Approaches of Study of
International Relations
• The approach implies looking at the problem from a
particular angle and explaining the phenomenon from
the same angle basing on a set of standards governing
the inclusion and exclusion of questions and data for
academic purposes.
• Methods, on the other hand, is a sort of study or
theory of the nature and grounds on which the search
of knowledge is based.
• The technique is a sort of tool and denotes the
operations and activities involved in the collection and
interpretation of data.
• The subject of international relations is
studied through different approaches.
• Quincy Wright has mentioned twenty three
types of models of international studies.
• The main types of approaches may be
classified into two broad types.
1. Classical or Conventional Approaches
2. Scientific or Behavioral Approaches
Classical or Conventional Approaches
• Traditional Approaches
1.Historical Approach
2.Current Event Approach
3.Institutional, Legal and Normal Approach
• Philosophical Approaches
1.Realistic Approach
2.Idealistic Approach
3. Eclectic Approach
II. Scientific or Behavioral Approaches
(a). Systems Approach (Morton Kaplan’s Six
Systems Approach)
1.Balance of Power Approach
2.Loose Bi-Polar System Approach
3.Tight BI-Polar System Approach
4.Universal International System Approach
5.Hierachical International System Approach
6.Unit Veto System Approach
(b). Policy Science Approach :
1.Decision-Making Approach
2.Communication Approach
3.Games Theory Approach
4.Bargaining Theory Approach
5.Equilibrium Approach
The Idealistic Approach
It is one of the classical approaches
• It is the liberal approach followed in between
the two world wars
• Woodrow was the proponent of this approach
• According to this approach, a society or nation
is formed due to evolution.
• In this evolution there may be good or bad
• In 1795 Condorcet visualized a world order free
from war, inequality and tyranny.
• This new order would be marked by constant
progress in human welfare brought about by the
use of reason, education and science.
• The future system was visualized to be free from
power politics, immorality and violence
• President Woodrow Wilson of USA who gave a
concrete shape to this his idealism through text of
Treaty of Versailles.
• He made a strong plea for world peace and
international organization.
• The difficulty of this system is that such a system
could emerge only by following the moral
principles in mutual relations in place of power,
which is not possible in practice.
• Secondly, to bring about such order the
totalitarian forces must be crushed by all means
of through the use of democratic methods and
• last necessity is the establishment of world
government.
Realist Approach
• The realistic approach was propounded by Hans
J.Morgenthau and George Kenna Spykman are
leading exponents of this theory.
• According to Morgenthau, the approach to the study
of international relations should take into consider
ration human nature as it is actually is, and not what
it ought to be.
• It is human nature which is reflected at the
international level under the name of foreign policy
of a state.
• Human nature is essentially selfish and wants to
protect its own interest.
• The master key in the study of international
relations is the attainment of power.
• Thus power is the essence of international
relations.
• This approach is called the realist approach
because it emphasizes the importance of national
interest as viewed by the statesmen of a
particular nation in concrete terms.
The Principles of Realist Theory are:
1.Foreign policy should be based on facts and reason.
2.Foreign policy should be based on national interest
defined in terms of power.
3.Meaning of national interest defined in terms of power
should change with the changing circumstances.
4.No place for universal moral principles in international
relations.
5.No identity between moral principles of a nation and
universal moral principles.
6.Political sphere is autonomous and pervading
Basic assumptions of the theory:
1.Concept of power
2.concept of national interest
3.Peace
Morgenthau believes that ‘Men do not fight
because they have arms’ but ‘they have arms
because they deem it necessary to fight’.
He,therefore,concludes that a mutually
satisfactory settlement of political problems is
necessary for disarmament.
Systems Theory :
• This approach was introduced in late 1950’s.
• ‘Hall and Fagan defined the system as ‘a set of objects
together with relationship between the objects and
between the attributes.
• International system came into existence with the
emergence of the modern European state systems.
• The systems theory or general systems theory was
expounded by Mc Clelland in 1955.Later it was
developed by many other scholars
• Morton Kaplan is one of the best exponents of the
systems theory.
• According to Morton Kaplan, International system or politics
implies two things –
1.International system
2.Nation state system
• Nations or states are the main actors in the international politics
and the role of the states changes with the change of international
system.
Kaplan treats six models of major international systems
1.The balance of power system
2.The loose bipolar system
3.The tight bipolar system
4.The universal international system
5.The hierarchical international system
6.Unit veto system.
• The Balance of Power System: A period between
the eighteenth century and 1914 (the beginning
year of the First World War) had been considered
as the golden era of the balance of power system.
• This system featured a multipolar dynamic of five
dominant European powers of similar strength.
These powers sought to enhance their capacities
through diplomatic channels rather than military
means.
• There were occasions of war among these powers, but
it came to an end when there was a threat of the
destruction of one of these powers. Hence, it was
clear that they never intended to alter the system;
instead, the primary goal was to preserve the system.
• When one power attempted to dominate the others,
then other powers formed an alliance against it. When
one major actor had suffered a defeat, the other
powers did not exclude that state. Instead, the
defeated state was reintegrated into the system by
other states.
The Loose Bipolar System: Unlike the balance of
power system, the loose bipolar system
featured diverse actors during the period of
Cold War.
• The basic structure of the system was two
large rival blocs led by two superpowers: the
United States of America and the Soviet
Union.
• These two blocs were radically different in terms
of ideologies: democratic capitalism and
communism. In addition to the two blocs, there
were also other actors such as Non-Aligned states
and international organizations such as the United
Nations.
• Both the superpowers avoided a direct war due to
the threat of nuclear destruction via
counter-attack (according to the second strike
doctrine).
The Tight Bipolar System: The tight bipolar system has so
many characteristics in common with the loose bipolar
system. For instance, the structure of the tight bipolar
system is the two rival blocs and the actors of both blocs
are hierarchically organized.
• The tight bipolar system will be transformed into a loose
bipolar system if both actors are non-hierarchically
organized.
• Another important feature is the role of the other actors
than the bloc actors. International organizations such as the
United Nations will be marginalized and Non-Aligned states
will either lose their significance or will disappear in the
tight bipolar system.
The Universal System: The universal system is
possible when the bipolar system disappears
and international organizations such as the
United Nations become so powerful in
maintaining world peace.
This system resembles Immanuel Kant’s idea of
the confederation of republican states which
follow rule of law. What makes the universal
system unique is its nature and functions.
• The universal system will be an integrated and
solidarity system. It will have the mechanisms
to perform judicial, economic, political and
administrative functions.
• These functions may be performed by either
the United Nations or any such international
organization. This system is featured by a high
level of cross-border cooperation and
humanitarian interventions.
The Hierarchical System: This system comes into
existence with the demise of the bipolar system
through the breakup of one of the two blocs.
Then the international order is reorganized into a
political hierarchy and the ideology of the
remaining bloc is enforced upon the members of
the collapsed bloc.
• Depending on the ideology of the remaining bloc
and the role of the international organizations in
the changed scenario, the hierarchic system will
be either democratic or authoritarian.
The Unit Veto System: The unit veto system is one in
which all states possess the capability to destroy one
another, but all of them are aware of the
consequences of the attack: that aggression will
trigger a retaliatory attack.
The consciousness about the retaliatory action
discourages each and every nation-state from
attacking other countries.
Kaplan held that the advancements in the fields of
communication and technology minimize the danger
of an accidental war under the unit veto system.
