  • Dependent Music, an independent Canadian record label, owned and operated by the artists that were a part of the collective
  • Dependent Records, a German independent record label that focuses on aggrotech, electro-industrial and futurepop music
  • Dependency ratio, in economics, the ratio of the economically dependent part of the economy to the productive part
  • Dependent and independent verb forms, in Goidelic languages, distinct verb forms used either with a preceding particle, in the case of dependent forms, or without one, in the case of independent forms

QNO38:-Explain the term Dependency Theory?

ANS:-Dependency theory or dependencia theory is a body of social science theories predicated on the notion that resources flow from a “periphery” of poor and underdeveloped states to a “core” of wealthy states, enriching the latter at the expense of the former. It is a central contention of dependency theory that poor states are impoverished and rich ones enriched by the way poor states are integrated into the “world system.”

The theory arose around 1970 as a reaction to some earlier theories of development which held that all societies progress through similar stages of development, that today’s underdeveloped areas are thus in a similar situation to that of today’s developed areas at some time in the past, and that therefore the task in helping the underdeveloped areas out of poverty is to accelerate them along this supposed common path of development, by various means such as investment, technology transfers, and closer integration into the world market. Dependency theory rejected this view, arguing that underdeveloped countries are not merely primitive versions of developed countries, but have unique features and structures of their own; and, importantly, are in the situation of being the weaker members in a world market economy, whereas the developed nations were never in an analogous position; they never had to exist in relation to a bloc of more powerful countries than themselves. Dependency theorists argued, in opposition to free market economists, that underdeveloped countries needed to reduce their connectedness with the world market so that they can pursue a path more in keeping with their own needs, less dictated by external pressures.

The premises of dependency theory are that:

  • Poor nations provide natural resources, cheap labour, a destination for obsolete technology, and markets for developed nations, without which the latter could not have the standard of living they enjoy.
  • Wealthy nations actively perpetuate a state of dependence by various means. This influence may be multifaceted, involving economics, media control, politics,bankingand finance, education, culture, sport, and all aspects of human resourcedevelopment (including recruitment and training of workers).
  • Wealthy nations actively counter attempts by dependent nations to resist their influences by means of economic sanctionsand/or the use of military force.

Dependency theory states that the poverty of the countries in the periphery is not because they are not integrated into the world system, or not ‘fully’ integrated as is often argued by free market economists, but because of how they are integrated into the system.

Dependency theory originates with two papers published in 1949 – one by Hans Singer, one by Raúl Prebisch – in which the authors observe that the terms of trade for underdeveloped countries relative to the developed countries had deteriorated over time: the underdeveloped countries were able to purchase fewer and fewer manufactured goods from the developed countries in exchange for a given quantity of their raw materials exports. This idea is known as the Singer-Prebisch thesis. Prebisch, an Argentine economist at the United Nations Commission for Latin America (UNCLA), went on to conclude that the underdeveloped nations must employ some degree of protectionism in trade if they were to enter a self-sustaining development path. He argued that Import-substitution industrialisation (ISI), not a trade-and-export orientation, was the best strategy for underdeveloped countries. The theory was developed from a Marxian perspective by Paul A. Baran in 1957 with the publication of his The Political Economy of Growth. Dependency theory shares many points with earlier, Marxist, theories of imperialism by Rosa Luxemburg and V.I. Lenin, and has attracted continued interest from Marxists. Matias Vernengo, a University of Utah economist, identifies two main streams in dependency theory: the Latin American Structuralist, typified by the work of Prebisch,Celso Furtado and Anibal Pinto at the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLAC, or, in Spanish, CEPAL); and the American Marxist, developed by Paul A. Baran, Paul Sweezy, and Andre Gunder Frank.

The theory was popular in the 1960s and 1970s as a criticism of modernization theory (the “stages” hypothesis mentioned above), which was falling increasingly out of favor because of continued widespread poverty in much of the world.

Many dependency theorists advocate social revolution as an effective means to the reduction of economic disparities in the world system.

Poor nations are at a disadvantage in their market interactions with wealthy nations. There are several aspects to this. One is that a high proportion of the developing nations’ economic activity consists of exports and imports from the developed nations—in many cases with only one or a few developed nations. By contrast, only a small proportion of the economic activity of the developed nations consists of trade with the developing nations; a developed nation’s trade consists mostly of internal trade and trade with other developed nations. This asymmetry puts a poor nation in a weak bargaining position Vis a Vis a developed nation. There are also historical aspects: the poor nations are almost all former colonies of the developed nations; their economies were built to serve the developed nations in a twofold capacity: as sources of cheap raw materials and as highly populous markets for the absorption of the developed nations’ manufactured output.

