Political Theory
Political Theory
Introduction
This section will look into the effect of discourse theory on international relations. Discourse theory is expounded into realism, liberalism and normative aspects. This paper will focus more on realism. This specific discourse has been taken as they have been key centers of debate in the international stage. They go forth to look into the general focus of sovereignty, human nature, conflict, and state survival. Discourse is hence brought to be a normative holistic framework that focuses on the moral dimension of international relations and the questions and evaluations created by these disciplines. The research will try to explain the impact of discourse on the international stage with reference to Zimbabwe. This is significance as it explores human rights, intervention into a Free State, justice and injustice which are normative aspects.
Realism looks into a nation as the main factor in international relations, and considering that a country looks out for its survival in an unfriendly setting the acquisition of power is necessary and an unavoidable objective of foreign policy (Huddle, 2005, pp.39). The president of Zimbabwe in his desire for power is therefore well brought out but not justified; he is looking to affirm his authority over Britain and the international community. They are not influencing his decision but have to get involved. It is hence for this purpose that international aid has been block and its elimination from the Commonwealth has been effected.
Realists have a pessimistic opinion on human nature and work on the belief that world politics is composed of international anarchy of free countries. There is quite a big hatred between Britain and Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe hates the procedure and actions of colonialism; on the other hand Britain hates Zimbabwe’s manner of handling diplomacy and foreign policy. There is sceptism if development will be a key focus in the international stage in comparison to the local politics. Zimbabwe has not displayed any development in both instances in the past two decades; it has applied unruly strategies in racial policy, ethnic matters and political discrimination.
Thucydides brought about the hindrance of control that is there in the countries and citizens in the manner of foreign policy. According to him, this was based on the anarchical form of the internal political matters of a country; meaning for one to safeguard his or her country, as the main aim of foreign policy, the choices that are not definitely abundant, and at times there may arise to be no choices completely (Huddle, 2005, pp. 40). This on the other hand brings about a form of anarchism, as it is each and every state to stand support itself. This does not imply that the workable answers are not accessible by foreign policy. Like for the case of Britain which was willing to pay for the land reforms in Zimbabwe, yet President Mugabe turned down Britain’s democratic and rule of law demands. Mugabe on the other hand has brought about a decline in agricultural production to the extent that local production and important exports have fallen making it import a large amount of the country’s stable food so as to hinder hunger and malnutrition. Zimbabwe hence cannot state that all her issues are based on anarchy in the internal state or it lacks enough backing from the international community.
Realists are of the belief that the political process is reliant on power and that foreign policy is the computation of a state’s power against another state. Zimbabwe has made efforts to bring about ‘African’ liberation from their former colonial masters, in this case Britain, yet on the issue of feasible economy and virtuous governance, Britain still keeps the power. South Africa has made efforts to maintain power of voting to its citizens. He holds the thought that a passive stance directed towards Zimbabwe will make this happen. Mbeki, the South African president, has been able to keep to his voters in the meantime, yet this is a beneficial policy for him if he desires to disregard the realities in Zimbabwe which he has no desire to challenge.
Hans Morgenthau may perhaps be termed to as being the leading realist thinker in the past century seeing men and women being attributed to a ‘will to power’: “Politics is a struggle for power over men……. Power is its imminent goal…” He went to state that the manner of possessing, keeping and showing this power is reliant on the method of political action. This is very applicable on the part of Zimbabwe and its politics as one may note on the amount of time he has been in power and the laws and policies he has put undertaken to keep it that way (Huddle, 2005, pp. 41). On the other hand, there are other presidents who put to work their power for the benefit of the people and their states. This is of the meaning that their mode of political action is advantageous and benefits the state. Several states with well backed democratic ideologies and virtuous economy have applied their power for their benefit.
The Realist emphasis is on the state; its freedom, survival, order and stability. Zimbabwe is a good instance of excess state focus and ignorance for the international community. Realists do not believe in international responsibility reliant on moral duty while for classical and neo-classical realists there is a single morality for the private and a contrasting one for the public aspect. The ethics of politics make it possible for some actions that are not accepted by private morality. Maintaining international human rights levels and respecting law would be termed to as moral duty. Mugabe has not drifted from his moral duty nor has no belief in it.
Realists have a massive significance on the balance of power and are of the thought that is a genuine objective for the massive powers to control this. Foreign policy is hence necessary more so for the first and third world countries and the ones well developed countries to maintain the balance of power (Dijk, pp. 139). Britain tried this to Zimbabwe; one however is not able to maintain the balance of power peacefully with one of the concerned parties not agreeing with the democratic modes.
The advantage of discourse theory on international relations is that a state has its own view of the world and its own principles concerning international and regional issues in addition to making a fair-minded judgment in reference to the rights and wrongs of the issue in focus (Xiao, April 2000). Similarly, the international relations discourse of a country cannot be separated from its independent and peace-related policy; this means that the theory is an outcome of a country applying an independent foreign policy. There is the benefit that a country’s idea may be recognized by other states and applied. Discourse of international relations brings forth the idea that a country has to free from control and application of power is necessary to meet, this creates a state that is less dependent on other countries. However, there are several disadvantages that may arise; in the event that a country’s looks to be independent, as the main aim of foreign policy, there may lack some choices leading to the state of anarchism. This state forces its views so as to meet its objectives and desires. In the event that a country looks to manage itself, it may disregard genuine help from other countries leading to suffering. The international society is necessary for realism attributing it to be narrow in focus and not meeting the extent to which international politics is an interaction of varied international relation voices and views.
Summarily, the emphasis on one particular state is necessary for the understanding of the international community, law and foreign policy with other countries. The impact of discourse theory in international relations has changed over time. The impacts have been both for the good as well as bad.
Bibliography
Dijk, T. A. (n.d.). IDEOLOGICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS. University of Amsterdam.
Huddle, N. (2005). INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS DISCOURSE ON ZIMBABWE. Chapter 3, 39-43.
Xiao, R. (April 2000). The International Relations Discourse in China: A preliminary Analysis. Washington DC: The Sigur Centre for Asian studies.
