International Relations and Neorealism
International relations (IR) is a vast discipline of political science that includes the debate of social science and humanities in a global context. A fundamental element of IR is that it is based on theories proposed by specific individuals and supported by groups of experts. The concept of neorealism, which has been pushed by Kenneth Waltz in many of his papers, is one such pertinent IR theory that is acceptable for the review (Humphreys 864).
The Theory of Neorealism
The theory of neorealism, like many others, has certain topics that are intrinsically problematic, necessitating a critical assessment from several angles for a deeper understanding of the theorist's ideas. The model of neorealism is founded on the principle of affirming that power is an essential component in IR so that the ordering principle is perceived in the context of anarchy. It is argued that the distribution of capabilities is a critical aspect of measuring power in such a system so that the ordering principle is often decentralized in nature. It thus follows that there is no established form of authority in the neorealistic institutions and in such a scenario, states would usually operate independently and pursue their individual interests. Often, the states express similar needs but have different aptitudes in ensuring that their necessities are met. Also, there is uncertainty regarding the ability of the states to meet the needs that they need, there is a lack of trust amongst the involved parties, and overall, there is a state of security dilemma (Humphreys 870).
Kenneth Waltz and Neorealism
One of the primary masterminds towards the comprehension of the theory of neorealism is Kenneth Waltz who was a political scientist and a prominent contributor to the field of IR. I acknowledge Waltz's effort in describing and explaining the models of international theory especially as pertain the principle of neorealism (Telbami 158). The postulation he presented will forever define how people understand and appreciate the world around them as it is widely used to describe IR. I agree with the work that he presented because his ideas have enabled people to understand the theory of neorealism as pertains the motivations and exciting concept that he described in his books. While much of what he has affirmed about realism has sparked debates and harsh reactions from some of the opponents, it is clear that a majority of the extreme responses and biased. The concepts that Waltz presented are essential because of the manner in which they broaden the mind of the subject and enable them to theorize the world around. Many people were unfamiliar with the concept of social science traditions for a long time, and it was after Waltz postulated the neorealism theory that scholars began integrating the theory in their humanities and social science arguments (Telbami 160).
Debates about Waltz's Arguments
Waltz's theories have inherently been debated throughout widely considering the arguments that he raised about the existence of the state of neorealism or more specifically, structural neorealism. One of the themes he postulated was related to the concept of realist thought where he argued that the world is a unit that is perceived as a single entity where anarchism is the defining feature. I am, however, concerned with the manner in which Waltz reduces the broad subject of IR into a unit-life interaction where he claims that a unit-like system of anarchy is the ultimate effect. It is a questionable statement considering that the world is a diverse entity that cannot be summed into a unit-like subject. In fact, it is common that Waltz would occasionally accuse himself of the argument he made in the process of trying to oversimplify the concept of IR. It is also on record that it is unfortunate that considering his historical background and career, Waltz was not involved in any massive effort of trying to understand the world, and the weaknesses in his arguments are apparent in the manner he ended up interpreting IR (Murray). The relevance of his arguments is thus best interpreted when one is trying to establish the response by a state when they are faced with a dilemma situation where they are required to act promptly. Only in such a case is it plausible to think of the state as a unit but the same cannot be generalized to the whole world. Furthermore, considering the argument that he has rarely been involved in international affairs, it is controversial that Waltz would make such generalist arguments (Murray).
Controversies and Conclusions
In summary, it is essential to underscore that the concept of IR is a broad subject that is best perceived in the way states associated with each other. The thesis of IR is, however, founded on the idea of neorealism that was advocated by Waltz. According to the theorists, the element of realism delineates the states to individual nations that operate independently. The controversy, however, arises from the fact that the word is broad and cannot be generalized as the theorist assumes. Overall, while Waltz is accredited for enabling people to understand the model of IR, the controversy about his arguments has since sparked debate.
Works Cited
Humphreys, Adam R.C. “Waltz and the World: Neorealism as International Political Theory.” International Politics, vol. 50, no. 6, 2013, pp. 863–879.
Murray, Robert. “Reflecting on Kenneth Waltz.” E-International Relations, 2013, www.e-ir.info/2013/05/14/reflecting-on-kenneth-waltz/
Telbami, Shibley. “Kenneth Waltz, Neorealism, and Foreign Policy.” Security Studies, vol. 11, no. 3, 2002, pp. 158–170.
