Originally Posted by safeemailk

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
(GROWTH, SCOPE, IMPORTANCE)

INTRODUCTION:
• International Relations (IR) is an important academic discipline and attains a very significant position in modern social sciences. The term “IR” is used to refer to a branch of Political Science which primarily focuses on the study of the relations among nation-states. But this view is oversimplified, because contemporary international relations cover a very broad subject-matter. IR is the shorthand name used for the academic subject of international relations.
• The term ‘international’ was first used by Jeremy Bentham in the later part of eighteenth century, with regards to the law of nations. Consequently, the term international relations was used to define the official relations between the nation-states. The discipline began to develop when the first Chair in International Relations was established in 1919 at the University of Wales. From diplomatic history to the present, the scientific study of international relations makes a fascinating story.
• As an academic discipline, international relations encompass a wide range of academic fields, ranging from history to environmental studies, and there are a number of areas of specific specialty, for academics who are interested in them.
• International Relations as a ‘condition’ refers to official relations between sovereign states; as a 'discipline' it is systematic knowledge of such inter-state relations. As a subject of study, International relations is focused upon the "process by which states adjust their national interest to those of other states."
• The concept of international relations on some level is probably quite old, given that humans have been establishing governments and communicating with each other for thousands of years.
• In Ancient times, Aristotle said “man by nature and necessity is a social animal. A man who can live without other beings is either a God or a beast.” In modern times no nation or a country can live in isolation. Cordial relations and mutual understanding among nations have become an important phenomenon of modern life.
• The fields of International Relations concern the relationships among the world’s Governments. These are closely connected with other actors such as International Organizations, Multinational Corporations (MNCs), and individuals with other social structures including economics, culture, and domestic politics, and with geographical and historical influences.
• International Relations have thus assumed a great pragmatic and academic significance at present time. It can be both a theoretical subject and a practical or policy subject. Academic approaches to it can be either empirical or normative or both. It is often considered a branch of political science, but it is also a subject studied by historians (international or diplomatic history), and economists (international political economy). Similarly, it is a field of legal studies (public international law) as well as an area of philosophy (international ethics). From that broader perspective IR clearly is an interdisciplinary discipline.
• Aspects of international relations, particularly war and diplomacy have been scrutinized and remarked upon at least since the time of the ancient Greek historian Thucydides but IR only became a proper academic discipline in the early twentieth century


HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF IR:
• HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AS A CONDITION (IN PRACTICE):
o Relations among nations are as old as phenomenon of history. As a political activity, international relations dates from the time of the Greek historian Thucydides and, in the early 20th century, became a discrete academic field. There were inter-tribal, inter-city state and inter-kingdom relations even in ancient age.
o Ancient civilizations like the Egyptian, the Sumerian, the Assyrian, the Indian, the Chinese etc. had evolved a distinct code of inter-state conduct and a pattern of international relations. There relations were incidental, sporadic and regional/limited to regions.
o As the relations among sovereign nation-states, International Relations are believed to have developed with the Peace Treaty of Westphalia signed in 1648, which is considered as the foundation stone in the establishment of modern nation-states in Europe.
o After the Peace of Westphalia Treaty in 1648, with the Renaissance and Reformation, the state became an ideal unit with its nation and territorial sovereignty, aware of their independence and conscious about interdependence in the modern world.
o But before the birth of modern nation-states, pre-state political systems had developed in different parts of the world. Relations among these pre-state political systems could be viewed, rather incoherently, as the beginning of international relations. But this history of IR is a disputed one because the nature and pattern of interactions among pre-state political systems, or for that matter among the nation-states after the Treaty of Westphalia, raise controversies.
o It is now generally believed that immediately after the treaty was signed, no structured pattern of international relations originated. And it was not before the French Revolution in 1789 that systematic interactions among nation-states or other types of political systems had developed. If the more recent history of IR—since the Treaty of Westphalia—is so controversial, it is not difficult to imagine that pre-state IR is subject to more disputes. Some of the known pre-state political systems that existed before the treaty were: (1) Sumerian city-states like Kish, Karsa, Ur, Lagash; and oriental city-states like Jericho, that existed before 2500 BC; (2) Greek city-states; and (3) large empires in the West and the East.
o The nature and extent of interactions among pre-state political systems differed from time to time, making it difficult to systematize the history of IR in ancient times. Occassional and contradictory references to sporadic diplomatic ties among pre-state political systems did not help either in knowing the history of pre-state IR.
o It is believed that the Treaty of Westphalia encouraged the rise of the independent nation-states by recognizing territorial sovereignty. The treaty also led to the institutionalization of diplomacy and armies. But immediately after Westphalia, no structured pattern of international relations had developed. International relations, in a modern sense, started to develop when the European nation-state system, born out of the treaty, was transplanted later in the two Americas, Africa and Asia, through the routes of colonialism.
o Peace of Westphalia provided the foundation for the smooth sailing of the international relations. Modern international relations began to grow in the paradoxical situation of independence and interdependence, separateness and closeness, individuality and mutuality, nationalism and internationalism and process of conflict and co-operation.
o After industrial revolution, there was an increase in the needs of nations and the improved means of transportation, communication, trade, science and technology which brought the nations nearer and closer to each other; all those developments made International Relations regular, comprehensive, valuable compact and global instead of regional and sporadic
o The trauma of First World War, together with the demand for democratic control of foreign policy, stimulated the public urge for better understanding of foreign policy. All these developments attracted scholars attention towards importance of IR and provided ground for academics to establish it as a discipline in the Western World and after the WW-II almost in the entire world.
