International Relations Theory-liberalism(vc Oparah, 2009)

-1INTRODUCTION The continuous changing and evolving world necessitates that individuals, intellectuals and state actors globally adjust to the challenges brought by the metamorphosis in world events in order to make it a better place. This is the underlying principles of liberalism as a direct critique of realism. In view of this, some key assumptions of realism will be highlighted in this review essay to show where liberal minds and likes are coming from. Liberalism is apparently a very complex concept taking into account the fact that various authors have contributed literature on the subject from different perspectives and approaches. These plethora of liberal views unlike realism in which the keys points are straight forward, are cumbersome. Nonetheless, the question this review essay will answer among others is; is liberalism practicable?

It is worth noting that the various themes and concepts embedded in liberalism are intertwined and may not necessarily be separated from each other. For example, the words “idealism and utopianism”1 are other terminologies used to describe approaches to liberalism in international system. These words will also be used in this essay where necessary and suitable. In the next paragraph, I will highlight the basic assumptions of realism, without engaging much on discussions of the concept before defining liberalism. The literature review will then follow and will be premised on works by President Woodrow Wilson in his “Fourteen Point”2 speech. The other writers to be included are; John Locke, Immanuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham without neglecting other contributors whose names will be mentioned. However, I think all these writers are Wilson’s ideologues and for the purpose of this essay it is important that I put a limit on authors in lieu of the required length recommended. Discussions on the strength and weaknesses of the concept of liberalism will be done on the concluding section of this essay. 1

Nel, P., “Theories of International Relations” in Nel, P. and McGowan, P. (eds.): Power, Wealth and

Global Equity: An International Relations Textbook for Africa, University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town, 2002. p. 30. 2

Nel, P., Op. Cit. p. 30 and See http://www.yale.edu.lawweb/avalon/wilson14.htm.

-2LIBRALISM AS A CRITIQUE OF REALISM Before I define liberalism, it is important that I highlight the key proposition of realism. The proposition include: states as the only important actors in world system, states are unitary rational actors with anarchy as the major force shaping state actions and preferences. Also, international institutions are independent force facilitating cooperation as state is very pessimistic about prospects for cooperation.3 In essence, the tenets of realism is statist or state centric in nature and regards the state as the only way things can be carried out domestically and internationally. Realists and Idealist have different interpretations to a particular scenario. For example, countries often have interests abroad which may not be secured by military means or garner support through traditional method of diplomacy. Realists argue that the most viable means of securing those interests is through bribery in form of foreign aid to that country where the country’s interest is so as to secure that national interest. Liberal minds will regard this financial aid as humanitarian concern giving by another caring country.4

Without dwelling too much on realism, liberalism as defined by Hoffman is “the protection of individual freedom, the reduction of state power and the conviction that power is legitimate only if it is based on consent and respects basic freedoms.”5 Taking the above definition further into the international arena, liberal foreign policies endeavours to promote the principles of liberalism in other countries through for instance, the protection of individual’s rights in other countries6. Liberalism relies on claims about impact of interdependence, the benefits of free trade, collective security and the existence of interests between states. It is also presented as a set of normative or moral claims about the importance of individual rights and freedoms.7 This definition will be expanded as the review progresses when the contributions of different authors are unpacked in the next sub-heading. 3

Grieco J.M., “Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal

Institutionalism”, in International Organizations, Vol. 42, No. 3, (Summer, 1988), p. 494. 4

Nel, P., Op. Cit. p. 31.

5

Paris, R., “Peacebuilding and the Limits of Liberal Internationalism”, in International Security, Vol. 22,

No. 2 (Autumn, 1997), p. 59. Paris, R., OP. Cit. p. 59. 7Elias, J. and Sutch, P.: IR: The Basics, Routledge, USA, 2007, p. 65.