Origins and predecessors

Dependency theory can trace its intellectual heritage to the long-running free trade debate, specifically various forms of economic nationalism and the school of mercantilism. An early statement of dependency theory is found in Henry Clay, architect of the American System, in an 1832 speech:

Gentlemen deceive themselves. It is not free trade that they are recommending to our acceptance. It is, in effect, the British colonial system that we are invited to adopt; and, if their policy prevails, it will lead, substantially, to the recolonization of these States, under the commercial dominion of Great Britain.

Similar sentiments were expressed by German American economist Friedrich List:

Had the English left everything to itself—’Laissez faire, laissez aller’, as the popular economical school recommends—the [German] merchants of the Steelyard would be still carrying on their trade in London, the Belgians would be still manufacturing cloth for the English, England would have still continued to be the sheep-farm of the Hansards, just as Portugal became the vineyard of England, and has remained so till our days, owing to the stratagem of a cunning diplomatist.


While there are many different and conflicting ideas on how developing countries can alleviate the effects of the world system, several of the following protectionist/nationalist practices were adopted at one time or another by such countries:

  • Promotion of domestic industry and manufactured goods. By imposing subsidies to protect domestic industries, poor countries can be enabled to sell their own products rather than simply exporting raw materials.
  • Import limitations. By limiting the importation of luxury goodsand manufactured goodsthat can be produced within the country, the country can reduce its loss of capital and resources.
  • Forbidding foreign investment. Some governments took steps to keep foreign companies and individuals from owning or operating property that draws on the resources of the country.
  • Some governments have forcibly taken over foreign-owned companies on behalf of the state, in order to keep profits within the country.

QNO39:- Explain the term’Sustainable Development’.

ANS:-Sustainable development (SD) is a pattern of resource use that aims to meet human needs while preserving the environment so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but also for generations to come. The term was used by the Brundtland Commission which coined what has become the most often-quoted definition of sustainable development as development that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

Sustainable development ties together concern for the carrying capacity of natural systems with the social challenges facing humanity. As early as the 1970s “sustainability” was employed to describe an economy “in equilibrium with basic ecological support systems.” Ecologists have pointed to The Limits to Growth, and presented the alternative of a “steady state economy” in order to address environmental concerns.

The field of sustainable development can be conceptually broken into three constituent parts: environmental sustainability, economicsustainability and sociopolitical sustainability.

Environmental sustainability

Environmental sustainability is the process of making sure current processes of interaction with the environment are pursued with the idea of keeping the environment as pristine as naturally possible based on ideal-seeking behavior.

An “unsustainable situation” occurs when natural capital (the sum total of nature’s resources) is used up faster than it can be replenished. Sustainabilityrequires that human activity only uses nature’s resources at a rate at which they can be replenished naturally. Inherently the concept of sustainable development is intertwined with the concept of carrying capacity. Theoretically, the long-term result of environmental degradation is the inability to sustain human life. Such degradation on a global scale could imply extinction for humanity.

The notion of capital in sustainable development

The sustainable development debate is based on the assumption that societies need to manage three types of capital (economic, social, and natural), which may be non-substitutable and whose consumption might be irreversible. Daly (1991), for example, points to the fact that natural capital can not necessarily be substituted by economic capital. While it is possible that we can find ways to replace some natural resources, it is much more unlikely that they will ever be able to replace eco-system services, such as the protection provided by the ozone layer, or the climate stabilizing function of the Amazonian forest. In fact natural capital, social capital and economic capital are often complementarities. A further obstacle to substitutability lies also in the multi-functionality of many natural resources. Forests, for example, not only provide the raw material for paper (which can be substituted quite easily), but they also maintain biodiversity, regulate water flow, and absorb CO2.

Another problem of natural and social capital deterioration lies in their partial irreversibility. The loss in biodiversity, for example, is often definite. The same can be true for cultural diversity. For example with globalisation advancing quickly the number of indigenous languages is dropping at alarming rates. Moreover, the depletion of natural and social capital may have non-linear consequences. Consumption of natural and social capital may have no observable impact until a certain threshold is reached. A lake can, for example, absorb nutrients for a long time while actually increasing its productivity. However, once a certain level of algae is reached lack of oxygen causes the lake’s ecosystem to break down suddenly.

The business case for sustainable development

The most broadly accepted criterion for corporate sustainability constitutes a firm’s efficient use of natural capital. This eco-efficiency is usually calculated as the economic value added by a firm in relation to its aggregated ecological impact. This idea has been popularised by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) under the following definition: “Eco-efficiency is achieved by the delivery of competitively priced goods and services that satisfy human needs and bring quality of life, while progressively reducing ecological impacts and resource intensity throughout the life-cycle to a level at least in line with the earth’s carrying capacity.”