• DEVELOPMENT OF IR AS AN ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE/SUBJECT:
o As an academic discipline, International Relations is not very old. Its systematic study started after the First World War, and universities in West Europe and the United States (US) introduced separate courses on it from the 1920s. The academic study of International Relations existed only in embryo before the First World War. In the second half of the nineteenth century when the social sciences, as we know them today, began to be differentiated, when ‘Economics’ emerged out of Political Economy as an allegedly scientific field of study, and when ‘Sociology’ and ‘Politics’ and ‘Social Theory’ came to be seen as addressing different agendas ‘International Relations (IR)’ remained unidentified as a discrete focus for study.
o Instead, what we now a-days know about International Relations (IR), it was one facet of a number of other disciplines like History, International Law, Economics, Political Science, etc. The field of International Relations as a separate subject of study emerged at the beginning of the 20th century largely in the West and particularly in the United States as that country grew in power and influence.
o Although IR is a relatively young discipline, less than a century old, many of its most important questions and concepts have deep roots in intellectual history. From Classical Greece to the British Empire, Ming China to modern America, leaders, advisers, academics and students have wrestled with problems of war and peace, trade and communication, culture and diplomacy. Even those who insist that the problems we face are more or less the same as those of the ancients, recognize that the world has changed dramatically in terms of its economic development, military technologies and rise of political democracy.
o However, IR – whose ambitious goal is to understand the complex network of social, economic and political interactions that connect human societies – is a contradictory subject regarding its evolution
o IR deals with the best and the worst of humanity like respect and hatred, cooperation and competition, war and peace but these are not new debates. Look at any standard history of IR and you can trace them through the ideas of past great writers like Thucydides (a Greek historian of the fifth century BC), St Thomas Aquinas (a thirteenth-century Christian theologian), Hugo Grotius (a seventeenth-century Dutch lawyer), Jean-Jacques Rousseau (an eighteenth-century French philosopher) and Immanuel Kant (a German thinker writing in the shadow of the Napoleonic wars).
o Though none of these great writers thought of themselves as working in a subject called IR, each contributed to our understanding of topics that have since become associated with this discipline: the causes for war, the possibilities of peace, and the impact of trade and ideas. Their works are the intellectual foundations upon which much of modern IR is constructed. Despite its deep intellectual roots, IR is a young discipline of all social sciences. For some time, scholars have been discussing who first taught IR, where and for what precise purpose.
o There is general agreement that its institutional growth in Western universities – notably British and American – is a twentieth-century phenomenon directly connected to the simple and terrible fact that between 1914 and 1989 the world experienced three terrible and protracted conflicts: the First World War, the Second World War and the Cold War. These took tens of millions of lives, led to revolutionary social transformations around the world, nearly eliminated whole human populations, facilitated the rise of some great powers, and led to the demise of others. The hugely destructive wars of this ‘bloodiest era in history’ have been at the heart of IR since it first emerged as a taught subject after 1918. It was the war which gave birth to academic IR, however, the achievement of peace was its first mission.
o Although scholars have written about International Relations for thousands of years, only in this century has the field begun to have some of the characteristics of an academic discipline.
o By 1914 history faculties of some universities in the US organized lectures regarding diplomatic history and United States foreign policy but no regular and systematic course of IR was there. It started establishing itself after the First World War. It was initiated by North Americans and West Europeans
o The birth of the field often associated with the founding of the world’s first chair for the study of international politics, in 1919 at the Department of International Politics at the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, UK and is characteristically viewed as a reaction to the horror of the First World War. Its first two incumbents were Sir Alfred Zimmern and Sir Charles Websiernier and both were historian. Others prominent occupants of the chair were C.K. Weber and E.H. Carr.
o This separate chair sowed the seed of International Relations(IR) as an autonomous academic discipline. David Davies, a survivor of the Western Front in the First World War, funded this first permanent academic post in IR and he made it clear that the position was not to be used for vague theorizing. Rather, it was to help scholars engage in practical thinking that would ‘herald in a new world freed from the menace of war’.
o “An introduction to the study of International Relations” has been considered the earliest text book in the discipline, jointly written by Grant, Hughes, Greenwood, Kerr and Urguhart which was published in 1916 in Britain
o Lord Bryce delivered a series of eight lectures in the US in 1921, which were published in 1922 as “International Relations”. He observed that the subject was very vast and closely connected with almost every branch of human sciences
o The History and Nature of International Relations was edited by E.A. Walsh in the United States in 1922
o Likewise, Prof Buell, Research Director, Foreign Policy Association USA published a lengthy text on International Relations in 1925
o Another important step towards the development of the discipline was the publication of a “Syllabus on International Relations” by Prof Moon of History Faculty in Columbia University in USA in 1926
o Development of IR at institutional/university level:
 After the setting up of a separate chair in the University of Wales (Britain) in 1919, a School of Foreign Service in USA came into being at Georgetown University in 1919 and a School of International Relation at University of Southern California in 1924 was established. By 1930 most of American Universities had one or more courses on IR
 In Paris the Institute of Advanced International Studies was founded in 1923 under the faculty of Law.
 It was the inter-war period where IR was gaining more and more recognition and its new aspects were being explored with the passage of time
o Research Bodies:
 In USA, in 1910 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was established at Washington. It organized conferences, exchange of scholars are promoted and published research papers.