6

-3REVIEW OF UTOPIAN MINDS Wilson theory can be reduced into four major analogy with idealists’ believe that people are naturally in learning process and will improve but circumstances often prohibit them from practicing those principles. President Woodrow Wilson’s “Fourteen Points” speech to US senate in 1917 further illustrates this believe that people have morals and can live in harmony with one another. He posited that democracy should be promoted in all countries as democratic countries do not go to war. Democracy encourages free press and freedom of speech and parliamentary accountability8. Accountability was emphasised by Michael Doyle who suggests that one of the reasons why democratic countries do not engage themselves in war is because the governments are accountable to the tax payers9. Government only engages in “just wars”10 through a collective action in this regard. From African perspective, Wilson’s assertion is one of the principles in African Union’s (AU) Constitutive Act. Whereas different countries have managed not to fight one another, that of free press and freedom of speech is still very limited. Besides, this notion of democracy is very problematic because some of the African countries are not yet matured to democratise. I believe that democracy survives and become very effective when a country has enough middle class. African and Third world counties have to come up with a system of governance which will enable them take care of the welfare of its citizens. 8

Ibid. p. 30.

9

Elias, J. and Sutch, P., Op. Cit. pp. 70-72.

10

Ibid. p. 70.

-4Intra-state wars have continued to rise as a result of weak states, whose powers have been eroded as a result of pressure of liberalism11. The war in Iraq was not a collective action as Doyle suggests. However, its significant is located as more countries democratise, but this does not mean all counties must be dragged into it as I afore stated.

Similarly, Locke proposed that moral law of nature was given by God and was in existence before politics. Equality as man was made by God means one has the innate ability to work out the basics in politics such as freedom from oppression and right to own property, he argued.12 Equality before the law and equity should be the way the state and international system ought to be managed. However, that in essence is a wishful thinking as the world has become the survival of the strongest and the wisest. The weak people in the society have no chance of fitting in. Rule of law is functional in most counties, especially the developed countries as the argument craves for. Nonetheless, events in those countries in terms of equal distribution of wealth have proven that all hands are not equal because of the income gap between the rich and the poor. I think that there is no such thing as egalitarian society or between states, whether democratic or not.

Another theorist is Kant and his ideology of international federation13. His argument is similar to Locke’s opinion on morality in which both suggest that there is a sense of duty in treating human beings as independent moral agents. Morality according to Kant is exhibited by individual out of obligation and not because of self benefit. 11

Kaldor, M.:. New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era, Polity Press, Cambridge, ‘07, p. 4.

12

Elias, J. and Sutch, P., Op. Cit. p. 66.

13

Elias, J. and Sutch, P., Op. Cit. pp. 67-69.

-5Kant further argued that the structure of international system should take on board conditions that make morality possible. His argument laid emphases on democratic institutions to peace and argument for global economic equity. He believes that individual’s autonomy should be respected and that conflict only erupts when this individual’s freedom is trampled upon.14 Individual’s rights are continually denied both in states and in the international system. For example; the rights to shelter and education enshrined in the constitution of many democratic counties are just mirage in the sense that governments either do not have enough resources to meet those needs or that they have other priorities that do not benefits its citizens. Cases of genocide and democides have taken place in Bosnia and Iraq respectively. Countries like Kuwait and Iraq have been invaded in the past. The international system capable of guaranteeing people’s right as Kant proposed is not available yet.

Secondly, Wilson proposed that “Self determination” of subjected peoples and nations should be encouraged to be independent.15 Again in African context; all the African countries have gained independence. However, the issue of ethnic divisions and minorities continue to be a problem. There have been continuous agitation of most minorities to cede from their existing states and the AU have not encouraged those calls owing to the fact that most of this groups do not meet the criteria to become a State. For example, Nigeria has about 250 ethnic groups and half of the groups are claiming to be minorities and seek creation of new separate countries from Nigeria. 14

Ibid. pp. 70-72.

15

Nel, P., Op. Cit. p. 30.

-6At independence in 1960, the country had only four regional geographic zones, but today it has 36 states (provinces). Yet, there are still calls for more provinces and some groups want separate countries. These agitations did at some stage resulted in civil war in the late 1960s when the Biafra people from the south east region of the country declared themselves an independent state16. That war notwithstanding, another attempt was made by Ogoni people in mid 1990s and hitherto Niger-Delta region continues to be conflict ridden 17. In view of this, the notion of self determination is problematic and highly contested. This is because most of the independent countries are finding it difficult to govern themselves and creating more states means creating more problems as synthesis of state creation will be endless.