QNO40:- Trace the antecedents and evolution of the Non-aligned movement

ANS:-The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) is an intergovernmental organization of states considering themselves not aligned formally with or against any major power bloc. As of 2010, the organization has 118 members and 18 observer countries. Generally speaking (as of 2010), the Non-Aligned Movement members can be described as all of those countries which belong to the Group of 77 (along with Belarus and Uzbekistan), but which are not observers in Non-Aligned Movement and are not Oceanian (with the exception of Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu).

The organization was founded in Belgrade in 1961, and was largely the brainchild of Yugoslavia’s first President, Josip Broz Tito, India’s first Prime Minister,Jawaharlal Nehru, Egypt’s second President, Gamal Abdel Nasser, and Indonesia’s first President, Sukarno. All four leaders were prominent advocates of a middle course for states in the Developing World between the Western and Eastern blocs in the Cold War.

The purpose of the organisation as stated in the Havana Declaration of 1979 is to ensure “the national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and security of non-aligned countries” in their “struggle against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, racism, and all forms of foreign aggression,occupation, domination, interference or hegemony as well as against great power and bloc politics.” They represent nearly two-thirds of the United Nations’s members and 55% of the world population, particularly countries considered to be developing or part of the Third World.

Because the Non-Aligned Movement was formed as an attempt to thwart the Cold War, it has struggled to find relevance since the Cold War ended. After the breakup of Yugoslavia, a founding member, its membership was suspendedin 1992 at the regular Ministerial Meeting of the Movement, held in New York during the regular yearly session of the General Assembly of the United Nations. At the Summit of the Movement in Jakarta, Indonesia (September 1, 1992 – September 6, 1992) Yugoslavia was suspended or expelled from the Movement. The successor states of the SFR Yugoslavia have expressed little interest in membership, though some have observer status. In 2004, Malta and Cyprus ceased to be members and joined the European Union. Belarus remains the sole member of the Movement in Europe. Turkmenistan, Belarus and Dominican Republic are the most recent entrants. The application of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Costa Rica were rejected in 1995 and 1998. Serbia has been suspended since 1992 due to the Serbian Government’s involvement in the Bosnian War (officially as the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia at the time).

The term “non-alignment” itself was coined by Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru during his speech in 1954 in Colombo, Sri Lanka. In this speech, Nehru described the five pillars to be used as a guide for Sino-Indian relations, which were first put forth by Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai. Called Panchsheel (five restraints), these principles would later serve as the basis of the Non-Aligned Movement. The five principles were:

  • Mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty
  • Mutual non-aggression
  • Mutual non-interference in domestic affairs
  • Equality and mutual benefit
  • Peaceful co-existence

A significant milestone in the development of the Non-Aligned Movement was the 1955 Bandung Conference, a conference of Asian and African states hosted by Indonesian president Sukarno, who gave a significant contribution to promote this movement. The attending nations declared their desire not to become involved in the Cold War and adopted a “declaration on promotion of world peace and cooperation”, which included Nehru’s five principles. Six years after Bandung, an initiative of Yugoslav president Josip Broz Tito led to the first official Non-Aligned Movement Summit, which was held in September 1961 in Belgrade.

The Non-Aligned Movement espouses policies and practices of cooperation, especially those that are multilateral and provide mutual benefit to all those involved. Many of the members of the Non-Aligned Movement are also members of the United Nations and both organisations have a stated policy of peaceful cooperation, yet successes that the NAM has had in multilateral agreements tends to be ignored by the larger, western and developed nation dominated UN.

QNO41:- What do you understand by the term ‘unipolarity’? Explain with reference to the

United States of America.

ANS:-Polarity in international relations is any of the various ways in which power is distributed within the international system. It describes the nature of the international system at any given period of time. One generally distinguishes four types of systems: Unipolarity, Bipolarity, Tripolarity, and Multipolarity, for four or more centers of power. The type of system is completely dependent on the distribution of power and influence of states in a region or internationally.


Unipolarity in international politics is a distribution of power in which there is one state with most of the cultural, economic, and military influence. This is different than hegemony since a hegemon may not have total control of the sea ports or “commons”.

Examples of unipolarity

The most recent example of a unipolar world has been one dominated by the United States since 1991, in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Other states and empires in the past have dominated their known worlds in a unipolar fashion. Some examples are below. Note that most of the cases as well as the dates given are open to some debate.


Bipolarity is a distribution of power in which two states have the majority of economic, military, and cultural influence internationally or regionally. Often, spheres of influence would develop. For example, in the Cold War, most Western and democratic states would fall under the influence of the USA, while most Communist states would fall under the influence of the USSR. After this, the two powers will normally maneuver for the support of the unclaimed areas.


  • The United Statesand the Soviet Unionduring the peak of the Cold War. However, the Sino-Soviet split of circa 1960 led to the rise of China as a possible third superpower.
  • Great Britainand Franceduring the colonial era.