 The Union of Democratic Control of 1914 did the spade work in England for the exchange of IR as an academic discipline.
 Foreign Policy Association and the Council on Foreign Relations, two research bodies were formed in 1918 in New York
 Royal Institute of International Affairs was established in London in 1920 where annual and quarter journals were published and had affiliated institutes in the various part of the world. Various other research organizations were formed during the course of time
o Role of League:
 It played a vital role in developing IR as a separate subject. It encouraged study of IR by arranging International studies conferences throughout the world
• IR AFTER SECOND WORLD WAR:
 The study of IR as an academic discipline evolved further and matured significantly after the Second World War. The WW-II compelled the need to improve the techniques of inter-state relations.
 The Second World War compelled writers and statesmen to think with greater urgency about the kind of world that had produced such appalling aggression. It also forced policy-makers to seriously think about how such disastrous events might be avoided once the war came to an end.
 UNO’s creation was an additional stimulus to the development of IR. UNESCO sponsored a Conference of representatives of Universities from all over the world in 1948 and gave a call to establish a separate chair or department for systematic teachings and research of IR throughout the universities in the world
 With the process of decolonization almost complete, and the appearance of new states in Asia, Africa and Latin America, contemporary international politics assumed a new dimension after the war, a period when IR as an academic discipline progressed significantly. With the emergence of more independent states and with the end of European domination after WW-II the scope of International Relations further expanded
 This horizontal expansion of International Relations has led to the spread of courses and departments of IR in the entire world. These newly independent states had to develop foreign relations and this required the development of the discipline of IR.
 With the end of the Balance of Power system that had existed for three centuries, the post–Second World War international order was different; it saw the emergence of two non-European nuclear (weapon) superpowers, the US and the Soviet Union, instead of the earlier five to six major non-nuclear (weapon) European powers. From the end of the Second World War (1945) to the end of the Cold War (1991), several issues gained prominence in international relations.
 These are: existence of non-state actors as significant players in international relations; advancement in IPE; importance of non-political issues like energy, environment, terrorism, globalization, and communication on world arena. These issues helped to shape a new global order vastly different from those of the past. This new order in effect made the study of IR more dynamic, complex, and broader in scope.
• STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT:
o IR as the youngest social science had its genesis in the first half of the twentieth century and attained its adulthood in the post-Second World War period passing through various stages. The development of the discipline of IR, has been summed up in following four stages by Kenneth Thompson
o First stage runs up to the end of WW-I in which IR was taught by diplomatic historians. History, instead of politics was the focus of their stduy
o Second stage starts after the end of WW-I wherein study of current affairs was given more emphasis
o His third stage begins after the end of WW-I and continues up to the end of WW-II. During this stage focus was on moralistic values. Idealist approach seems to remain prominent throughout this stage to avoid war
o Fourth stage runs after the WW-II. During this stage the focus in international relations was shifted to scientific analysis of international politics, determination of foreign policy, techniques of foreign policy, and the mode of resolution of international conflict and crisis’s
o Various other scholars have added the following further stages in the development of IR
o Fifth stage was surrounded by the post realist approach, i.e., behavioral approach in the study of IR. There emerged various other factors like interdependence, new liberalism, international organizations, security communities, dependency theory in 1960, North-South parities, demand of New International Economic Order (NIEO) in the field of IR
o The sixth stage starts from late seventies to the first half of eighties; during this stage there emerged a New Cold War; USSR invaded Afghanistan while the USA threatened the world by developing Star War Program and the theory of neo-realism was also developed by Kenneth waltz.
o In 1985 when Mikhail Gorbachev came to power with his “New political thinking” the period can be dubbed as seventh stage. Major feature of this era were balance of interest instead of balance of power, cooperation instead of confrontation, internationalization instead of nationalization, disarmament instead of armament, de-ideologisation instead of ideologisation, detente instead of cold war
o In the early nineties when USSR disintegrated, it can be called eighth stage of IR
o Post-Cold War: This is the stage where USA emerged as the sole Super Power in the world and is termed as Unipolarity. International Organization (UNO) also emerges as the major actors in this period.
o The catastrophic event of 9/11 in the year 2000 changed the entire structure of the world politics and the global “War on Terror” started where importance of non-state actors in the arena of international politics became an unformidable reality
o And now in the post-withdrawal scenario (US withdrawal from Afghanistan) to the start of 2017 again there are global shifts on the world political scene and new political realities are emerging. The world is at the stage of transformation and the scholars are forecasting its change from unipolarity to multipolarity as the Russia is resurging; China is becoming an economic giant; USA is still militarily incompatible; existence of EU and emergence of new security and economic alliances and blocs like SCO, BRICS and ASEAN are indicating the visible shifts on the global political scene. Scholars are conscious about the coming of Donald Trump to power in the US in 2017 and predicting various new global shifts on the world scene like the cancellation of Trans-pacific agreement by the new incumbent.
o Likewise, the world is facing new challenges like global warming, economic interdependence, nuclear proliferation, widening gap between global North and South, international security and global terrorism, cyber warfare etc. which are a real test of time as well as the major challenge for the discipline itself to put it on the way towards maturity
o IR, as a separate academic discipline, emerged after the First World War and grew rapidly after the Second World War. It is of recent origin. It is neither well organized nor fully developed, nor having complete conceptual framework yet. It has developed itself from allied branch of political science and history to an autonomous discipline.
o The factors that contributed towards its developments in the Post-WWII period are: the fear of total war, technological development, establishment of UNO, emergence of new states after de-colonization, coming on the scene of trans-national and supra-national agencies, economic inequality between North-South, concern for environmental protection nuclearization and de-nuclearization, bi-polarization and multi polarization, Cold War and detente, ideologisation and de-ideologisation, concerns for peace and new world order.
