Introduction
The books under review are definitely milestones in international politics because one of the authors set the precedent for the realist school of thought while the other illustrated the importance of non state economic actors in the global arena.
Discussion of the books
In essence, Rosenau (1998) argues that world affairs are now characterized by a new frontier in which increased interdependence between nations (as brought on by better communication, technologies etc) is complicated by even greater domestic issues.
Consequently, any discussion of international politics should consider the fact that domestic and foreign matters have become increasingly interdependent so one cannot operate without the other.
One of the emerging themes in “Along the Domestic foreign frontier” is the breaking down of state structures. Individuals have gained sufficient knowledge and skills to be better organized and to serve their own interests. This means that the relevance of the nation state is slowly reducing; in its place, is the rise of the private entity1.
Nongovernmental actors are becoming the new force to reckon with in international relations because most of their actions rarely get confined to their countries’ boundaries. This argument can be interpreted as a major strength of the book. By focusing on both local and international elements of international relations, the author takes into account both small scale and large scale factors in this subject matter.
This discussion also shows that the author is aware of current forces shaping people’s lives and he has connected this to world politics. This shows a cause and effect relationship between local and foreign dynamics. The book also provides a platform for incorporating one of the most influential factors in the global scene; globalization.
It looks at the increased skillfulness of people around the world and the need for international state actors to respond to this increased accessibility to expertise and knowledge.
Perhaps the greatest strength in the book lies in the fact that is allows readers to understand the complex and even chaotic nature of the global system. It merges the forces of decentralization and integration as seen today thus showing how dynamic this system has become2.
One may also argue that this overemphasis on the private sector makes the book less appropriate for international politics and more effective for economics or trade and investment stakeholders.
Some critics have claimed that for international relations readers, too much emphasis of trade and investment makes the book a little detached from the political realm. Another issue that can be put into question is the waning importance of the state in international politics.
To a certain extent, the nation state is still the reference point even in the world that Rosenau (1997) talks about. Nations and governments play a pivotal role in determining the trading environment prevalent within certain nation states so they should not be downplayed.
Observations put forward by Rosenau (1997) do not adequately explain the need for security yet this is a crucial factor in international politics. Issues such as terrorism, weapons proliferation and drug trafficking are still rife today and a comprehensive discussion of diplomacy must account for these issues well.
On the other hand, Morgenthau (1948) spearheads the realist movement by asserting that international politics is characterized by divergent parties which each have their own interests. This eventually leads to conflict. In fact, Morgenthau believes that there is no place for morality in international relations because state actors are human and human nature is innately concerned with securing its own interests.
He also adds that these interests are largely defined by power. Therefore, the major assumptions in the book include the fact that state actors are rational and their decisions are governed by interests. These factors testify to the main strength of the book; it allows for an objective look at international politics. It differentiates between opinion and truth or objectivity and rationality by using rational thought.
One weakness in ‘Politics among nations’ is its overdependence on human nature as a driving force for international politics. This can be complicated because humans are difficult to predict. It would have been better is the writer sought a more rigid platform for the realist school of thought.
In fact this is the reason why the neorealist school gained a lot of ground subsequently; it focused more on structure and the need for security3.. Even so, one can also argue that the reliance on human nature makes the theory solid because certain characteristics of human nature remain consistent throughout the ages.
The two books differ from one another because of the practicality of use or their degree of applicability in international relations. “Along the domestic foreign frontier” would not work very well for the foreign policy maker or diplomat because it does not curve out a path for dealing with international politics challenges.
On the other hand, “Politics among the nations” provides a clear cut route or circumstances in foreign politics because it advocates for rationality and a need to look into rational alternatives. Another distinctive difference between these two books is their conceptualization of international politics. Rosenau (1997) tends to look at the economic, technological and politics issues all as one.
This means that although the author aims at contributing towards a degree of order in the international system, he has instead led to some confusion because he has not been able to differentiate between these matters.
On the other hand, Morgenthau (1948) clearly separates political issues from other realms of the international system. In this regard, the book contributes towards a certain degree of order in the international relations studies because its issues are very distinct.
Class theory of international politics
“Along the domestic foreign frontier” directly propagates class theories of international relations because it focuses on the power of global organizations. However, minimal focus has been given to the state as a source of class domination. One can argue that theories put forward by Morgenthau (1948) provide support for class based divisions and hegemonic powers in the international sphere.
Hegemonic states can garner support from other powerful nations if this support is in their rational interests. For example, the world decided to side with the United States during the cold war and after the war because a capitalist world system was in their best interests.
The structural nature of realism is highly supported by class theory of international relations and this means that Morgenthau (1948) accounts for existence of class theories in his theory.
Conversely, Rosenau (1997) believed in the power of the public over that of governments. He therefore advocated for the breakdown of structures and boundaries. Nonetheless, he accounts for the class theory by placing power structures in the hands of international organizations.
Conclusion
The two books provide explanations of international systems in their own way. James Rosenau focused more on integration and localization of the system while Morgenthau focused on power and conflict between nation states.
References
James Rosenau. (1997). Along the Domestic – foreign frontier: Exploring governance in a turbulent world. Cambridge: Cambridge university press
Hans Morgenthau (1948). Politics among nations. NY: Alfred Knopf
Lebow, Richard. (2003). The tragic vision of politics. Cambridge: CUP
Footnotes
1 James Rosenau. (1997). Along the Domestic – foreign frontier: Exploring governance in a turbulent world. Cambridge: Cambridge university press
2 James Rosenau. (1997). Along the Domestic – foreign frontier: Exploring governance in a turbulent world. Cambridge: Cambridge university press
3 Lebow, Richard. (2003). The tragic vision of politics. Cambridge: CUP