Some people have yet to grab any understanding of why things work the way they do in the international world. Accordingly, they fail to develop any rationale for why nations act the way they do. They've seen a global map and how there are national boundaries separating states and they ask themselves: Why don't states just leave each other alone? When people were children they didn't care to ask why states went to war. For example, when children learn about the history of nations they just take at face value. In other words, when they learn about the World Wars they just think that that is how it was and is. Children don't further ask why it was, or why it is. But when I got into college I was having an incredibly frustrating time trying to figure out why nations went to war. After I took a few international relations classes I became familiar with Political Scientists' explanations for why states go to war and I thought it would be beneficial for those who are not familiarized with why states go to war and give them a brief summary about why political scientists say they do.
First, political scientists examine human biology. They study what humans may be biologically predisposed to do. They do this by studying humans at the individual level and at the beginning stages of cooperative societies; tribes and bands. At the individual level, political scientists and anthropologists both claim that humans may have a predisposed inclination towards violence, but also an innate desire towards cooperative behavior with others. Proof of this cooperative behavior emanates from the fact that at some point in history humans began living with each other in societies; tribes and bands. In these tribes and bands, humans got into what could be described as tribal warfare. Anthropologists claim the cause for these wars had to do with scarce resources and an inability to convey their intentions. In other words, the fear of not being able to live because of diminishing resources caused tribes to go to war. Also, an inability to convey one's intentions leads tribes and individuals to assume their "foes" have malevolent intentions to give themselves the greatest protection of survival. In short, individuals and societies can be used as a framework for understanding why states go to war.
Likewise, what could be phrased the "resource theory" of international relations posits that states go to war because they want to provide sufficient resources for their society. As an example, these theorists contend that America went to war in Iraq because of the oil that could used for their society. They contend that Hitler tried to expand because of his understanding that he would not be able to provide for his people and thus needed to annex more land and resources for his people. However, there are many cases where states have gone to war when resources were clearly not the causation.
Secondly, the realists theory contends that states go to war because their is no overarching authority to prevent them from doing so. States, in essence, live in an international world of anarchy. States are subordinate to no higher entity. There are no rules in the international community. As a result, states take actions in what they perceive as their self-interest. Thus, states build up their military, invest heavily in weapon innovation, and make allies with others to gain more power and security. For example, they may preemptively strike neighboring countries who are becoming stronger to prevent a nation from becoming a formidable power in their region, which, in effect, would hinder their security. This is what happened during the Cold War. The United States and Russia were not sure of the others intentions, and therefore both partook in an arms race where both sides built an excessive amount of WMDs to beef up their security.
There are many other theories that purport to know why states go to war, but just having being aware of what political scientists believe why states go to war is enough if you don't feel like taking an international relations course or read an international relations book. Just to reiterate, political scientists all agree, to some degree, that states go to war for fear of their demise. Nations will take steps to protect themselves from others by either building up their military, attacking or overtaking other nations to attain economic sufficiency, and/or making strategic allies with other nations. Furthermore, political scientists also make the case that states go to war to satisfy the ego of leaders. Napoleon Bonaparte believed he was on a quest to take over the world during the Napoleonic Wars. Sadaam Hussein use to think of himself as a manifestation of some God, which in effect convinced him that he could take on the US Military in 2003 (they captured him in three weeks).
First, political scientists examine human biology. They study what humans may be biologically predisposed to do. They do this by studying humans at the individual level and at the beginning stages of cooperative societies; tribes and bands. At the individual level, political scientists and anthropologists both claim that humans may have a predisposed inclination towards violence, but also an innate desire towards cooperative behavior with others. Proof of this cooperative behavior emanates from the fact that at some point in history humans began living with each other in societies; tribes and bands. In these tribes and bands, humans got into what could be described as tribal warfare. Anthropologists claim the cause for these wars had to do with scarce resources and an inability to convey their intentions. In other words, the fear of not being able to live because of diminishing resources caused tribes to go to war. Also, an inability to convey one's intentions leads tribes and individuals to assume their "foes" have malevolent intentions to give themselves the greatest protection of survival. In short, individuals and societies can be used as a framework for understanding why states go to war.
Likewise, what could be phrased the "resource theory" of international relations posits that states go to war because they want to provide sufficient resources for their society. As an example, these theorists contend that America went to war in Iraq because of the oil that could used for their society. They contend that Hitler tried to expand because of his understanding that he would not be able to provide for his people and thus needed to annex more land and resources for his people. However, there are many cases where states have gone to war when resources were clearly not the causation.
Secondly, the realists theory contends that states go to war because their is no overarching authority to prevent them from doing so. States, in essence, live in an international world of anarchy. States are subordinate to no higher entity. There are no rules in the international community. As a result, states take actions in what they perceive as their self-interest. Thus, states build up their military, invest heavily in weapon innovation, and make allies with others to gain more power and security. For example, they may preemptively strike neighboring countries who are becoming stronger to prevent a nation from becoming a formidable power in their region, which, in effect, would hinder their security. This is what happened during the Cold War. The United States and Russia were not sure of the others intentions, and therefore both partook in an arms race where both sides built an excessive amount of WMDs to beef up their security.
There are many other theories that purport to know why states go to war, but just having being aware of what political scientists believe why states go to war is enough if you don't feel like taking an international relations course or read an international relations book. Just to reiterate, political scientists all agree, to some degree, that states go to war for fear of their demise. Nations will take steps to protect themselves from others by either building up their military, attacking or overtaking other nations to attain economic sufficiency, and/or making strategic allies with other nations. Furthermore, political scientists also make the case that states go to war to satisfy the ego of leaders. Napoleon Bonaparte believed he was on a quest to take over the world during the Napoleonic Wars. Sadaam Hussein use to think of himself as a manifestation of some God, which in effect convinced him that he could take on the US Military in 2003 (they captured him in three weeks).
No comments:
Post a Comment