• “GREAT DEBATES” AND DEVELOPMENT OF IR:
o IR thinking has developed through distinct phases, characterized by specific debates between groups of scholars. This story of the field’s evolution is closely related account of the field evolving through a series of “great debates” beginning with the first “great debate” between “idealists” and “realists”.
o The widespread belief that the field’s history has been characterized by three successive great debates is so pervasive and dominant that, as Waever notes, “there is no other established means of telling the history of the discipline”. These ‘great debates’ are really about what the study of IR is or should be.
o Robert Jackson has stated that “there have been three major debates since IR became an academic subject at the end of the First World War and we are now in the early stages of a fourth. The first major debate was between utopian liberalism and realism; the second between traditional approaches and behaviouralism; the third between neorealism/neoliberalism and neo-Marxism. The emerging fourth debate is between established traditions and post-positivist alternatives.”
o The first great debate, which Miles Kahler has termed the “foundational myth of the field,” was between the interwar “idealists” and the postwar “realists”. Almost every historical account concedes that the realists won the first debate and, as a result, reoriented the field in a more practical and scientific direction
o The second great debate, as characteristically described in the literature, took place within the context of the behavioral revolution that was already deeply impacting the social sciences, especially political science, and which pitted “traditionalists” against “behavioralists” or “scientists.” The debate is symbolized by the intellectual exchange between Hedley Bull (1966), who sought to defend what he termed the “classical approach,” and Morton Kaplan (1966), who was one of the early advocates of what came to be known as the “scientific approach.”
o Historical accounts of the third debate tend to be more ambiguous than that of the other two debates, but it is commonly described as an inter-paradigm debate that took place in the early 1980s among realists, pluralists, and structuralists. The typical explanation of the origins of the third debate holds that, during the 1970s, realism fell on some difficult times when events in the realm of international politics, particularly in the economic sphere but also regarding matters of peace and security, appeared to contradict some of the key realist assumptions about the nature of inter-state politics. As a result of this apparent incongruity, it is generally believed that alternative approaches such as Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye’s theory of “complex interdependence,” Immanuel Wallerstein’s “world systems theory,” John Burton’s “cobweb theory” (1972), and “dependency theory” of Cardoso and Faletto, were developed and directly challenged many of the central tenets of realism
o Unlike the previous two “great debates,” the “third debate” is, according to Waever, “seen as a debate not to be won, but a pluralism to live with”. In other words, claims about the ascendancy of neorealism did not mean that adherents of a liberal (pluralist) or Marxist (globalist) approach stopped contributing to the discourse of IR, and some have even questioned whether the three “paradigms” were ever in competition with one another

MEANING AND DEFINITIONS OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (IR):
• It is a complex phenomenon to get a precise and comprehensive definition of International Relations due to the following two reasons:
o Firstly, throughout history international politics and international relations have been used interchangeably
o Secondly, world community is changing day by day. Study of few years ago becomes obsolete today.
o Likewise, the IR is a young discipline yet and is in the process of evolution
o Further, many scholars have forwarded such definitions of the subject which explain the essence of the subject rather than its main areas of inquiry
• However, the definitions of the prominent scholars can be divided in following two categories:
o Traditional view
o Current view
• Traditional View- International Politics:
o Scholars of traditional view used the term “politics” instead of “relations” and they focus only on the study of international politics and political nature of relations among the nation-states
o Nation-states are considered the main actor in the international arena. It focuses only on Nations-state’s political and official relations
o In this view not only the non-state actors(NSAs)’ relations are ignored but also non-officials and non-political relations are kept outside the domain of international relations. This view confines its focus to official relations only and excludes other relations from the purview of international relations
o Initial years of the beginning of the discipline of IR were mainly known as International Politics
• “International relations is the discipline, which tries to explain political activities across states boundaries and, to date, it has been chiefly concerned with the political relations between governments which are the official representatives of states”
o Definitions of various scholars of this view are given below:
o Padelford and Lincoln define:
 “International Relations are the “The interaction of individual nation states in their pursuit of their perceived national interest and goals”
o Hans J. Morgenthau states:
 “International politics is a struggle for and use of power, among nations”
o Quincy Wright:
 “International Politics is the art of influencing, manipulating or controlling major groups, so to advance the purpose of some against the opposition of others. It is the purpose by which power is acquired, maintained and expanded. As a discipline it includes expositions instructing in the practice of this art, predicting the consequences of its applications, evaluating it, and narrating its history”.
o Frankel:
 “International politics embraces the foreign policies of all the states in their mutual interaction as well as in their interaction with the international system as a whole, with international organizations, and with social groups other than states, the operation of the international system and also the domestic politics of all the states.”
• SUMMING UP THE ABOVE DEFINITIONS:
 It is a process of adjustment of relationship among nations in favor of a nation or a group of nations by means of power
 The important things relevant to international politics are national interest, conflict and power; the first is objective, the second is the conditions and the third is the means of international politics.