Regional examples

  • Spartaand Athensduring much of pre-Alexandrian Greek history.
  • Carthageand the Roman Republicprior to the Punic Wars
  • Roman Empireand the Sassanid Empireduring the Roman-Persian Wars, until the Arab invasion of Persia.
  • Russiaand Japan, up until the Russo-Japanese Warof 1905, causing bipolarity in spheres of influence in several parts of China, Korea, andMongolia.
  • Russia, the Safavid Empireand the Ottoman Empirein struggles to attain regions surrounding the Black Sea, from the early 18th century until World War I.
  • Israeland Egyptcould be considered regional powers in the Middle East during the Arab-Israeli conflict from 1948 to 1978
  • Indiacould be considered as regional power in the South Asia during the Kargil conflictof 1999.

Multi-state examples of bipolarity

The bipolar system can be said to extend to much larger systems, such as alliances or organizations, which would not be considered nation-states, but would still have power concentrated in two primary groups.

In both World Wars, much of the world, and especially Europe, the United States and Japan had been divided into two respective spheres – one case being the Axis and Allies of World War II (1939–1945) – and the division of power between the Central Powers and Allied Powers during World War I (1914–1918). Neutral nations, however, may have caused what may be assessed as an example of tripolarity as well within both of the conflicts.


Multipolarity is a distribution of power in which more than two nation-states have nearly equal amounts of military, cultural, and economic influence.

Opinions on the stability of multipolarity differ. Classical realist theorists, such as Hans Morgenthau and E. H. Carr, hold that multipolar systems are more stable than bipolar systems, as great powers can gain power through alliances and petty wars that do not directly challenge other powers; in bipolar systems, classical realists argue, this is not possible. On the other hand, the neorealist focus on security and invert the formula: states in a multipolar system can focus their fears on any number of other powers and, misjudging the intentions of other states, unnecessarily compromise their security, while states in a bipolar system always focus their fears on one other power, meaning that at worst the powers will miscalculate the force required to counter threats and spend slightly too much on the operation. However, due to the complexity of mutually assured destruction scenarios, with nuclear weapons, multipolar systems may be more stable than bipolar systems even in the neorealist analysis. This system tends to have many shifting alliances until one of two things happens. Either a balance of power is struck, and neither side wants to attack the other, or one side will attack the other because it either fears the potential of the new alliance, or it feels that it can defeat the other side.

One of the major implications of an international system with any number of poles, including a multipolar system, is that international decisions will often be made for strategic reasons to maintain a balance of power rather than out of ideological or historical reasons.

Multipolarity today

Those claiming that the world is multipolar fall into two main camps. A “superpower is something of the past” view holds that the USA and USSR in the Cold War were in fact superpowers, but argues that due to the complex economic interdependencies on the international scale and the creation of a global village, the concept of one or more states gaining enough power to claim superpower status is antiquated. The rival view is that even throughout the Cold War, neither the USA nor the USSR were superpowers, but were actually dependent on the smaller states in their “spheres of influence.”

While the US has a great deal of economic clout and has influenced the culture of many nations, their dependency on foreign investors and reliance on foreign trade have created a mutual economic dependency between developed and developing nations. According to those who believe the world is multipolar, this interdependency means the US can’t be called a superpower as it isn’t self-sufficient and relies on the global community to sustain its people’s quality of life. These interdependencies also apply to diplomacy. Considering the complex state of world affairs and the military might of some developing nations, it has become increasingly difficult to engage in foreign policy if it is not supported by other nations. The diplomatic and economic factors that bind the globe together can sometimes make it difficult to act unilaterally, however alliances exist and the US is largely considered to be the sole superpower due to its unchallenged strength and influence, which would suggest a more unipolar world (despite globalization).


Nonpolarity is an international system with numerous centers of power but no center dominates any other centre. Centers of power can be nation-states, corporations, non-governmental organizations, terrorist groups, and such. Power is found in many hands and many places.


QNO42:- Briefly explain the various theories of ‘regionalism’.

ANS:-In politics, regionalism is a political ideology that focuses on the interests of a particular region or group of regions, whether traditional or formal (administrative divisions, country subdivisions, political divisions, subnational units). Regionalism centers on increasing the region’s influence and political power, either through movements for limited form of autonomy (devolution, states’ rights, decentralization) or through stronger measures for a greater degree of autonomy (sovereignty,separatism, independence). Regionalists often favor loose federations or confederations over a unitary state with a strong central government. Regionalism may be contrasted with nationalism.

Proponents of regionalism say that strengthening a region’s governing bodies and political powers within a larger country would create efficiencies of scale to the region, promote decentralization, develop a more rational allocation of the region’s resources for benefit of the local populations, increase the efficient implementation of local plans, raise competitiveness levels among the regions and ultimately the whole country, and save taxpayers money.

