INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS PAST QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Q1. Why international relations as a practice in international affairs and as a distinct field of study?

International relations is a relatively new field that studies the unique relationships between different
countries and cultures and how they affect different aspects of society, from economics to law, security
and governance. It focuses on the impacts of global development while giving you a deeper
understanding of current international issues such as climate change and human rights.

International relation is a course that introduces you to the world of politics and socio-historical impact
of global development. You will get to learn about the different governing policies and political systems
around the world. You will understand their connection with a wide range of international issues such as
global ethics, climate change, global poverty, human rights, etc.

The following are important factors to know with regards to the importance of international relations or
why we opted to study international relations

1. INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IS FAR MORE THAN POLITICS

Although a degree in International Relations prepares you for a career path in Politics, your career
options and opportunities are in no way limited to politics alone. Because the skills acquired during the
course of study are transferable, students who study international relations go further to work in
different industries and careers including activism, national security, military intelligence and analysis,
international business frontiers, and more.

Many graduates go on to become diplomats and work in a wide variety of areas like: Global Health,
Human trafficking, Science, Technology, Conflict resolution, Climate change, Environmental issues

2. YOU’LL EXPERIENCE CULTURAL IMMERSION

However, to be highly successful in your career as a business executive, lobbyist, ambassador or

diplomat in a particular region, you’ll have to immerse yourself in other cultures. Part of the experience
will require you to learn another country’s traditions, cultures, and language. In addition to making you
highly proficient at your job, it will position you for deep personal growth which is incredibly fulfilling.

3. IT’S A GREAT CAREER PATH

Moreover, depending on your aspirations, interest, and experiences, career opportunities related to
International relations in the Public, Private, or NGO space are always in abundance. If you’re
considering a career in government, you can opt-in for a role in intelligence or security. This will afford
you the opportunity to be involved with international relations projects. More so, studying international
relations is a great starting point to kickstart your ambition to be an ambassador or diplomat.

4. YOU’LL GAIN REAL-LIFE EXPERIENCE

Studying international relations positions you to have real-life experience. It helps you to understand
where and how strategies, policies, laws, and conflicts have an impact around the world. Most
institutions around the world are now integrating compulsory study and work experience in the
curriculum to help students have a practical application of what they learned within the four walls of a
classroom.

5. NUMEROUS CAREER OPTIONS

Studying international relations is a surefire way to hone your decision-making, analytical, and
interpersonal skills. You gain a comprehensive understanding of society, people, globalization and
multinational markets. This skill set is in high demand among leading employers in both the private and
public sectors. International relations today is an up-tempo and flourishing field, with plenty of
opportunity for travel.

In conclusion, Studying international relations majors would give students the opportunity to work in
various sectors such as research institutions, media outlets, government ministries, and NGOs. However,
in order to grasp those opportunities students need to equip themselves with other technical knowledge
and skills such as computing, public speaking, and language skills, as well as soft skills such as
communication and interpersonal skills.

Q2. With a detailed explanation, distinguish between the concept of statehood and nationhood in
domestic and international relations

Statehood has long been the central organising idea in the international system. Although there is no
generally accepted legal definition of statehood, the best-known formulation is found in the 1933
Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States: defined territory, permanent population,
government and capacity to enter into relations with other states. Paradigmatically, territory, people
and government coincide in the state to produce international law’s map of the world as a jigsaw puzzle
of solid colour pieces fitting neatly together.

Although the state as territory–people–government is international law’s main device for representing
the world, the intersection of this definition with other doctrines of international law complicates the
picture
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STATEHOOD AND NATIONHOOD

There is no clear universal distinction between these terms, and “nation,” “state,” and “country” all tend
to be used interchangeably in common parlance, so if you want to make a point about any of them, you
have to define your terms very carefully, and be sure those who are reading/listening understand your
definitions.

