State-centric perspective refers to a situation where a state holds the primary political power whereby the decisions and policies they make greatly impact all the other nations across the globe. Institutional liberalism, constructivism, and realism theories all fall under the category of being state-centric. A state-centric understanding of international relations is in sync with the idea of the state-centric perspective while also stating that the behaviors of the states are sorely aimed at gaining more power and national interest. In international relations, several historical occurrences, such as world wars I and II, brought about the aspect of state centrism. This aspect has played a big part in the outcome of the international relations field. In addition, this aspect has also been the main theme in Hans Morgenthau and John Mearsheimer s works. This paper will discuss the usefulness of the state-centric understanding of international relations. The paper will also discuss some of the limitations of being state-centric and the most appropriate solution.
One of the usefulness of the state-centric understanding of international relations is the ability to explain the behavior of states in the international system. This perspective is important as it discusses why states participate in certain behaviors, such as forming alliances and constantly fighting for power (Mearsheimer, 2003, page 34). In the book ‘the tragedy of great power politics,’ the author discusses the pursuit of power as one of the primary reasons for states in the international system to want to be state-centric to increase their survival ability. According to the author, due to the lack of a central authority to enforce rules in the international system, the states are made to provide security by relying on their armies (Mearsheimer, 2003, Page 30). Due to this, each great power in the system keeps pushing to gain authority and possess the power to influence all the other states. This idea of states’ pursuit of power has been used to explain the causes of world wars I and II and the emergence of the cold war. Since states wanted to take power and make policies that would affect all the other states, there resulted in constant power battles that, in turn, resulted in wars.
The ability of states to make and provide policy recommendations is another aspect of the usefulness of the state-centric understanding of international relations (Hans Joachim Morgenthau, 1948, PAGE 15). This perspective largely shaped the influence of U.S. foreign policy, especially during the Cold War. The State centric perspective allows a state to have a lot of power in the international system, thus enabling them to make policies that will impact all the other states. Since states are rational, this much power also allows them to make policies that are in sync with their national interests. These interests include a state’s economic, political, cultural, social, and other interests. However, these interests are the basic concepts that cannot be limited to only economic or moral considerations, which is the foundation for understanding international relations. The ability to make policies that impact all the other states in the international system is a major opportunity; hence, many powerful states constantly compete to be state-centric, as many others form alliances to enable them to take or maintain the power.
The other use of the state-centric perspective in understanding human relations is its role as the unit that analyses international relations. The state-centric theories such as realism and liberalism discuss that only states can formulate foreign policies and make decisions and influence their national interests. This theory views the state as the main participant in the political world because; states consider national interests, ensuring their survival (Mearsheimer, 2003, Page 31.) They also have the ability and power to control and regulate their citizens and formulate policies. States can also make their society stand out in the international system. The international system contains several states, their interactions, alliances, disagreements, and cooperations. The state-centric perspective provides a good analysis of international relations by describing how the states coordinate their needs, interests, power, and policies in the international system.
In as much as the state-centric perspective has been very influential and largely impacted the shaping of the field of international relationships, there are several limitations to it. One of its limitations is that it is very pessimistic. This is evident because this perspective largely entails states fighting and disagreeing with one another for power and control. Realists believe that states need more trust between them in the international system and hence find it hard to cooperate. (Mearsheimer, 2003, Page 52.) This perspective has resulted in many wars and conflicts that have, in turn, led to the death of many people due to the fight for power. Another limitation of this perspective is that it assumes that states are always rational. This is not a solid fact, as states have made decisions and policies that have been proven irrational over time. For instance, there have been situations when states have rushed into conflicts based on poor assumptions instead of first assessing the extent of the issues to figure out the best way to handle them.
Due to the limitations associated with the state-centric perspective, states can incorporate several solutions to manage the shortcomings of the perspective. First of all, states can adopt a multi-faceted approach. This approach considers not only the power balance and dynamics between states but also other aspects, such as culture and principles. This approach encourages the importance of ideas in shaping a state’s behaviors and recognizes that power is not the main basis that determines international relations. Secondly, states can adopt or incorporate the human-centric perspective in their international relations. This perspective understands the necessity of humans and centers on human development and well-being. This approach will encourage states to focus on issues that directly affect humans, such as; climate change, poverty, diseases, and pandemics, and the impact these issues have on states’ stability. A more detailed view that accounts for the multi-dimensional nature of the international system of international relations should be considered. These views will further address the limitations of the state-centric perspective.
This paper has discussed the usefulness of the state-centric understanding of international relations. The paper has also discussed some of the limitations of being state-centric and the most appropriate solution to managing this perspective. This paper has discussed the behavior of states in the international system, the ability of states to make policies, and how the perspective can be used as a unit of analysis in international relations. However, this perspective also has its limitations which include; its pessimistic nature and entails assumptions that states are always rational. This paper has also mentioned a few solutions to manage and complement the limitations of the state-centric perspective. By considering the appropriate solutions to manage the limitations associated with the state-centric perspective, we can better understand international relations and aim at attaining a safer, better, and more peaceful world.
Bibliography
Mearsheimer, J.J. (2003). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. W.W. Norton & Company.
Hans Joachim Morgenthau (1948). Politics Among Nations. New York: A.A. Knopf.
write