Essay Sample on Realism vs Liberalism

The relationship of nations is tarnished by the divisions that exist between them. In the modern world, it is rare to find nations that are seemingly similar. However, though there are differences, it does not mean that some nations are more important than others. Simply, the differences show the diversity that exists in the modern world. Most of these differences are created by the distinctions placed in the society (Jackson & Sorensen, 2016). One major example of these distinctions is the notion of developed and underdeveloped nations. At the moment, there is a huge division between rich and powerful states and those that have weak economies and little influence globally. Such resulted in the establishment of international development assistance that allows rich countries to provide aid to underdeveloped countries (Jackson & Sorensen, 2016). Two theories, realism, and liberalism can explain such actions. At its inception, foreign aid and international development were mainly structured upon liberal concepts so as to create a better and fair international community. However, today, the motivation to use international development is greatly influenced by realist thoughts.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Liberalism is one of the main international relations theory. The theory is based on various assumptions. First, liberalism views non-state actors as crucial in the international relations system (Rawls, 2005). While the state matters in international relations, individual actors are the main components of an effective international system. Secondly, the theory strongly emphasizes that individuals and groups have their interests that may at times differ with that of the overall state (Rawls, 2005). Thus individuals and groups may evaluate personal gains and losses that may come as a result of foreign policies. This may influence their decision to support foreign policy and international development initiatives. Though there may be differences in opinions between individuals and the government, liberalism argues that political institutions are the ones that allow individuals to cooperate with each other and to settle at common goals and objectives. The aim is for nations to cooperate rather than compete. Thirdly, liberalism considers absolute power to be more important than relative power (Rawls, 2005). Thus nations should consider policies that can benefit both of them as opposed to one nation maximizing their own gains at the expense of others. Lastly, related to absolute gains, liberalism support ideas such as free trade which the theory claims is a peaceful way for nations to acquire wealth (Mingst & Arreguin-Toft, 2013). This is because the nations would be better off than if they were pursuing self-interests. Furthermore, apart from making nations economically powerful, free trade eliminates the division between nations and unites them into one community.

The other theory, realism, contrasts sharply with the liberalism theory. Rather than viewing individuals and groups as the main actors, realism claims that the state is the primary actor of international relations (North, 2010). Thus, individuals are loyal to the state regarding foreign policies. Rich and powerful nations offer foreign aid and international development assistance while having their interests in mind. Such interests include achieving favorable policies, building international influence, and creating an international community to assist them to realize their economic and political interests. Thus, foreign aid may not be primarily a means for developing countries to obtain humanitarian needs and achieve economic development, but also offers an opportunity for donor nations to gain more power. As a result, they may find it easier to achieve their self-interests. Secondly, unlike liberalism, realism argues that the states are the unified actors and that individuals and groups cannot influence state decisions on matters concerning international relations (North, 2010). Thirdly, realism views relative power as more important than absolute power (North, 2010). Thus, states need to consider how a policy option will make them well off before validating the agreement. Clearly, with realism, powerful nations will always outdo and outlast weaker competitors.

Liberalism and Realism provide a basis for explaining why rich and powerful nations provide aid to developing nations. The two theories have contrasting views on the concept of foreign aid. Liberalism defines foreign aid in terms of measures that developed nations take so as to ensure the political and socio-economic development of recipient countries (Mowle, 2003). On the other hand, realism defines foreign on the basis of developed nations offering assistance so as to increase the international influence and power (Mowle, 2003). Despite the contrasting views, the two theories agree that foreign aid involves material goods and services that donors have in plenty transferred to recipient nations based on certain purposes or interests. It is these interests that distinguish the views of the two theories. Foreign aid can be in terms of emergency humanitarian, economic, or military aid (Lancaster, 2008).