That being said, among scholars there is a common distinction between a “state,” which is defined in
terms of political organization and independence (the USA is in the minority among countries in using
“state” for subordinate units, rather than the country as a whole), and a “nation,” which refers to a
group of people who consider themselves to be of the same identity or ethnicity. In 19th-century
Europe, for example, the Austro-Hungarian Empire would be thought of as a multi-national state - a
single unit containing many distinct “nationalities” (Austrian, Hungarian, Czech, Slovak, Serb, etc.) The
“nation-state” was almost an exception - a country in which all the people were thought of (and thought
of themselves) as being of the same “nation.” It became an ideal for many, especially after WWI.

So what, then, is a “nation” if it is not the same as a “state.” There have been fascinating studies of
nationalism over the past half-century or so; I am partial to the interpretations of Benedict Anderson,
especially Imagined Communities. He writes of nations as being exactly that - “imagined communities” -
large groups of people who do not know each other personally, but imagine themselves to be members
of the same community, for whatever reasons (race, language, shared ancestry or history, etc.) Another
scholar put it neatly: “A nation is a group of people who believe that they are a nation.”

A nation is a group of people with a common language, history, culture, and (usually) geographic
territory. A state is an association of people characterized by formal institutions of government,
including laws; permanent territorial boundaries; and sovereignty (political independence). A state may
comprise one or more nations (as did the Roman Empire and Austria-Hungary), and a nation may be
represented in (or ruled by) one or more (usually contiguous) states, as in the early modern principalities
of Germany. A state comprising or dominated by a single nation is often called a nation-state.

Q3. Many IR scholars argue that, the conception of state sovereignty originates from the peace of
Westphalia. Briefly explain what brought about the peace of Westphalia and distinguish between "De
facto" and "De Jure" states.
The Peace of Westphalia was a series of peace treaties signed between May and October 1648 in the
Westphalian cities of Osnabrück and Münster that ended the Thirty Years’ War.

Over a four-year period, the warring parties of the Thirty Years’ War (the Holy Roman Empire, France,
and Sweden) were actively negotiating at Osnabrück and Münster in Westphalia. The end of the war
was not brought about by one treaty, but instead by a group of treaties, collectively named the Peace of
Westphalia. The three treaties involved were the Peace of Münster (between the Dutch Republic and
the Kingdom of Spain), the Treaty of Münster (between the Holy Roman Emperor and France and their
respective allies), and the Treaty of Osnabrück (between the Holy Roman Empire and Sweden and their
respective allies).

KEY POINTS

The end of the Thirty Years’ War was not brought about by one treaty, but instead by a group of
treaties, collectively named the Peace of Westphalia.

The treaties did not restore peace throughout Europe, but they did
create a basis for national self-determination.

Along with several territorial adjustments, the terms of the Peace of

Westphalia included a return to the principles in the Peace of Augsburg
of 1555, in which each prince would have the right to determine the
religion of his own state.

The treaty also extended that tolerance to allow the

minority religion of the territory to practice freely.

The Peace of Westphalia established important political

precedents for state sovereignty, inter-state diplomacy,
and balance of power in Europe.

However, De facto and De Jure are very closely related

concepts. De Facto describes practices in reality in law
and government, even though laws do not officially
recognise them whereas De Jure is a Latin word that means lawful, legitimate, officially sanctioned or
abided by the law. The difference between De Facto and
De Jure is very important from the exam point of view as
these terms are used to denote the status of the
positions held by certain important stakeholders in a
government. The De facto vs De jure is one of the most
important topics for the UPSC IAS Examination.
Q4. International Relations have some field of special interests that are hard to ignore, give a detailed
explanation of the following and state their importance in the state, and interstate Relations

a. Diplomacy

b. Foreign Policy

c. Foreign Policy Analyses

A. DIPLOMACY

The term diplomacy is derived via French from the ancient Greek diplōma, composed of diplo, meaning
“folded in two,” and the suffix -ma, meaning “an object.” The folded document conferred a privilege—
often a permit to travel—on the bearer, and the term came to denote documents through which princes
granted such favours. Later it applied to all solemn documents issued by chancelleries, especially those
containing agreements between sovereigns. Diplomacy later became identified with international
relations, and the direct tie to documents lapsed (except in diplomatics, which is the science of
authenticating old official documents). In the 18th century the French term diplomate (“diplomat” or
“diplomatist”) came to refer to a person authorized to negotiate on behalf of a state.

