International Conflict
The 20th century witnessed the two most devastating international conflicts in the history of mankind. World War I – also called the “war to end all wars” – was followed by the even more devastating World War II, so it is only prudent to think about the possibility of such international conflict even in the face of 60 years without it. This is not to say that “other wars” are not important, but it is to say that international conflict is more important and understanding the possibilities for it are more important in thinking about the longer-range future. While there isn’t a trend of international conflict per se, it is worth understanding what we can about what causes large-scale wars and how we might prevent them as we think about the future.
Understanding International Conflicts - 2005
Joseph S. Nye Jr.
Learn more (Longman)
This is Joseph Nye’s classic text on international politics as it relates to conflict. The main question he tackles is whether there is an enduring logic to conflict in world politics. He starts by saying that of the three basic systems of international politics – world imperial, feudal, and anarchic systems of states – it is the last that is most relevant to the contemporary world. The two main logics he tests against 20 th century conflict are the realist view – in which the central problem is war and the use of force and the central actors are states – and the liberal view – in which a global society functions alongside the state through cross-border trade, travel, and international institutions. These are used to explain some things that the realist view has trouble with. He touches on other logics, including Marxism, dependency theory, the neorealists, and the neoliberals, and he treats the constructivists – who emphasize the importance of ideas and culture in international politics – as almost equal with the realist and liberal views though it isn’t really a logic, per se. In the end, he finds a combination of the realist and liberal logics and the constructivist view all necessary to explain conflict in the contemporary world. More interestingly, he sees globalization as moving the world inexorably beyond the old Westphalian system of nations. And the central question he poses is, “How then is it possible to preserve some order in traditional terms of the distribution of power among sovereign states while also moving toward institutions that are based on ‘justice among peoples?’”
Top