1.0 In the medieval Europe, there was a

1.0 INTRODUCTION According to Oppenheim stateterritory is defined as a portion of the surface of the globe which is subjectto the sovereignty of the state. Crawford J (1979) stated that, a Stateswithout a territory is not possible, although the necessary territory may bevery small. States are generally regarded as having some component. AbrahamLincoln identified the main component of a States are territory, people andgovernment. Territory is where a state starts.

Territory is element on whichother elements exist. Furthermore, all these frontiers enclose not just territorybut people. They number may and does vary hugely from one state to another.Government also plays important part in state. By one process or another, someof the people of a state are designated as its official representatives,constituting its government.

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
Writers Experience
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
Writers Experience
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
Writers Experience
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team

In the medieval Europe, there was ahierarchical system of power and authority instead of territorial sovereigntyand sovereign equality under feudalism. Sovereigns were divided into variouscategories in the medieval period. They were as some sovereigns were recognizedas independent, both de-factor and de-jure, next some were independent inpractice but not altogether in juridical theory and lastly some states wereseparately constituted with their own laws and institutions but dependent. Thisshow the territorial state system was not introduced during the medievalperiod. By the beginning of the seventeenth century there was a demand for theestablishment of norms and rules for peaceful relation.In order to understand the 1648Treaty of Westphalia, it is important to understand of the event that led tothe establishment of the Peace of Westphalia. Key historical events prior tothe Treaty of Westphalia was the Thirty Years War. Asch, 2014, the Thirty YearWar was one of the greatest and longest armed contests of the early modernperiod.

The Thirty Year’s War (1618-1648) began when Holy Roman EmperorFerdinand II of Bohemia attempted to curtail the religious activities of hissubject, sparkling rebellion among Protestants. The war came to involve the majorpowers of Europe with Sweden, France, Spain and Austria all waging campaignsprimarily on German soil.Furthermore, this conflict redrew thereligious and political map of central Europe.

Began in the Holy Roman Empire,a vast complex of some one thousand separate, semiautonomous political unitsunder the loose suzerainty of the Austrian Hapsburgs. Over the previous twocenturies, a balance of power had emerged among the leading states. But duringthe sixteenth century, the Reformation and the Counter Reformation had dividedinto hostile Protestant and Catholic camps. Each prepared to seek foreignsupport to guarantee its integrity if need arose.The writing of Englishman, ThomasHobbes (1588-1645) captured the essence of the modern state. Realist argue basedon his ideas that order in international relation depends upon state power andthe balance of power among state.

Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) in his workprovided a rule based order for commerce and the conduct of war and peace. HugoGrotius earning himself the title “father of international law”.Peace of Westphalia ended the war in1648. New balance of power emerged in Europe in which Germany, Sweden andFrance become the most powerful states in Europe. 2.0 OBJECTIVE 1.   Toanalysis the important actor in International Relations.2.

   Todiscuss what is the paradigm that distribute the system of state in                                              International Relations.3.   Toexamine the chronology of International Relations that has been                                                 dominated by Western paradigms. 3.0 LITERATUREREVIEWS3.1            Objective1 : To analysis the important actor in International Relations.At theInternational scene, there are many players engaged in what is regarded as thegame of international relations. One of the oldest and universally acknowledgedactors on the modern world stage is the state.

A state is a type of polity thatis an organized political community living under a single system of government.A Political community is referred to as a government responsible for thecitizens under the government. It has been earlier assumed that internationalrelations are made up of the relations between states. International relationscan be likened to a series of actions that promote interactions between states.Actors are entities that participate in or promote international relations.

Thetwo types of actors involved in international relations include State andnon-state actors. State actors represent a government while non-state actors donot. However, they have impact on the state actors.   3.1.1  Major Actors and Assumptions by Realism          Realism is basedon four key assumptions. First, statesare the principle or most important actors. States represent the key unitof analysis, whether one is dealing with ancient Greek city-states or modernnation-states.

The study of international relations is the study of relationsamong these units. Realist who use the concept of system defined in term ofinterrelated parts usually refer to an international system of states. What ofnonstate actors ? International organizations such as the United Nations mayaspire to the status of independent actor, but from realist perspective, thisaspiration has not in been achieved to any significant degree. Multinationalcorporations, terrorist groups, and other transnational and internationalorganization are frequently acknowledged by realist, but the position of thesenonstate actors is always one of lesser importance. State are the dominatactors.      Second, the state is viewed as a unitary actor. For purposes ofanalysis, realists view the state as being encapsulated by metaphorical hardshell. A country faces the outside world as an integrated unit.