Lowering barriers between countries encourage inter-independence and raise cost of conflicts accordingly, argues Wilson. This argument favours uninterrupted transnational flow of information, labour, capital, goods and services through removal of tariffs and non-tariff barriers.18 Through this process, there has been encouragement of the formation of sub-regional blocks in Africa into a common trade agreement through the Regional Economic Commissions (RECs). These RECs include South African Development Commission (SADC) and the Economic Commission of West African States (ECOWAS) whereby single market is being practiced. The SADC through its South African Customs Union (SACU) is an example of trade practices without tariffs on the goods flowing in and out of member countries. 16

See https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ni.html.

17

Akintunde, M., “Secrets of the Grave”, in Africa Today, Vol. 6, No. 4, April 2000, pp. 24-26.

18

Ibid. p. 30.

-7Similarly, neo-liberal institutions argue that there is opportunity for complex or multiple interdependence which in reality has multiple channels or means for political interaction. However, the conundrum of determining states priority between “high” over “low politics” and vice vassal is problematic. High and low politics would mean economic and social issues repectively19. Some states may choose bolstering their military capability over welfare of the people etcetera.

Furthermore, strengthening the international law and creating international organisations is another idea behind idealism.20 International organisations such as the AU creates opportunities for states to co-operate on functional issues such as health, security, economic development and labour issues. The more areas states work together and share information about each other’s interest and concerns, the more they understand each other better and sort out differences amicably21.

Bentham22 on international law argues that political judgment should be rooted on measurement. His quantitative approach further suggests that things should be categorised in accordance with over all benefits and the general good of the people. He maintains that political involvement or participation and leadership should transpire to happiness at the highest level for people. 19

Elias, J. and Sutch, P., Op. Cit. p. 73

20

Nel, P., Op. Cit. p. 31.

21

Nel, P., Op. Cit. p. 32.

22

Elias, J. and Sutch, P., Op. Cit. pp. 66-67.

-8The maxamisation of utility according to Bentham should also be a key priority. For him, utility means wrong or right and bad and good. He acknowledged the relevance of states, but thinks it is through the state that individual’s utility should be enhanced. Thus, international law should not encompass national self- aggrandizement rather the “greatest happiness of all nations taken together”23.

Furthermore, Bentham proposed a solution to inter-state conflicts- an international court capable of resolving all disputes. This court according to him will not become powerful and sovereign to make decisions, rather it will make recommendations24. I think Bentham by acknowledging the relevance of the state should have made his argument from the neo-realist perspective. However, his thesis makes a whole lot of sense given the emergence of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) despite the politics and paradox hindering the operations of these courts. At the moment, only alleged war criminals from the developing world can be arrested and tried whereas when nationals of the developed countries are involved, they are treated as war heroes. Warrant of arrest has been issued recently so that Sudanese President25 will answer for war atrocity in his oil rich country. Former Liberian President, Charles Taylor is being tried by ICC26 whereas war criminals from United States of America walk freely. In my view, it is a double-standard in world politics. 23

Elias, J. and Sutch, P., Op. Cit. pp. 67.

24

Elias, J. and Sutch, P., Op. Cit. p. 67.

25

Heard, L., “Nothing International about ICC”, Arab News, 10 March 2009. Accessed on 19 April 2009 at

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=120098&d=10&m=3&y=2009. 26

King, M. L., “This Too, Shall Pass”, in Africa Today, Vol. 12, No. 5, May 2006, pp. 14-23.

-9The argument that US did not sign ICC treaty is very flimsy because US can sign the treaty if the rest of the world wants it to. On ICJ, recommendations by the court are only carried out by a country’s volition and not obligation. I am not condemning these courts or being hypercritical, but it should be understandable that it is good to treat the goose the way the gander is being treated.

DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION Different literatures on liberalism have been reviewed in this essay and I must express some disappointments for the fact that this noble ideology; liberalism, is not workable in the current world order. Consequently, it leaves the concept with many weaknesses than strengths, which makes me to wonder why the authors have to bother constructing this theory. I have therefore come to the realisation that there is no such thing as best set of theory to explain IR or how governments ought to map their foreign policy. These theories are often exaggerated to justify claims being made in their contents. Nevertheless, liberalism has a moderating influence on international politics as it breeds bonds of mutual interests on a commitment to the status quo. One could argue that these international organisations like United Nations (UN) are mere talking shops. This notwithstanding, rational state actors can always find solutions to conflicts and disputes through dialogue or diplomacy.

One of the weaknesses of the concept includes the fact that it does not provide necessary connection perceived between the process of economic growth and political development. The debate in recent times has been whether democracy leads to

- 10 development. Secondly, it ignores the differences in relative gains and the distribution of wealth generated by the market system. The asymmetry in international trade has remained a problem in the international system. The notion of collective security has led to inaction by the international community in situations that demand humanitarian intervention. Sometimes, it is a little too late to pass a resolution such as that of Somalia. The post conflict peace buildings are not managed well leading to failed states. At the moment, Somalia has become ungovernable resulting in piracy activities27 by its citizens. This is a big concern now, but it could have been prevented long ago. If Clinton’s administration had acted when war was taking place in Somalia, US would not have got entangled in the recent “operation Phillips”28 to save the captain of one of numerous ships been hijacked in that Gulf of Aden. Finally, the concept is reminiscing to its name; utopian. There is nothing like egalitarian society as it suggested. Egalitarianism may only possible in other planets where there is no force of gravity.

In conclusion, liberalism may become implementable the day all members of Breton Woods Institutions (BWI) and UN have equal votes without some elite groups within these institutions. At the moment, realism remains the order of the day as altruism and self interest is difficult to differentiate sometimes in theories of International Relations. 27

Goldberg, J., “How to Solve Piracy Problems” Los Angeles Times, 14 April 2009. Accessed on 19 April

‘09 at http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-goldberg14-2009apr14,0,1560384.column, and See “Piracy Force the Rule of Law” Globeandmail.com, 14 April 2009. Accessed on 19 April, 2009 at http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090414.EPIRATES14ART1938/TPStory/Opinion/e ditorials, 28

See “Saving Captain Phillips: American alive, pirates dead, let's hope more to follow”, WSJ.COM, 13 April 2009. Accessed on 19 April 2009. at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123958568421112479.html.

- 11 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Akintunde, M., “Secrets of the Grave”, in Africa Today, Vol. 6, No. 4, April 2000.

Elias, J. & Sutch, P.: International Relations: The Basics, Routledge, USA, 2007.

Goldberg, J., “How to Solve Piracy Problems” Los Angeles Times, 14 April 2009. Accessed on 19 April ‘09 at http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-goldberg14-2009apr14,0,1560384.column, Grieco J.M., “Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism”, in International Organizations, Vol. 42, No. 3, (Summer, 1988).

Heard, L., “Nothing International about ICC”, Arab News, 10 March 2009. Accessed on 19 April 2009 at http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=120098&d=10&m=3&y=2009.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ni.html.

http://www.yale.edu.lawweb/avalon/wilson14.htm.

Kaldor, M.:. New and Old Wars: Organised Violence in a Global Era, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2007.

Kennedy, E.A., “Somali Pirates Hijack Spree Since Weekend” Associated Press, 14 April 2009. Accessed on 19 April 2009 at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090414/ap_on_re_af/piracy.

King, M. L., “This Too, Shall Pass”, in Africa Today, Vol. 12, No. 5, May 2006.

Nel, P., “Theories of International Relations” in Nel, P. and McGowan, P. (eds.): Power, Wealth and Global Equity: An International Relations Textbook for Africa, University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town, 2002. Paris, R., “Peacebuilding and the Limits of Liberal Internationalism”, in International Security, Vol. 22, No. 2 (Autumn, 1997).

- 12 “Piracy Force the Rule of Law” Globeandmail.com, 14 April 2009. Accessed on 19 April, 2009 at http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090414.EPIRATES14ART1938/TPStory/Opinion/e ditorials,

“Saving Captain Phillips: American alive, pirates dead, let's hope more to follow”, WSJ.COM, 13 April 2009. Accessed on 19 April 2009. at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123958568421112479.html.