In this paper, I explore the relationship between realist theory and the phenomenon of revolution. Realism, being one of the key IR theories and considering the inherently conflictual nature of...Show moreIn this paper, I explore the relationship between realist theory and the phenomenon of revolution. Realism, being one of the key IR theories and considering the inherently conflictual nature of revolutions, has surprising little to say on this topic specifically. My aim thus is to elucidate how revolutions can be understood through existing realist theory. I do this through an analysis of the key texts and authors of Classical Realism and Structural Realism, highlighting the aspects of the thought which is applicable. I wish to demonstrate that realism is a strong theoretical tool for understanding these events, and I parse out four key attributes through which to do so. Revolutions’ Amplification of material power, Challenge to the Status Quo, their Amour-Propre and their Break in Communication with other states. In all, I provide a review of Revolution and Realism thus far, identify its key theoretical tools and suggest a framework for further research.Show less
Sastrowijoto, Laurens Pepijn Henricus Helenius 2020
This thesis focuses on the different forms of Realism in the field of International Relations; Classical Realism, Neorealism and Neoclassical Realism. With Neoclassical Realism being the most...Show moreThis thesis focuses on the different forms of Realism in the field of International Relations; Classical Realism, Neorealism and Neoclassical Realism. With Neoclassical Realism being the most recent addition, researched is why and to what extent it may be more suitable to analyse Russia’s FP with a focus on Crimea’s annexation, compared to its predecessors.Show less
After several years of intense American involvement, NATO was established as an effort to tackle the spread of communism in Europe. After it was signed and ratified, the United States of America...Show moreAfter several years of intense American involvement, NATO was established as an effort to tackle the spread of communism in Europe. After it was signed and ratified, the United States of America was instantly became the hegemony and it affects two European superpowers namely France and Britain. However, these two countries showed different reaction in response to the American hegemony in NATO. Due to the Special Relationship, the British under the leadership of Harold Wilson, was more inclusive towards the US involvement in the European politics. On the other hand, Charles de Gaulle showed different reaction towards the American hegemony where he clearly rejects the American involvement in the European soil. This paper will show how crucial the analysis of country’s leader as the political figure that able to decide the direction of a country. There are some parameters that are utilized to analyze the leader such as the political background, political party such as well as the national political system, and lastly the interest of the leader. The two events such as the French withdrawal from NATO and the British withdrawal from the Suez but rely on NATO is the perfect example to show the two contrast ambition of the two leaders. These two are also the perfect cases in order to provide a better understanding about how crucial an analysis of the leader as a person might affects a country’s political direction.Show less