A commonassumption associated with realist thought is that political differences withinthe state are ultimately resolved authoritatively such that the government ofthe state speaks with one voice for the state as a whole. The state is aunitary actor in that it is usually assumed by realists to have one policy atany given time on any particular issue. To be sure, exceptions occur from timeto time, but to the realist these are exceptions that demonstrate the rule andthat actually support the general notion of the state as an integrated ,unitary actor.    Third, given this emphasis on the unitary state-as-actor, realists usuallymake the further assumption that the state us essentially a rational actor. Arational foreign policy decision-making process would include a statement ofobjectives, consideration of all feasible alternatives in terms of existingcapabilities available to the state, the relative likelihood of attaining theseobjectives by the various alternatives under consideration, and the benefits orcosts associated with each alternative. Following this rational process,governmental decisionmakers evaluate each alternative, selecting the one thatmaximizes utility.

3.1.2 Major Actors and Assumptions by Pluralism              For the pluralist, the state is not a unitary actor.Indeed, the realist view of the state as unitary actor is an abstraction thatmasks the essence of politics that is found principally within the state. Thestate is not some reified entity an abstraction to be treated as if it werephysical bein that acts with single-minded determination, always in a coherentmanner. Pluralis disaggregate the state break it into its component parts. Theyreject the notion of the state as an integrated entity, impermeable to outsideforces.

Both governmental and nongovernmental actors pass through this softouter shell, sometimes taking actions with policy implications contrary topreferences of central state authorities. These are not just exceptional casesfrom the pluralist Theessence if politics. This is not only in terms ofinteractions within the state; equally important, it is the transnationaldimension of state and nonstate actors that operates across national borders.

The pluralist image thus offers greater complexity than the relatively simplerimage of states as unitary actors interacting with one another.3.1.3  Major Actors and Assumptions by Globalism.           Globalism, as weuse the term, is a third perspective, fundamentally different from  both realist and the pluralist images.

  Globalists typically assume that the startingpoint of analysis for international relations is the global context withinwhich states and other entities interact. Globalists emphasize the overallstructure of the international system or , more colloquially, the “bigpicture.” To explain behaviour takes place. This is a dominant theme within theglobalist image, although some realists and pluralists also share thisperspective. To understand the external behaviour of states requires more thanmerely examing factors internal to a state. One must first grasp hiw thestructure of the system conditions and predisposes certain actors to act incertain ways.

                Second, globalist assume thatit is not only useful but also imperative to view international relations froma historical perspective. For many globalists, Marxists as well asnon-Marxists, the defining characteristic of the international system is thatit is ‘capitalist’. This requires the study of the rise of capitalism as itemerged is sixteenth-century Western Europe, its development, changes, andexpansion to the point at which today we can speak of a worl capitalist systemthat conditions and constrains the behavior of all states and societies. Somestates and societies benefit from this capitalist system; others do not.Furthermore, the evolution of the world capitalist system supposedly accountsfor the creation of states, not just their behavior.

While realist and manypluralists tend to see states as a given, utilizing them as independentvariables, some globalists view states as dependent variables that wich is tobe explained.3.2     Objective2 : To discuss what is the paradigm that distribute the system                                               of state in InternationalRelations.In this objective,the scholar will discuss about what is the paradigms that distribute the systemof the state in the international relations. A paradigms is a theoreticalapproach that includes one or more theories that shared similar philosophicalassumptions. A paradigms also a set of beliefs about what should be taken forgranted and what need to be investigated, about what sorts of forces are mostimportant in the world, and about what assumptions should begin the analysis.Paradigms that distribute the systems of the state are realism, liberalism, andconstructivism.

  RealismRealism focuses onthe fact that there is anarchy in the international system. Anarchy is wherethere is no higher authority governing relationships between states. States areviewed as the ultimate authority or sovereign over the people and government.It also mean that no state can rely on other to come on their aids. As said byKenneth Waltz, perhaps the most influential neorealist, observes: “people donot need to prepared defense themselves because public agencies do that/ anational system is not of self-help, but the international system is”. As aresult, the paradigm focuses on gaining power to ensure a state’s survival fromother enemy states in the world”. Not doing so will lead a state to risk itssecurity in the international system.

