Milner
in her article talks about the various meanings attached to the term ‘anarchy’
and how different theorists manipulate the meanings in order to fit their own
purpose. Milner’s writing is divided into three sections and it takes us back
to the nature of international politics in terms of whether or not there
actually is anarchy in the international system.
To
begin with, the Milner explores several concepts of 'anarchy' that work in the
international relations literature. She investigates the dichotomy between
domestic and international politics and questions about the validity and
utility of such a dichotomy. She then provides a more creative way to
understand the international system as she suggests combining anarchy and
interdependence.
Moreover, the author puts importance on the need to
do away with dichotomy mentioned earlier. She also does not agree with Waltz idea
that international politics is the only true politics because for some politics
is simply the struggle for power. However, realists believe that there is no
struggle for power within the state and the struggle for power only takes place
between states. On the other hand, this notion is not accurate and presents an
over simplified version of reality because even within the state there are many
actors with their own interests. These political actors then want to come up
with policies that enhance their own political power and increase their own
status. Therefore, it would be wrong to say that there are no competitions
between state members for power. Just like the states compete in an
international realm individual actors compete within the domestic sphere.
However, realists believe that there is no struggle for power within the state and the struggle for power only takes place between states.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your contention to this point because there are countries all over the world where the struggle of power takes place within the states. Such an example will be that of the French Revolution where there was a need to go against King Louis and the elites which existed. One of the bloodiest revolutions were the result of domestic tensions and not in the international arena.
Realists generally are less interested in the domestic workings of the state - although power is still a central concern there - and are primarily interested in the struggle for power between states. What happens within a state is less interesting than what happens when a state is interacting with other states in the international system.
ReplyDelete