In some countries, the development of regionalist politics may be a prelude to further demands for greater autonomy or even full separation, especially when ethnic and cultural disparities are present. This was demonstrated in the late 1980s in Yugoslavia, among other examples.

A regionalist party is a regional political party promoting autonomy for its region; a regional party is a political party with its base almost entirely in a single region. All regionalist parties are also regional, while only a portion of regional parties are also regionalist. Because regional parties often cannot receive enough votes or legislative seats to be politically powerful, they may join political alliances or seek to be part of a coalition government.

Regionalism may or may not include autonomism. Examples of autonomist parties include Action démocratique du Québec in Canada (Quebec), New Democratic Macau Association in China (Macau), Martinican Progressive Party (Martinique) and Communist Party of Réunion (Réunion) in France, Lega Nord in Italy (Northern Italy) and Popular Democratic Party of Puerto Rico in the United States (Puerto Rico).

One must distinguish between regionalist parties which support autonomy and nationalist/independentist movements which support independence. In the latter are included the likes of Frente para a Libertação do Enclave de Cabinda (FLEC) in Angola (Cabinda province), the Nieuw-Vlaamse Alliantie and the Vlaams Belang and in Belgium (Flanders), the Basque Nationalist Party (Basque country), Convergence and Union (Catalonia) and the Republican Left of Catalonia (Catalonia) in Spainand the Scottish National Party (Scotland) and Plaid Cymru (Wales) in the United Kingdom. Sometimes, the Lega Nord has formerly been independentist too.

QNO43:- Briefly examine the role and functions of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

ANS:-The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an organization that intends to supervise and liberalize international trade. The organization officially commenced on January 1, 1995 under the Marrakech Agreement, replacing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which commenced in 1948. The organization deals with regulation of trade between participating countries; it provides a framework for negotiating and formalizing trade agreements, and a dispute resolution process aimed at enforcing participants’ adherence to WTO agreements which are signed by representatives of member governments and ratified by their parliaments. Most of the issues that the WTO focuses on derive from previous trade negotiations, especially from the Uruguay Round (1986-1994).

The organization is currently endeavoring to persist with a trade negotiation called the Doha Development Agenda (or Doha Round), which was launched in 2001 to enhance equitable participation of poorer countries which represent a majority of the world’s population. However, the negotiation has been dogged by “disagreement between exporters of agricultural bulk commodities and countries with large numbers of subsistence farmers on the precise terms of a ‘special safeguard measure’ to protect farmers from surges in imports. At this time, the future of the Doha Round is uncertain.”

The WTO has 153 members, representing more than 97% of total world tradeand 30 observers, most seeking membership. The WTO is governed by a ministerial conference, meeting every two years; a general council, which implements the conference’s policy decisions and is responsible for day-to-day administration; and a director-general, who is appointed by the ministerial conference. The WTO’s headquarters is at the Centre William Rappard,Geneva, Switzerland.

ITO and GATT 1947

The WTO’s predecessor, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), was established after World War II in the wake of other new multilateral institutions dedicated to international economic cooperation — notably the Bretton Woods institutions known as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. A comparable international institution for trade, named the International Trade Organization was successfully negotiated. The ITO was to be a United Nations specialized agency and would address not only trade barriers but other issues indirectly related to trade, including employment, investment, restrictive business practices, and commodity agreements. But the ITO treaty was not approved by the U.S. and a few other signatories and never went into effect.

In the absence of an international organization for trade, the GATT would over the years “transform itself” into a de facto international organization.

GATT rounds of negotiations

The GATT was the only multilateral instrument governing international trade from 1948 until the WTO was established in 1995. Despite attempts in the mid 1950s and 1960s to create some form of institutional mechanism for international trade, the GATT continued to operate for almost half a century as a semi-institutionalized multilateral treaty regime on a provisional basis.

From Genève to Tokyo

Seven rounds of negotiations occurred under the GATT. The first real GATT trade rounds concentrated on further reducing tariffs. Then, the Kennedy Round in the mid-sixties brought about a GATT anti-dumping Agreement and a section on development. The Tokyo Round during the seventies was the first major attempt to tackle trade barriers that do not take the form of tariffs, and to improve the system, adopting a series of agreements on non-tariff barriers, which in some cases interpreted existing GATT rules, and in others broke entirely new ground. Because these plurilateral agreements were not accepted by the full GATT membership, they were often informally called “codes”. Several of these codes were amended in the Uruguay Round, and turned into multilateral commitments accepted by all WTO members. Only four remained plurilateral (those on government procurement, bovine meat, civil aircraft and dairy products), but in 1997 WTO members agreed to terminate the bovine meat and dairy agreements, leaving only two.


