“Nation, nationality, nationalism – all have proved notoriously difficult to define, let alone to analyse“, Anderson writes somewhat consternated before trying to change just that in about two-hundred pages. In this essay, I shall have a go at the principle of national self-determination in about a fiftieth of the space and sketch its impact on the international system. For that purpose, I will first establish a neo-realist conception of the international system and define national self-determination to then go on and delineate how the latter has hurt the former. By looking at two historical cases, Nazi-Germany and decolonization, I will focus on the way self-determination highlights the independent significance of norms in international order, undermines the balance of power and – while seemingly cementing an international Westphalian system of stable states – is a continuous force of disruption within it.
Table of Contents
1. The international system
2. National self-determination
3. How national self-determination hurts the neo-realist conception of the international system
4. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
The primary objective of this essay is to critically analyze the impact of national self-determination on the neo-realist conception of the international system, specifically evaluating how normative pressures disrupt Westphalian stability and balance-of-power mechanisms.
- Neo-realist theories of the international system and anarchy.
- The definition and evolution of national self-determination as a political and legal norm.
- The historical influence of self-determination during decolonization and the expansion of the state system.
- The disruptive potential of self-determination on state borders and territorial integrity.
- The conflict between nationalist ideologies and traditional power-balancing mechanisms.
Excerpt from the Book
How national self-determination hurts the neo-realist conception of the international system
In this section, I will show how the principle of national self-determination not only underscores the independent significance of norms but also threatens the neo-realist conception of the international system and of international security by undermining the balance of power and constituting a continuous force of disruption to Westphalian stability. Two historical cases of national self-determination, Nazi-Germany and decolonization, will help to exemplify my points.
For a neo-realist, the dissolution of European empire after World War II is easily explained by looking at altered material capabilities after the war. Financial and military exhaustion facilitated “shifts in the relative balance of power between center and periphery” (Spruyt, 2000, p.66) and so colonial powers were either not powerful enough to retain imperial influence or did not regard it in their immediate material interest anymore to do so. However, Spruyt, as have others before him (cp. Finnemore, 1993; Goertz, 1994; Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998; Tan, 2015), makes a very compelling case that there is to more to the dynamics of decolonization than meets the positivist eye. He argues that it was not normative changes in the European imperial centers that facilitated the end of empire (cp. Porter & Stockwell, 1989; Albertini, 1971; Mommsen, 1990), a common normative explanation that gives the colonial powers a form of moral agency they did not possess. Rather, it was the ‘peripheral’ countries embracing the principle of national self-determination, not only independently of the distribution of power but in direct opposition to it, that led to widespread autonomization from the imperial yoke. The case of decolonization shows that if norms maintain internal consistency, there are incentives for political leaders to champion them and the international environment is forbearing if not charitable, they carry strong causal force in political change.
Summary of Chapters
1. The international system: Establishes the neo-realist framework, defining the system as an anarchic environment composed of sovereign states that prioritize security and the balance of power.
2. National self-determination: Explores the multifaceted nature of self-determination as a political ideology and legal norm, distinguishing it from broader concepts of nationalism.
3. How national self-determination hurts the neo-realist conception of the international system: Analyzes how self-determination challenges state stability and power-balancing through historical examples like Nazi-Germany and the decolonization process.
4. Conclusion: Synthesizes the argument that self-determination functions as a transformative and disruptive force that exposes the limitations and impracticalities of parsimonious neo-realist theories.
Keywords
National self-determination, Neo-realism, International system, Westphalian order, Balance of power, Decolonization, Sovereignty, Nationalism, Norms, State security, International relations, Political ideology, Territorial integrity, Anarchy, Power-balancing.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this academic essay?
The essay examines the impact of the principle of national self-determination on the international system, specifically challenging the theoretical assumptions of neo-realism regarding state stability and security.
What are the primary themes discussed in this work?
The work focuses on neo-realist international relations theory, the normative force of self-determination, the historical process of decolonization, and the inherent instability introduced by nationalist movements within sovereign borders.
What is the author's central research objective?
The objective is to demonstrate that national self-determination poses a significant threat to neo-realist conceptions of order by acting as a disruptive force that undermines traditional balance-of-power mechanisms.
Which scientific approach does the author employ?
The author uses a theoretical analysis of neo-realism contrasted with historical case studies—specifically Nazi-Germany and the era of decolonization—to evaluate the practical application of international norms.
What content is covered in the main body of the text?
The main body defines the neo-realist view of the international system, discusses the evolution of self-determination, and critically analyzes its role in challenging territorial sovereignty and state security.
Which keywords best characterize this research?
Key terms include national self-determination, neo-realism, Westphalian order, balance of power, decolonization, and state sovereignty.
How does the author relate decolonization to his argument?
He uses decolonization to argue that normative pressures, rather than just material power shifts, were a primary driver in the collapse of European empires, thereby challenging purely positivist neo-realist explanations.
Why does the author consider national self-determination a 'nuisance' to the Westphalian system?
It is seen as a nuisance because it encourages infinite regress by legitimizing demands for new state boundaries, which constantly threatens the established stability of existing sovereign states.
- Quote paper
- Jan-David Franke (Author), 2016, What has been the impact of national self-determination on the international system?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/411973