 It is the phenomenon of recurring patterns of conflict and harmony but co-operation is feasible only through control of conflict.
 Thus international politics deals with the control of conflict and achievement of cooperation. By and large nature of international politics is conflictual
• Current view- International Relations:
o In latest trends after the 1950s, the term international relations is extensively used instead of international politics as it encompasses all the relevant actors, content and relationship found in international arena
o The following definitions are more comprehensive as they include states and international system, international organizations, other trans-national and supranational agencies, non-state entities, groups and relevant individuals and at the same time also cover larger areas of relationship both, conflictual and co-operative, friendly and unfriendly, power relationship and peace relationship, government and people to people relationship etc.
o Quincy Wright:
 “It is not only the nations which international relations seek to relate. Varied types of groups-nations, states, governments, peoples, regions, alliances, confederations, international organizations even industrial organizations, cultural organizations, religious organizations must be dealt within the study of international relations, if the treatment is to be realistic”
o Palmer and Perkins:
 “It encompasses much more than the relations among nation states and international organizations and groups. It includes a great variety of transitional relationships, at various levels, above and below the level of the nation- state, which is still the main actor in international community”.
o After 10 years, Frankel also used the term international relations instead of international politics and give more broader definition of IR which is given below:
 “This new discipline is more than a combination of the studies of the foreign affairs of the various countries and of international history. It includes also the study of international society as a whole and process. It is increasingly concerned not only with the states and their interactions but also with the web of transnational politics”.
o Encyclopedia Britannica:
 “International relations refer the study of the relations of states with each other and with international organizations and certain sub-national entities (e.g., bureaucracies, political parties, and interest groups). It is related to a number of other academic disciplines, including political science, geography, history, economics, law, sociology, psychology, and philosophy.”
o In the words of Heat Man
 “The term 'International Relations covers all intercourse, among states and movements of people, goods and ideas across national frontiers. However as a field of study its focus is on the processes by which states adjust their national interests to those of other states."
o Stanley Hoffmann is of the opinion that
 "The discipline of international relations is concerned with the factors and activities which affect the external policies and the power of the basic units into which the world is divided."
o Teygve Mathiesen says that
 “International Relations embraces all kinds of relations traversing state boundaries, no matter whether they are of an economic, legal, political are any other character, whether they be private or official and all human behaviors originating on one side of a state boundary and affecting human behaviors on the other side of the boundary".
o K.J Holsti:
 “It is not only the nations which international relations may refer to all forms of interactions between the members of separate societies, whether government sponsored or not”
o According to Theodore A. Couloumbis & James H. Wolfe
 “It is not only a distant field of study, but it also include international theory, comparative foreign policy analysis, international organizations comparative politics and regional studies strategic studies, international development, international communications, peace studies and conflict resolutions including arms control and disarmament”
o SUMMARIZING DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS:
 “International Relations is mainly the study of nation-states, their political and non-political relations, their foreign affairs and policies, their interaction with each other and with various other political and non-political groups, alliances, regional and international organizations, sub-national, transnational and supra-national agencies, also includes the study of international history, international law, international society and other psychological, cultural and strategically factors that influences the interactions and relations among states and these groups.”
 International relations is the study of the interactions among the various actors that participate in international politics, including states, international organizations, nongovernmental organizations, subnational entities, and individuals.
• DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS AND IR:
o Both are used loosely and interchangeably but a little distinction is enumerated below:
o Narrow and Broader terms:
 International politics is used in a narrow sense focusing on diplomacy and relations among states whereas International Relations consist of the totality of the relations among people and groups of world society. International Relations describes all types of relations i.e. political- & non-political, peaceful & war-like, legal & cultural, economic & geographic, official & non-official, formal & informal, etc.
o Official and non-official:
 In International politics only official and political relations among governments are discussed while in International Relations official, non-official, economic, cultural, and all sorts of relations among states and non-state actors are discussed.
o Scope of IR is broader:
 The scope of International politics is narrower whereas the scope of IR is wider and interdisciplinary
o Methodology:
 Methodology to study both is different. To study IR, wider, more versatile, and scientific methods & approaches are used while international politics is studied with historical, descriptive and analytical methods

SCOPE AND SUBJECT MATTER OF IR:
• Since WW-I and after WW II scholars, Universities, academic organizations and institutions attempted to carve out a specific area of study of IR but all are unable to demarcate its limits. Its scope is not yet fully decided because the international scenario as well as this discipline is in a state of constant flux on daily basis
• Starting with the study of diplomatic history and law, the scope of international relations has steadily expanded. The study of non-state actors and international institutions attracted the attention of world scholars with the growing complexity and interdependence among nation-states.
• Area studies and strategic aspect of foreign policy started gaining importance as the WW-II outbreak. This led to the efforts to understand the dynamics of national liberation struggles and anti-colonial movements taking place in the world in a better and organized way.
• The founding of the United Nations by the allied powers during the ending days of Second World War encouraged thinking about post-war restructuring and the systematic formulation of relations among nations. The study of cooperation became important even as the study of conflict remained central. New topics like ideology, nuclear armament and disarmament, space explorations etc. assumed unprecedented importance in the era of cold war. So did the system of alliances and regionalism. Contemporary international relations embrace the whole gamut of diplomatic history, international politics, international organization, international law and strategic studies.
• Writing about the contents of international relations, a few decades back, Palmer and Perkins said that the then international relations was a study of "the world community in transition." This conclusion is largely true even today. The transition has not reached an end point. While the underlying factors of international relations have not changed, the international environment has changed and is still changing.