Among the various functions of the WTO, these are regarded by analysts as the most important:

  • It oversees the implementation, administration and operation of the covered agreements.
  • It provides a forum for negotiations and for settling disputes.

Additionally, it is the WTO’s duty to review and propagate the national trade policies, and to ensure the coherence and transparency of trade policies through surveillance in global economic policy-making. Another priority of the WTO is the assistance of developing, least-developed and low-income countries in transition to adjust to WTO rules and disciplines through technical cooperation and training.

The WTO is also a center of economic research and analysis: regular assessments of the global trade picture in its annual publications and research reports on specific topics are produced by the organization. Finally, the WTO cooperates closely with the two other components of the Bretton Woods system, the IMF and the World Bank.

Principles of the trading system

The WTO establishes a framework for trade policies; it does not define or specify outcomes. That is, it is concerned with setting the rules of the trade policy games. Five principles are of particular importance in understanding both the pre-1994 GATT and the WTO:

  • Non-Discrimination. It has two major components: the most favoured nation(MFN) rule, and the national treatment Both are embedded in the main WTO rules on goods, services, and intellectual property, but their precise scope and nature differ across these areas. The MFN rule requires that a WTO member must apply the same conditions on all trade with other WTO members, i.e. a WTO member has to grant the most favorable conditions under which it allows trade in a certain product type to all other WTO members. “Grant someone a special favour and you have to do the same for all other WTO members.” National treatment means that imported goods should be treated no less favorably than domestically produced goods (at least after the foreign goods have entered the market) and was introduced to tackle non-tariff barriers to trade (e.g. technical standards, security standards et al. discriminating against imported goods).
  • Reciprocity. It reflects both a desire to limit the scope of free-ridingthat may arise because of the MFN rule, and a desire to obtain better access to foreign markets. A related point is that for a nation to negotiate, it is necessary that the gain from doing so be greater than the gain available from unilateralliberalization; reciprocal concessions intend to ensure that such gains will materialise.
  • Binding and enforceable commitments. The tariff commitments made by WTO members in a multilateral trade negotiation and on accession are enumerated in a schedule (list) of concessions. These schedules establish “ceiling bindings”: a country can change its bindings, but only after negotiating with its trading partners, which could mean compensating them for loss of trade. If satisfaction is not obtained, the complaining country may invoke the WTO dispute settlement procedures.
  • Transparency. The WTO members are required to publish their trade regulations, to maintain institutions allowing for the review of administrative decisions affecting trade, to respond to requests for information by other members, and to notify changes in trade policies to the WTO. These internal transparency requirements are supplemented and facilitated by periodic country-specific reports (trade policy reviews) through the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM). The WTO system tries also to improve predictability and stability, discouraging the use of quotasand other measures used to set limits on quantities of imports.
  • Safety valves. In specific circumstances, governments are able to restrict trade. There are three types of provisions in this direction: articles allowing for the use of trade measures to attain noneconomic objectives; articles aimed at ensuring “fair competition”; and provisions permitting intervention in trade for economic reasons. Exceptions to the MFN principle also allow for preferential treatment of developing countries, regional free trade areasand customs unions.

QNO44:-Explain the term European Union?

ANS:-The European Union (EU) is an economic and political union of 27 member states which are located primarily in Europe. The EU traces its origins from the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) and the European Economic Community (EEC) formed by six countries in the 1950s. In the intervening years the EU has grown, in size, by the accession of new member states and, in power, by the addition of policy areas to its remit. TheMaastricht Treaty established the European Union under its current name in 1993. The last amendment to the constitutional basis of the EU, theTreaty of Lisbon, came into force in 2009.

The EU operates through a hybrid system of supranational independent institutions and intergovernmentally made decisions negotiated by the member states. Important institutions of the EU include the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, the European Council, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the European Central Bank. The European Parliament is elected every five years by EU citizens.

The EU has developed a single market through a standardised system of laws which apply in all member states including the abolition of passport controls within the Schengen area. It ensures the free movement of people, goods, services, and capital, enacts legislation in justice and home affairs, and maintains common policies on trade, agriculture, fisheries and regional development. A monetary union, the eurozone, was established in 1999 and is currently composed of seventeen member states. Through the Common Foreign and Security Policy the EU has developed a limited role in external relations and defence. Permanent diplomatic missions have been established around the world and the EU is represented at theUnited Nations, the WTO, the G8 and the G-20.

With a combined population of 500 million inhabitants, the EU generated an estimated 21% (US$ 14.8 trillion) share of the global economy (GDP PPP) in 2009. As a trading bloc the EU accounts for 20% of global imports and exports.

After World War II, moves towards European integration were seen by many as an escape from the extreme forms of nationalism which had devastated the continent. One such attempt to unite Europeans was the European Coal and Steel Community which, while having the modest aim of centralised control of the previously national coal and steel industries of its member states, was declared to be “a first step in the federation of Europe”.