Liberalism strongly claims that nations participate in foreign aid so as to benefit the recipient nation and its population. The foreign aid will assist the recipient nation to combat poverty and promote development (Doyle & Recchia, 2011). Liberals claim that nations are always embedded in both the domestic and transnational society which results in the creation of social, cultural and economic incentives that foster interaction across borders. State policies determine these interactions though individuals and groups can pressure the government to draft policies that would enable them to realize their goals. There are two assumptions of liberalism with regards to foreign policy (Doyle & Recchia, 2011). First, states represent the preferences of the society. It is a representative institution that is subject to change its decisions based on societal pressure. Secondly, the theory assumes that there is cooperation between the society and the state before foreign policy decisions are made. Therefore, based on the two assumptions, liberalism can explain foreign aid in terms of collaboration between two states with individuals having the power to influence policy decisions. Also, self-interests of governments are not important in providing foreign aid policies.

On the other hand, realism argues that donor nations have self-interests when offering foreign aid to developing nations (Guzzini, 2013). They gain international influence and soft power which enables them to remain in the top positions. Though in the past military power was the most important form of power for nations, nowadays, it has incorporated economic strength as well as the ability of a nation to influence other nations (Guzzini, 2013). As a result, foreign aid and international development assistance have been influenced more by realism than liberalism.

Foreign aid and international development have become an integral part of maintaining the relations between different nations. However, it has strong links to international politics, which like all other politics, involves a struggle for power. In this context, power can have very different meanings. It can mean wealth, political influence, workforce, or military strength. According to Guzzini (2013), political realism gets its way into international politics because of the interest of power. This implies that foreign aid and international development assistance compels the decisions of rich nations as to whether they will have the chance to use their power to accomplish their self-interests. However, this does not mean that nations will not interact with one another, just that they will do so when they know that it will benefit them the most (Jackson & Sorensen, 2016). Mowle (2003) makes this clear when he claims that realists form coalitions so as to improve their chances of influencing the distribution of national capabilities. When a nation does not have enough power, then it may align with other nations so as to increase the opportunities of acquiring ones interests.

Foreign aid and international development assistance have not only been driven by interests of development but also economic, institutional and political conditions of both recipients and donors. From the point of view of realism, foreign aid, and international development assistance is an excellent way for rich nations to secure their power and influence which is necessary for them to pursue their self-interests (North, 2010). Development initiatives usually achieve this by influencing domestic policies, building goodwill, and forming communities of nations that have favorable donor policies. Therefore, foreign aid and international development assistance is a brilliant way for rich nations to acquire the soft power that will allow them to achieve their self-interests in the modern international community.

Unlike the past trends where nations used military means to solve the worlds problems, today, developmental assistance has become more relevant to realizing peace in the world. Nations no longer use hard power since it has acquired a negative reputation in international politics (North, 2010). On the other hand, foreign aid and international development assistance can address the needs of conflict-stricken nations in a manner accepted globally. Offering assistance to the poor empowers them both as individuals and communities. By providing basic education, raising awareness, including discriminated groups and by bestowing hope and pride, international development models that are inclusive offers people confidence and strength to get out of poverty (Lancaster, 2008). Offering assistance to these people benefits not only international security needs of a nation but also a nations reputation which is crucial in developing strong diplomatic ties.

Supporting foreign aid and international development builds the reputation of a nation and gives the impression of benign intentions, whether or not such intentions are true. The international development efforts may just be an issue of improving a nations public image (Mingst & Arreguin-Toft, 2013). Being exceptionally active in offering foreign aid and international development assistance makes a nation look well, and this image is crucial in improving its credibility and therefore its influence in diplomatic circles. Such importance of a rich nations image can be evident in certain scenarios when the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member nations, who strive to offer assistance to developing nations, do not keep their promise. When a member nation refuses to provide foreign aid, they reputation and records are damaged, therefore resulting in them having weaker positions in policy discussions (Lancaster, 2008). Realists claim that all nations seek to improve their positions and power globally even if they aim to preserve their independence. International development assistance offers them this opportunity as it provides soft power and significantly increases the persuasive ability of nations (Mowle, 2003). Soft power is the main factor that strengthens diplomacy. Therefore, it is in the best interest of nations to actively participate in international development so as to develop soft power, which in turn gives it more power to realize its interests.

Rich nations can also use foreign aid and international development assistance to achieve desired domestic conditions both abroad and at home. Today, it is common to find nations using economic skills in terms of sanctions both positive and negative in an attempt to influence other nations (Guzzini, 2013). Positive sanctions involve ent...