• The state system is undergoing modifications; non-state actors are becoming important; a technological revolution has taken place in a miracle way; new blocs are emerging; new states of Asia and Africa are playing increasingly important roles. There is also a "revolution of rising expectations." Thus, as Palmer and Perkins wrote, "old and new elements must be interwoven" in the contemporary international relations. "The focus is still the nation-state system and inter-state relations; but the actions and interactions of many organizations and groups have also to be considered."
• The scope of international relations at the second decade of the twenty-first century has become very vast indeed. The world has virtually become a "global village", as interdependence of states has increased manifold.
• Economic relations between states, the role of international institutions like the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organisation and the new bank in pipeline i.e., Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, today influences economic activity all over the world. The United Nations and its various agencies are engaged in numerous socio-economic and political activities. Various other regional organizations like ASEAN, SCO, SAARC, EU etc. are exerting their influence in shaping these interactions
• International terrorism after the 9/11 incident has become a cause of serious concern for the human existence. Terrorist organizations like Al-Qaida and ISIS have not only challenged the supremacy and sovereignty of the nation-states but also have threatened the survival of humanity. Multinational Corporations (MNCs), and other giant companies who are operating the world over, are important non-state actors of international relations.
• Currently, the study of international relations broadly covers the following areas:
o Sovereign Nation-states and their relations:
 The operation of the nation-state system and relations among nation-states have always made international politics possible, and continued the basic subject-matter of IR. These would continue to remain the primary area of study in the discipline.
o Non-state actors (NSAs):
 The importance of non-state actors in the study of IR has been increasing over the years. Non-state actors like the multinational corporations (MNC), international non-governmental organizations (INGO), and the inter-governmental organizations (IGO) exert considerable influence in today's international relations. So, these non-state actors are important ingredients of the study of contemporary IR.
o International Political Economy (IPE):
 International political economy is the study of international relations with the help of economic activities and analyses. With the onset of globalization from the mid-1980s, a renewed interest in IPE has developed among scholars. Along with political and security angles, the study of international relations is frequently analyzed today with the help of economic views.
o International Security:
 Security has always remained the primary concern of nation-states. The concern for security had led to war and peace in the past, and would continue to promote these in the future. A peaceful international order is always linked to the notion of international security that includes, among others factors, non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and reduction of tension among states. Studies on war and peace and strategic studies in IR are also related to international security.
o Foreign policies of major powers:
 Foreign policies of major and medium powers constitute important subject-matter of IR because these powers are the driving force in international relations. When the balance of power system was prevalent, the study of foreign policies of major European powers was considered important. In contemporary IR, analyses of foreign policies of the US, China, Russia, Japan and India may be useful as these states have become major actors in recent times.
o Power and National Power:
 After the Second World War, power became the central theme in IR. According to Morgenthau, international politics is nothing else but power politics and can be realistically understood only if viewed as the concept of interest defined in terms of power of a nation state. National power is the major determinant of the foreign policies of the major powers.
o International Law:
 International law is one of the major aspects of the international relations. International law contains a set of rules, which regulates and determines the interstate behavior pattern both in time of war and peace
o International System:
 The study of international relations has also been undertaken in terms of international systems. System theories are applied in the international relations. Various regions are studied as international subsystems or as subordinates systems.
o Conflict Management and Conflict Resolution:
 Vide range of international relations involves conflict, its management and resolution. Their study becomes important subject matter of international relations.
o War and Peace:
 The problem of war and peace is an area around which almost all the study of international relations revolves. It was the war which gave birth to the study of international relations and it is the peace which international relations want to establish.
o National Interest:
 It is the objective of sovereign nation states which they want to pursue in the international arena with the help of power and instrument of foreign policy.
o Nationalism and internationalism:
 Nationalism and internationalism are the important subject matter of international relations as they are the modern factors of modern state system.
o Globalization:
 This primarily refers to economic activities which have serious impact on political and social spheres. With the ascendance of liberal economy over mercantilist economy since the early 1980s, the term globalization has assumed increasing popularity and usage, and become significant in the study of IR. Although globalization and WE are closely related, these are not identical, as subsequent chapters in this book would reveal.
o Climate Change and Global Warming:
 Environmental issues have now assumed greater significance in the study of IR than ever before because industrialization and technological progress have enhanced concerns for environmental safety all over the world. Environmental issues have made states across the world highly interdependent today because carbon emissions from industrial plants in one part of the world may affect other parts; or shortage of river water in a state may lead it to war with its neighbouring states. A stable and peaceful international order is dependent on environmental issues in today's world.
o Global terrorism:
 Terrorist activities involving citizens of more than one country and having transnational impacts constitute international terrorism, an important area of study in IR. It is also referred to as 'cross border' terrorism. International peace and security are closely related to this issue
o Area studies:
 Sometimes it becomes rather difficult to study international political, security, or economic issues from a broader perspective. So area studies have become popular now-a-days. Under it, such issues concerning different areas of the world are taken up separately for analysis. For instance, West Asia, South Asia or Central Europe may be taken up for exclusive analysis under area studies, which has gained prominence in contemporary IR with increasing proliferation of regional organizations and free trade areas (FTA).
• The expanding scope of international relations lead to the view, and also to the controversy, that the discipline is becoming increasingly unmanageable, and that it lacks a clear conceptual framework. But this view is born out of pessimism about the discipline, and is not acceptable.