Diplomacy is often confused with foreign policy, but the terms are not synonymous. Diplomacy is the
chief, but not the only, instrument of foreign policy, which is set by political leaders, though diplomats
(in addition to military and intelligence officers) may advise them. Foreign policy establishes goals,
prescribes strategies, and sets the broad tactics to be used in their accomplishment. It may employ
secret agents, subversion, war, or other forms of violence as well as diplomacy to achieve its objectives.
Diplomacy is the principal substitute for the use of force or underhanded means in statecraft; it is how
comprehensive national power is applied to the peaceful adjustment of differences between states.

However, the purpose of diplomacy is to strengthen the state, nation, or organization it serves in
relation to others by advancing the interests in its charge. To this end, diplomatic activity endeavours to
maximize a group’s advantages without the risk and expense of using force and preferably without
causing resentment.

B. FOREIGN POLICY

Foreign policy is the mechanism national governments use to guide their diplomatic interactions and
relationships with other countries. A state’s foreign policy reflects its values and goals, and helps drive
its political and economic aims in the global arena. Many foreign policies also have a strong focus on
national and international security, and will help determine how a country interacts with international
organisations, such as the United Nations, and citizens of other countries.
Foreign policies are developed and influenced by a number of factors. These include:

the country’s circumstances in a number of areas, including geographically, financially, politically, and so
on

the behaviour and foreign policies of other countries

the state of international order and affairs more widely (for example, is there war or unrest? Are there
trade alliances to take into consideration?)

plans for advancement, such as economic advancement or technological advancement

Foreign policies generally are designed to help protect a country's national interests, national security,
ideological goals, and economic prosperity. This can occur as a result of peaceful cooperation with other
nations, or through aggression, war, and exploitation.

C. FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSES

Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA) is a field of study that analytically straddles international relations and
comparative politics. It captures the porousness of the borders between the domestic and international,
examining the rich interchanges which happen in between.

Foreign policy analysis allows us to better understand how political actors make policy decisions and
how they relate to other foreign government and non-government entities. Foreign policy is a complex
discipline wherein numerous actors work within structures both inside and outside the state to have an
impact on the decision-making process. It is useful to have analytical process models to illuminate the
dynamics in this field and help explain how states conduct their foreign policy, international relations
and diplomatic endeavors.

Q5. Write short note on the following

a. Anarchy

b. Balance of Power

c. Security dilemma

d. Hard Power

e. Soft Power

f. Arm race
g. Game theory

A. ANARCHY

In international relations theory, anarchy is the idea that the world lacks any supreme authority or
sovereign. In an anarchic state, there is no hierarchically superior, coercive power that can resolve
disputes, enforce law, or order the system of international politics. In international relations, anarchy is
widely accepted as the starting point for international relations theory.

International relations generally does not understand "anarchy" as signifying a world in chaos, disorder,
or conflict; rather, it is possible for ordered relations between states to be maintained in an anarchic
international system.

The prevalence of anarchy in the relations between states is the basic assumption of realism, a
prominent school of thought in international relations theory.

B. BALANCE OF POWER

The balance of power is considered one of the core principles of international relations. Although the
theory doesn’t have one, exact meaning1, it is best understood as referring to a state of international
order where power is balanced in such a way that nations avoid aggression out of fear of forceful
retaliation.

How Is The Balance of Power Maintained?

The balance of power theory maintains that when one state or alliance increases its power or applies it
more aggressively; threatened states will increase their own power in response, often by forming a
counter-balancing coalition. Balance of Power is a central concept in neorealist theory.. A few of these
strategies include:

Preservation of National Sovereignty

After World War II, many policy experts recognized the extreme danger of permitting one state to
invade and control another state. Those who believe in the balance of power theory believe nations
should never violate other nation’s sovereignty, although nations can divide into smaller nations, if that
is the will of its people.

