International relations remains to date an academic discipline in search of itself. The discipline has gone through a number of changes in terms of its underlying philosophical theories--and is showing signs of entering another transition period.
The purpose of this research is to examine the evolution of major international relations theories and to briefly explain the significance of these theories to understanding world politics. Particular attention will be given to changes in the field since 1970 and to future prospects for international relations theory.
Prior to the First World War, it could reasonably be argued that the field of international relations was in its infancy. No clear philosophical premises directed the study of global politics. Relations between nations were not usually guided by paradigms of thought. Rather, global politics tended to be largely anarchistic and unscientific (Linklater, 1982, pp. 9-10).. In the wake of a world war, the concept of an "international community" was pressed into the minds of the nations' leaders with the hope of developing a system of international institutions and laws capable of preventing another major global conflict.
The Second World War and the rise of Nazism shattered the illusion of the legalistic approach to international relations. The legalistic and moralistic approach was eventually replaced as the dominant paradigm by the philosophy of realism--a paradigm that still is a guiding force today.
Realism is essentially an acceptance that relations between nations are anarchistic in nature, but that conflict situations can be mitigated by an appropriate distribution of power. Specifically, there are three primary components to political realism: (1) nations are the primary units of action in global politics; (2) nations seek power, either as an end in itself or as a means to some other end; and (3) in seeking power, nations behave more or less in a rational man...