Decisions made with a realist mindsetdoes not focus on the ethical considerations behind the choice. Instead, themajor factor in a decision is whether the state is gaining power over states.Just like historically example that have happened when it include Spain underCharles V, France under Louis XIV, France again under Napoleon and Germany inWorld War I and again under Hitler in World War II.LiberalismLiberalism, likerealism, acknowledges that anarchy in the international system exists. However,liberalism differs in the response to anarchy as liberals believe that makingalliances will lead to a decrease of anarchy. A famous example of a liberalorganization is the United Nations, and like other organization is the WorldTrade Organization, the World Bank and there are thousands more of this. Theorganization reduces anarchy in the system as it provides sovereign states witha higher authority that can solve major issues in the international system.

Anadditional way that liberalism affects international relations is that greatereconomic alliances can lead to a lesser chance of conflict since the states donot want to risk their economic power in the world. This can be shown in whereassuspicion, rivalry, conflict and war were once normal among the Europe’s majorpowers, war among the Germany, France, and Britain today would be ludicrouslyunimaginable in large part because post-World War II institutions such asEuropean Union have helped nuture and sustain the peace, cooperation, andcommerce so the citizen now day can live peaceful without war anymore. Insummary, liberalism focuses on having reciprocity between states with absolutegains rather than a power struggle.ConstructivismConstructivism isa perspective that stresses the important of identities and sharedunderstandings in shaping the behavior of social actors. Constructivismoriginated after the paradigms of realism and liberalism couldn’t explain thefall of the Soviet Union.

Constructivism believes that individuals with theirpersonal ideas and norms drive international relations. Just like Daniel Thomasexplains:” According to…constructivist theories of international relations,actorsstate seek to behave in accordance with the norm relevant to theiridentities …which are definitions of the self in relation to other thatprovide guidance for how one should behave in a given context.”  If the people within a state have a deephatred for an opposing state, then the state itself would not have relationswith the enemy state due to the ideals of the people.

Non-governmentorganizations such as Habitat for Humanity or Amnesty International areessential to the paradigm as they allow for the diffusion of ideas and norms tothe population within a state. 3.3            Objective3 : To examine the chronology of International Relations that                                                    has      been dominated by Western paradigms.The choronology ofinternational relation that has been dominated by the western paradigm sincethe started of World War 1, World War 2, Cold War and continued with Liberalismand Constructivism.

World War 1 or Great War is an international conflict thatoccured in 1914 – 1918 embroiled most of the nations of Europe along withRussia, United States, the Middle East and other regions. The central powermainly from Germany, Austria-Hungary and Turkey against France,Great Britain,Russia, Italy, Japan, and United States (from 1917). It was happen cause by theassassination of the Austrian archduke, Franz Ferdinand and his wife on 28thJune 1914 by the Bosnian revolutionary, Gavrilo Princip. This tragedy set offthe declaration of war. This war was ended with the defeat of the centralpower. The war was virtually unprecedented in the slaughter, carnage and destructionfor them. The legacy of the World War 1 is it took about more than 9 millionsoldiers, and 21 million more were wounded. Civilian casualities causedindirectly by the war numbered close to 10 million.

Two nation that mostaffected were France and Germany. Each of them sent about 80 percent of theirmale populations between the ages of 15 to 49 into battle. World War Two,also called the second world war, the conflict that involved virtually theevery part of world during years 1939 until 1945. There are about40,000,000-50,000,000 deaths incurred in World War Two make it the bloodiestconflict as well as the largest war in history. Both during the war and afterwar, there are many conspiracy theories came out.

For instance, the PearlHarbour attack, Dunkirk evacuation, alien conspiracy theories, Hitler’s sexualfetishes and even Nazi occult connections. During this World War Two, theSoviet Union and United States fought together against the axis power. But, therelationship between the two nations was a tense one.After the war ended, thesegrievances ripened into an overwhelming sens of mutual distrust and enmity. By the time WorldWar Two ended, , most American officials agreed that the best defence againstthe Soviet Union threat is by a strategy that called ‘containment’. In 1946, inhis famous long telegram, the diplomat George Kennan (1904-2005) explained thepolicy which is ‘a political force commited fanatically to the belief that withthe US there can be no permanent modus vivendi (agreement between parties thatdisagree)’. In result, America’s only choice was the ‘long term, patient butfirm and vigilant containment of policy of the United States’, he declaredbefore Congress in 1947. The Cold War closed when President Richard Nixon(1913-1994) began to implement a new approach to IR.