• Today, the subject has a definite and useful theoretical framework to support research in different areas. The broad scope may actually be helpful for it, because the varied subject matter may lead to more research and analyses, as well as greater specialization within the discipline. The broad scope of political science, physics or history, for that matter, has enriched these disciplines and helped them to grow further. There is little rationale therefore to worry about the expanding scope of IR; it will help the discipline to mature into a well-defined and enriched branch of modern social science.

CHANGING NATURE OF IR:
• The nature and context of international relations have undergone major changes after the Second World War. Historically, world politics was centered in Europe and relations among nations were largely conducted by officials of foreign offices in secrecy. The common masses were not involved, and treaties were often kept secret.
• Today public opinion has attained an important role in the decision-making process in foreign offices, thus, changing completely the nature of international relations. Ambassadors, once briefed by their governments, were largely free to conduct relations according to the ground realities of the countries of their posting.
• Today, not only have nuclear weapons changed the nature of war and replaced erstwhile the balance of power by the balance of terror, but also the nature of diplomacy changed as well. It is the jet age where the heads of state and government and their foreign ministers travel across the globe and personally conduct international relations. Before the First World War a traveler from Pakistan to USA spent several months in the sea voyage. Today, it takes less than 20 hours for a jet aircraft to fly from Islamabad to Washington. Smart phones, internet, emailing, advance telecommunication technology and other electronic devices with their advance software have brought all government leaders in direct contact on a distance of few seconds and made the world a global village. This has reduced the freedom of ambassadors who receive daily instructions from their governments.
• Decolonization has resulted in the emergence of a large number of sovereign states. The former colonies of the European Powers have become important actors on the stage of international relations as is the case of Pakistan who had been assigned a frontline state in the global war on terror. They were once silent spectators. Today, they participate in the conduct of world politics. The disintegration of the Soviet Union has created 15 members of the United Nations, instead of the previous three. Some of the very small countries like Nauru may have no power but they also have an equal voice in the General Assembly.
• Thus, international relations are now conducted by such a large number of new nation-states. Besides, many non-state actors such as multinational corporations and transnational bodies like terrorist groups have been influencing international relations in a big way.
• With the collapse of the Soviet Union as a Super Power, the United States emerged as the sole Super Power and dominated the international scene almost without any challenge up till now but again the global political realities are changing and the transition from unipolarity to multipolarity is underway. Hence the nature of international relations is in a constant change and it is changing according to the new political realities emerging on the world scene.

IS INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AN INDEPENDENT ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE?
• As a field of study IR has uncertain boundaries. As a part of Political Science, IR is above international politics; the decisions of governments concerning their actions toward other governments. To some extent, the field of IR is interdisciplinary, relating international politics to economics, history, sociology, and other disciplines. The field’s antecedents included international law, diplomatic history, the peace movement, moral philosophy, geography, and anthropology
• In “The Study of International Relations” (1955), Quincy Wright identified eight “root disciplines” and six disciplines with a “world point of view” that had contributed to the development of IR. Wright, along with many others, argued that the task of synthesizing these largely autonomous fields of inquiry hampered the effort to create a unified coherent discipline of IR.
• The interdisciplinary character of the field and the fact that other disciplines studied various dimensions of its subject matter has sometimes led to the question of whether “international relations” is a distinctive discipline”. This characteristic of the field of IR and differences in national settings sometimes lead to the conclusion that a distinct discipline or field of IR does not really exist.
• There remained a controversy among scholars for a long time about the recognition of modern international relations as a sovereign academic discipline. Some scholars were unwilling to recognize it as a separate, autonomous academic discipline, and thought it to be largely dependent on subjects such as political science and history. The controversy that existed for more than four decades, till the 1960s, seems to have died down now with IR getting the recognition of an independent academic discipline. According to the various scholars an autonomous academic discipline requires, mainly, a systematic body of theory, appropriate methodology, and a distinct subject matter. International Relations today is capable of meeting these criteria to exist and flourish as an autonomous discipline.
• The scholars are, now of the view, that the controversy does not exist anymore. Without entering into this controversy, it would be pertinent to identify the distinctive character of IR as an academic discipline.
• If political science is concerned with the 'politics', both formal and informal, of say, Pakistan, USA, India, Britain, China, or Australia; IR would be more concerned with the relationship between Pakistan and USA, India and Britain, or China and Pakistan, or and India, or among all of them. These relations may not be confined to political aspects only; they may cover economic, security, cultural, or environmental issues. In other words, an IR scholar would not normally study the constitution or party system of any state; he would rather go for (international) relations of this particular state with others. A political scientist would be interested in the Government of Pakistan, or USA, and its politics; but an IR scholar would be more interested in the foreign policies of Pakistan and USA, and their impact on relations between the two countries, rather than the domestic political systems in both countries.
• Although this separation is not always absolute, as both the political scientist and the IR scholar have to enter the 'other's area' for the sake of a comprehensive study, but these involvements are now more for scholarly inputs rather than helpless dependence. And such inter-disciplinary visits are prerequisites for matured academic work. Similarly, IR scholars' areas of interest would ultimately differ from those of economists or historians, and they may follow different methodologies to study their subject. Interactions between IR and other social science disciplines have increased over the years, but the former's 'dependence' on the latter has been considerably minimized, thus helping it to emerge m an autonomous discipline with a distinct set of theories, methodology, and subject matter.
