“Does man make society in his image or does his society make
him?” Kenneth Waltz divides the causes of war into three ‘images’; Individuals,
States, and the International System. Consistent with Classical Realist views,
Waltz argues that the human nature of political decision makers within a state shape
the structure of a war in the International community.
Can the decisions of political actors be sufficient in
understanding the effects of war? Is the balance of power one of the clear-cut
reasons one state would attack another? Considering only the state and
individual as bases for war is reductionist in nature, and, as Rousseau stated,
what really needs to be observed and studied is the International System.
The International Relations of United States and Soviet Union
after World war make it understandable why it is not individuals and states
that cause wars, but it is the International System which makes individuals and
states act the way they do. Using the concept of multi-polarity and bipolarity,
the international system was mad bipolar after World War II, where USA and
Soviet Union emerged as dominant superpowers. This division was not made only
on the basis of the economic and military superiority of these superpowers, but
on the ideology that they professed. This was the start of a new war:
Liberalism vs Communism.
The impact of the Liberal-Communist war on the International
System is visible even today. The rise of Communist China as the to-be economic
superpower has disturbed USA, and hence, the International system. Could this
be because USA still fears the rise of communism or do they not want to
consolidate their power? Whatever the answer may be, the argument remains that
war will be caused not because of the actions of individual states or actors,
but on the basis of the ideology they support, which they carry out in the
International system.
Does USA take China as a threat mainly because it feels that with the emergence of China will bring with itself the dominance of Communism or is it because of something else? What if it wasn't China , but France or UK, poised to take over USA as the world super power? Would USA deal with such a situation differently? The point being, any superpower would look to maintain its position and standing, no matter who stands in front of it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you when you say 'what really needs to be observed and studied is the International System' because at the end of the day it is the actions of the other plays in the international arena which determines state actions and perhaps the greatest tangible evidence for this is the cold war epoch
ReplyDeleteWar is caused by both the individual actions of states and for structural reasons. Also, the US couldn't care less about Communism - because in reality, it has already been defeated - but does care about competition.
ReplyDelete