The European Union was formally established when the Maastricht Treaty came into force on 1 November 1993, and in 1995 Austria, Sweden, and Finland joined the newly established EU. In 2002, euro notes and coins replaced national currencies in 12 of the member states. Since then, the eurozone has increased to encompass seventeen countries. In 2004, the EU saw its biggest enlargement to date when Malta, Cyprus, Slovenia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary joined the Union.

QNO45:-Discuss the Foreign direct investment in the field of International Relations?

ANS:-Foreign direct investment (FDI) or foreign investment refers to long term participation by country A into country B. It usually involves participation in management, joint-venture, transfer of technologyand expertise. There are two types of FDI: inward foreign direct investment and outward foreign direct investment, resulting in a net FDI inflow (positive or negative) and “stock of foreign direct investment”, which is the cumulative number for a given period. Direct investment excludes investment through purchase of shares.

FDI is a measure of foreign ownership of productive assets, such as factories, mines and land. Increasing foreign investment can be used as one measure of growing economic globalization. The figure below shows net inflows of foreign direct investment in the United States. The largest flows of foreign investment occur between the industrialized countries (North America, Western Europe and Japan). But flows to non-industrialized countries are increasing sharply.


A foreign direct investor may be classified in any sector of the economy and could be any one of the following:

  • an individual;
  • a group of related individuals;
  • an incorporated or unincorporated entity;
  • a public companyor private company;
  • a group of related enterprises;
  • a government body;
  • an estate (law), trustor other societal organisation; or
  • Any combination of the above.


The foreign direct investor may acquire voting power of an enterprise in an economy through any of the following methods:

  • by incorporating a wholly owned subsidiaryor company
  • by acquiring shares in an associated enterprise
  • through a mergeror an acquisitionof an unrelated enterprise
  • participating in an equity joint venturewith another investor or enterprise

Foreign direct investment incentives may take the following forms:

  • low corporate taxand income taxrates
  • tax holidays
  • other types of tax concessions
  • preferential tariffs
  • special economic zones
  • EPZ- Export Processing Zones
  • Bonded Warehouses
  • Maquiladoras
  • investment financial subsidies
  • soft loanor loan guarantees
  • free land or land subsidies
  • relocation & expatriation subsidies
  • job training & employment subsidies
  • infrastructuresubsidies
  • R&D support
  • derogation from regulations (usually for very large projects)

Foreign direct investment in the United States

“Invest in America” is an initiative of the US Department of Commerce and aimed to promote the arrival of foreign investors to the country.

The “Invest in America” policy is focused on:

  • Facilitating investor
  • Carrying out maneuvers to aid foreign investors.
  • Provide support both at local and state levels.
  • Address concerns related to the business environment by helping as an ombudsmanin Washington DC for the international venture
  • Offering policy guidelines and helping getting access to the legal system.

Foreign direct investment in China

Starting from a baseline of less than $19 billion just 20 years ago, FDI in China has grown to over $300 billion in the first 10 years. China has continued its massive growth and is the leader among all developing nations in terms of FDI. Even though there was a slight dip in FDI in 2009 as a result of the global slowdown, 2010 has again seen investments increase.

Foreign direct investment in India

A recent UNCTAD survey projected India as the second most important FDI destination (after China) for transnational corporations during 2010-2012. As per the data, the sectors which attracted higher inflows were services, telecommunication, construction activities and computer software and hardware. Mauritius, Singapore, the US and the UK were among the leading sources of FDI. FDI for 2009-10 at USD 25.88 billion was lower by five per cent from USD 27.33 billion in the previous fiscal. Foreign direct investment in August dipped by about 60 per cent to USD 1.33 billion, the lowest in 2010 fiscal, industry department data released showed.

Foreign direct investment and the developing world

Foreign investment can be a significant driver of development in poor nations. It provides an inflow of foreign capital and funds, in addition to an increase in the transfer of skills, technology, and job opportunities. Many of the East Asian tigers such as China, South Korea, Malaysia, and Singapore benefited from investment abroad. The Commitment to Development Index ranks the “development-friendliness” of rich country investment policies.

QNO46:- Explain the term Humanist Movement?

ANS:-The Humanist Movement is an international volunteer organisation that promotes nonviolence and non-discrimination. It is not an institution. It takes its inspiration from the current of thought referred to as New or Universal Humanism that has been developed since 1969 by its founder Mario Rodríguez Cobos, pen name: Silo.

New Humanism focuses on the overcoming of pain and suffering at a personal, interpersonal and social level. It defines violence as anything that causes pain and suffering to human beings. In this way violence is seen to have many different aspects, not just the well-known physical form but also; economic, religious, psychological, sexual, ethnic, etc.