He suggested the using ofdiplomacy instead of military action to create more poles. He encourage theUnited Nations to recognize the communist Chinese government and after a tripthere in 1972, they began to establish diplomatic relation with Beijing.  He also adopted a policy of ‘detente’ orrelaxation toward the Soviet Union. In 1972, Richard Nixon signed the StrategicArms Limitation Treaty (SALT 1) with Soviet premier called Leonid Brezhnev.This strategic prohibited the manufacture of nuclear missiles by both sides andtook a step toward reducing the decades old threat of nuclear war. However, the ColdWar heated up again after under the President Ronald Reagan (1911-2004). Reaganbelieve that the spread of communism anywhere will threatened freedomeverywhere.

  He worked to providefinancial and military aid to anticommunist governments and insurgencies aroundthe world.  This policy particularlyapplied in the developing world places like Grenada and El Salvador was knownas the Reagan Doctrine. Reagan fought communism in Central America, but theSoviet Union was disintegrating. Premier Mikhail Gorbachev (1931) took officein 1985 to severe economic problems and growing political ferment in the USSRand he introduced two policies that redefined Russia’s relationship to the restof the world for political openness and economic reformation.

In 1991, theSoviet Union had fallen apart when they influence in Eastern Europe waned.Every other communist state in the region replced their government with anoncommunist one. In November 1989, the Berlin wall is the most visible symbolof the decade-long cold war finally destroyed after two years reagan hadchallenge the Soviet premier in a speech in Berlin. With that, the cold war wasover.

After all the warended up, the liberalism start to take place. The liberal paradigm shares somebasic option. Liberals usually regard the modern West countries as theuniversal standard, which used in their theoritical thinking. This liberalismin IR theory based on an important statement which is ‘democracies don’t attackone another’. This democratic regimes are concern to each other as the citizensin the states. They are based on peaceful competition, right priority and therationalizaton of any relations and actions.

This IR theory is not the fight ofall against all and satisfying one’s own egoism. There are some main principlesof IR theory in liberalism such as for the liberals, national states are important but they are not the onlyand in some cases not the main actors in international relations. Then, aspecial institution may exists which may have control over sovereign nationalstates. The anarchy also can be eliminated or harmonized, pacified andmodernized (if it possible). Democratic states are also in a state ofrelatively firm and guaranteed peace, and only non-democratic states and otherworld political actors such as terrorists threaten them with war and so on. For decades,international relation theory fields was comprised with liberalism and realismtheory.

However, in recent decades, there has emerged one another theory calledconstuctivism. Constuctivism focuses on ideas or norms, the development of thestructures, the relationship between actors and how identity influences actionsbetween actors. In 1992, Alexander Wendt publish an article for internationalrelation theory titled ‘Anarchy is what states make of it:the socialconstruction of power politics’. In this article, he argues that anarchy can bea stuctural fact about the world that state inhabit, but that it is up topoliticians (and IR scholars) to decide how to deal with the anarchy. Thisconstuctivism theory focus on the idea of anarchy but they depart from priorpositions on the anarchial system. These constuctivisms disagree with therealist position that anarchy inherently leads to competition and war. For theconstructivists, the anarchial system is whatever the actor want to be.

Thereis no reason that anarchy brings about war or peace. The actor will play themajor roles how to manage the system.  4.0       CONCLUSIONIn conclusion, statesare the principal or most important actors on the international political stageand represent the key unit of analysis. State are viewed as unitary actors thatbehave in a generally rational manner.

National security issue dominate thehierarchy of the international agenda. Furthermore, the significant system ofinternational relations has been dominated by western paradigm sinceWestphalia(1648), based on the discussion and by the history the internationalrelation that has been dominated by the western paradigm and not by the Eastor etc paradigms since the started of World War 1, World War 2, Cold War and continuedwith Liberalism and Constructivism. World War 1 or Great War is aninternational conflict that occured in 1914 – 1918 embroiled most of thenations of Europe along with Russia, United States, the Middle East and otherregions.