International Relations: Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
Debate regarding the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the international agreement among states to desist from developing nuclear weapons, is at a all-time high today, with disputes regarding the nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran at the forefront of international relations. The motivations of states to either sign or decline the NPT as well as whether or not they abide by it can be viewed through the lens of each of three major perspectives in political theory: neorealism, neoliberal institutionalism, and constructivism. This paper will examine the theoretical grounds of each of these political philosophies as well as how each would evaluate the Non-Proliferation Treaty and its effects. The tradition of neorealism has a deep-rooted historical basis in the political philosophy of realism, the concept of nature described by Thomas Hobbes as that of constant war between men in order to survive. Niccolo Machiavelli contributed to this concept by justifying all actions taken to preserve the state as right, regardless of their morality. Realist thinkers throughout the years have posited that the survival of the state is the primary aim of politics, and individual states exist in a constant state of near-war, only tempered
In contrast with this highly self-interested view of world politics, neoliberal institutionalist theory sees the international institutions which enforce and create treaties and protocols such as the NPT as the highest authority regarding international relations (as opposed to the actions of one self-interested state, as in neorealism). The acceptance of the interdependence of nations on one another for ideal security and living conditions is a significant part of neoliberal institutionalism (Keohane 119-126). Additionally, the stability which is desired by neorealists can be achieved via international institutions, say neoliberals. The fact that democracies fight fewer wars against one another than any other political structure does offer support to this theory, and neoliberal institutionalists assert that an interdependent international community is the surest way to ensure individual state securities (Owen 1994). Finally, constructivists approach international relations from the perspective that states construct rules and structures for the governance of their societies; from the constructivist perspective, states have created the NPT and it gains its authority only from the structures which states constructed in order to enforce it. From this perspective, both the neorealist focus on individual states as shapers of policy and the neoliberal institutionalist idea that agencies shape policy become a part of the creation (e.g. construction) of structures which govern individual state actions as well as the international community as a whole. One of the central constructivist insights is that the international system is not a fixed, external structure, but is instead a socially produced structure of shared meanings (Wendt, 61-68). The rules of the system are produced by the institutional interactions of states and in turn shape those states' practices, social rules, and norms. A constructivist appro
Some common words found in the essay are:
North Korea, Niccolo Machiavelli, Non-Proliferation Treaty, Korea Iran, international institutions, Thomas Hobbes, international community, neoliberal institutionalists, international relations, neoliberal institutionalism, , non-proliferation treaty, nuclear programs, international treaties, global community, regarding nuclear, Nuclear Non-Proliferation, regarding nuclear programs, individual international institutions, nuclear non-proliferation treaty, neorealism neoliberal institutionalism, neoliberal institutionalism constructivism,
Approximate Word count = 1297
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|