Introduction and basic philosophy

New Humanism is based on two basic points:

  • Solidarity – defined as treating other people the way one would like to be treated and,
  • Coherence – defined as thinking, feeling and acting in the same way.

The project of the Humanist Movement is to eradicate war, hunger, poverty and economic exploitation across the planet and develop a new system based on the value of human life as the central value, higher than money, power, prestige, etc. This vision of the future is called the Universal Human Nation. The methodology used is to work in groups and undertake personal development activities as well as social projects. Once sufficiently experienced, new groups develop according to their interests.

New Humanists share the following Humanist Attitude:

  • Placing the human being as the central value and concern, in such a way that nothing is above the human being and no human being is above another.
  • Affirming the equality of all human beings.
  • Recognizing personal and cultural diversity, affirming the characteristics proper to each human group and condemning discrimination, whether motivated by economic, racial, ethnic, or cultural differences.
  • Developing knowledge beyond the limitations imposed by prejudices accepted as absolute and immutable truths.
  • Affirming the freedom of ideas and beliefs.
  • Repudiating violence in all its forms.

Near the end of the 60s, Silo organized a group to study the personal and social crisis occurring in the world. This group, and others like it, organized around his writings, grew and developed into what started life as The School and after much iteration later became known as the Humanist Movement.

The Humanist Movement is often said to have been started May 4, 1969, with the talk “The Healing of Suffering” by Silo at Punta de Vacas, Argentina. Because of the military dictatorship in place at that time, this talk was permitted on the condition that it would be held high in the Andes Mountains, far from the nearest town.

These initial groups faced repression and disinformation campaigns as they grew and spread throughout Latin America. This growth was reinforced when some of the members, freely or as politicalexiles, took up residence in various countries in Europe, Asia and the Americas.

In 1975 one hundred members from different countries met in Corfu, Greece, to agree on proposals, objectives and a rudimentary organisation that would be tested over the next four years.

After the launch of the Humanist International in 1989, the strategy turned once more to the development of the Humanist Movement in a more general form and its organisation structure. A stage of putting down roots in communities, with the opening of Centres of Communication and the publication of hundreds of neighbourhood newspapers around the world was started.

In 1993 the Document of the Humanist Movement was published. The first Humanist Forum was held in Moscow, Russia, and The World Center of Humanist Studies was founded.

The organizational form of the Humanist Movement is constantly changing. Currently the movement is in a process of transformation of its organizational form and the form that was applied until now, is no longer valid. At the moment the Humanist Movement consists simply of all those who adhere to the Document of the Humanist Movement (1993) and there are no formal positions in the organization – rather all participants are simply colleagues.

The Humanist Movement has launched official organisations, internally referred to as organisms, in political, social and cultural fields, according to the legal requirements in the country where the Humanist Movement is being developed. The strategy of the Humanist Movement is to launch the following five organisms in every country in the world where it is possible to do so.

  • The Community for Human Development
  • The International Humanist Party
  • Convergence of Cultures
  • The World Centre of Humanist Studies
  • World without Wars and without Violence

The Community for Human Development

The Community for Human Development, launched in 1981, is a social and cultural organisation that works for nonviolence through simultaneous social and personal transformation i.e. through the transformation of the structures of society and the way that individuals act in the world.

The Community has the following objectives:

  • To create the conditions for human beings to be free, non-violent and to live in solidaritywith others, to give direction and meaning to their lives; for individuals to work for their own destiny and for the social struggle for conditions in education, healthand quality of life that allow every person to evolve without obstacles.
  • To build a new moral force that serves as a social and personal reference.

The Community works in society in the areas of education, health, culture, and quality of life. In each of these areas it denounces all that which hinders the development of the human being and develops actions that favour it.

The key characteristics of the work of The Community are:

  • Voluntarism- disinterested giving allows the truly human dimension to appear.
  • Direct communication- allows isolationto be overcome and a daily personal engagement in the name of one’s values and aspirations.
  • Active nonviolence, as a methodologyof action and as an internal and external attitude that favours life.












  • Realist and Neo-Realist Approaches
  • Liberal and Neo-Liberal Approaches
  • Neo-Radical Approaches
  • Post-Structuralist and Post-Moternist Approaches
  • Feminist Approaches
  • End of Cold War
  • Post-Cold War Issues
  • Emergining Powers
  • Regional Groupings
  • Globalisation
  • International Inequities
  • Right to Self-determination
  • Intervention/Invasion
  • International Terrorism
  • Role of Science and Techonology in International Relations
  • Inequality among Nations
  • Global Corporatism and State Sovereignty
  • Human Rights and International Trade
  • China as an emerging Power
  • Emergence of central Asian Republics
  • Aboriginal/Indigenous Movements
  • Role of NGOs
  • Concept of Justice in International Relations
  • Human Security



























Leave a Reply