Contained Conflicts
When conflicts do erupt, power is best balanced by containing/stopping that conflict and ensuring it
doesn’t spread. This was one of the driving rationales behind the UN’s involvement in the Korean War,
the United States’s involvement in Vietnam, and the more recent international involvements in Libya
and Syria.

Limited Retaliation

Nations who are attacked by other nations should retaliate only to the extent necessary to preserve
their own sovereignty and safety. To preserve the balance of power, the retaliating nation should not
seize land or resources.

Strong Military Alliances

Because some large nations desire all the power, nations must form military alliances to prevent
international aggression. In particular, stronger nations need to ally with weaker nations to keep those
nations from becoming a target of other strong nations. If an aggressive nation cannot easily expand by
taking over weaker nations, it can be more easily kept in check.

C. SECURITY DILEMMA

Security dilemma, in political science, a situation in which actions taken by a state to increase its own
security cause reactions from other states, which in turn lead to a decrease rather than an increase in
the original state’s security.

Some scholars of international relations have argued that the security dilemma is the most important
source of conflict between states. They hold that in the international realm, there is no legitimate
monopoly of violence—that is, there is no world government—and, as a consequence, each state must
take care of its own security. For this reason, the primary goal of states is to maximize their own
security. However, many of the actions taken in pursuit of that goal—such as weapons procurement and
the development of new military technologies—will necessarily decrease the security of other states.

D. HARD POWER

Power is defined as a set of particular attributes that people use in their interactions and the social
processes that determine the various identities and abilities of these people playing the power.

Hard power simply means when a country uses economic and military coercion to influence the
interests or behaviors of other countries or political bodies. This political power is deemed aggressive as
it is usually imposed on a lesser body or government by a much superior power, making it instantly
effective. Moreover, it is often backed by the superior power owning natural resources, economic
superiority, or even a higher population.
E. SOFT POWER

Soft power is the kind that attracts and convinces, as opposed to coercion, to change and influence
other people's and countries' preferences. This power uses negotiation and influence to appeal to
others. Soft power is necessary to improve human relations and create lifelong connections among the
parties. Soft power is best used in complex issues and helps reach a mutually beneficial state without
much difficulty.

F. ARM RACE

arms race, a pattern of competitive acquisition of military capability between two or more countries.
The term is often used quite loosely to refer to any military buildup or spending increases by a group of
countries. The competitive nature of this buildup often reflects an adversarial relationship. The arms
race concept is also used in other fields. However, the discussion in this article is limited to military arms
races.

One example of an arms race is the “dreadnought” arms race between Germany and Britain prior to
World War I. In the early 20th century, Germany as a rising power sought to challenge the United
Kingdom’s traditional naval dominance. In 1906 Britain launched a new, more-advanced warship, the
HMS Dreadnought, triggering a naval arms race. Between 1909 and the outbreak of World War I in
1914, Britain launched a further 19 dreadnoughts (i.e., turbine-powered all-big-gun warships) and a
further nine battle cruisers, while Germany launched 13 dreadnoughts and five battle cruisers. This arms
race is often cited as one of the causes of World War I.

G. GAME THEORY

Game theory is the analysis of how decision makers interact in decision making to take into account
reactions and choices of the other decision makers. International conflict and other phenomena in
international relations occur as a result of decisions made by people. These people may be leaders of
states, members of the legislature or military, members of nongovernmental organizations, or just
simply citizens of a country.

However, Game theory studies interactive decision-making, where the outcome for each participant or
"player" depends on the actions of all. If you are a player in such a game, when choosing your course of
action or "strategy" you must take into account the choices of others. But in thinking about their
choices, you must recognize that they are thinking about yours, and in turn trying to take into account
your thinking about their thinking, and so on.