• It is believed that there are four major theoretical traditions in the discipline of IR: Idealism/liberalism, realism, theories based on international society approach, and theories rooted in international political economy. Recent approaches to counter earlier theories constitute the 'post-positivist' position in the discipline.
• However, it may be noted here that these theories have strengthened the claim of IR as an autonomous discipline. Methodologies in IR can be broadly classified into four types: traditional or classical, behavioral or scientific, post-behavioral or positivist, and post-positivist which have further strengthened the claim of IR as an independent academic discipline.
• IR as an academic field of study, has attained a distinct professional identity and discourse and it can be called as youngest of all social sciences

SIGNIFICANCE/IMPORTANCE OF IR:
IR AND DAILY LIFE:
• In this age of globalization, the International Relations are affecting the life of every individuals i.e. college students and other citizens participate in international relations, every time they vote in an election or work on a political campaign, every time they buy a product, or service traded in world market, every time they watch the news, the choices one make in daily life ultimately after the trends followed through International relations
• Students and the literate section of the society sometimes nurture a feeling that international relations is far away not only from daily life, but also from domestic politics. They take IR as a subject of interest for governments and leaders, where an ordinary man has no role to play.
• They also think that it deals with issues which are International' in character, and are therefore remote from their private life, and even from national politics. But this idea is far from reality. IR is very much linked to domestic politics, as well as to our daily life. Its study not only enriches our academic knowledge and broadens our views about global affairs, it also helps us to understand daily life and domestic politics.
• International security and international political economy, among other issues of IR, are closely linked to our daily life. A war, for instance, would affect our daily life profoundly. Our movements may be restricted, our freedom to turn on the lights in our houses may be curbed, and market prices may soar, affecting the normal rhythm of daily life. So, not only students of IR but every citizen would value the existence of peace in regional and international politics.
• Further, if the price of petroleum increases in the world market, our daily life would be affected because our kitchens would suffer as well due to the enhanced price of cooking gas. Such price hike may also become an issue in domestic politics. Moreover, the prospect of getting jobs after college education would depend on international economic and political conditions. At the time of economic recession or political turmoil, there may not be enough jobs. In an era of globalization, international economic crisis would definitely affect job prospects around the world, and normalcy in daily life.
• Sometimes treaties among states may affect the life of the common people. A bilateral treaty between two countries on sharing of the water of a certain river, for instance, may have profound impact on the daily life of the people living by the side of the river.
• Similarly, a multilateral trade or security treaty may also influence the life of the people living in countries that are party to the treaty. Nowadays, regional trade agreements like the SAFTA (South Asian Free Trade Agreement) or the AFTA (Asean Free Trade Agreement) influence the development of the economy of participating states. Such influence over the national economy may, in turn, affect our daily life.
• On the other hand, ordinary citizens also take part, knowingly or unknowingly, in international relations. When people cast their votes in parliamentary elections, they actually take an active part in the formation of the government of their country. The government, in turn, formulates foreign policies of the country, along with domestic policies; and tries to protect national interests in world politics and maintain international relations. Therefore, through the process of elections, every adult citizen everywhere takes part not only in domestic politics, but also in international relations.
• Further, when people take part in an educational or cultural project sponsored by organizations like the UNESCO (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization), they associate themselves, perhaps unknowingly, with international developmental activities. International relations, as perceived in common parlance, is not a distant subject, far removed from our daily life. On the contrary, it influences the life of ordinary citizens, and in turn, also benefits from them. The discipline shares a symbiotic relationship with the ordinary person.
• The internationalization of daily life increasing rapidly. Better communication and transportation capabilities are constantly expanding the ordinary persons. Contact with people, products and ideas with other countries are increased as technological advances are made. The world is shrinking year by year. The participation of citizen in their daily life affects the institutions that affect the international relations on state level.
WHY TO STUDY IR?
• International Relations (IR) is closely related with several other disciplines. These include History, Political Science, Law, Economics, and Geography. What is the utility of the study of IR as a separate subject'? Every rational being know that no country in the World can live in isolation. Even when means of transportation and communication were much less developed than today, sovereign states did interact with each other. They cooperated at times, and had frequent conflicts which often led to wars. Relations among those states were generally studied by Historians and Political Scientists as has been discussed in the foregoing line.
• Diplomatic History was usually studied for understanding relations among sovereign states. During the second decade of the twenty firs century, revolution in the means of travel and communications have not only changed the nature of international relations, but made its study essential for every enlightened person.
• While living in such a complex and interdependent state-system along with various influential non-state actors, importance of studying IR attains vital importance. It is essential for all of us to have a clear idea of what is happening in the world. Political events are important, but even economic developments, trade, commerce and activities of actors like multinational corporations are no less significant. We live in an age of growing international cooperation. Therefore, not only do the activities of the United Nations and its numerous agencies affect all the nations and their peoples, but regional organisations like the European Union, South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC), Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) also play important roles in our lives.
• As the single event of 9/11 has not only changed the entire scenario of world politics but also affected the life of every individual being living in this planet. International terrorism, global warming, population explosion, unrest in the Middle East, nuclear proliferation, poverty, human rights, global security and economic well-being have been the concern of all humanity. In this age of globalization, any other single event can bring unpredicted changes for a person who is not in a contact with the study of IR. The study of International Relations has therefore become highly useful and enlightening for students and others alike.