Category: International Politics

Introduction

The world is changing around us with national boundaries breaking and becoming a small place. A global revolution is changing the world. Traditional command and control structures are being replaced with groups of communities and social networks.

Non-governmental organizations have emerged as one of the most visible forces in developing countries. They have directed their efforts toward social development initiatives by working with disadvantaged groups and communities. They have become one of the three primary institutional sectors of human society alongside government and business (Shamima 2006, 34).

NGOs have a comparative edge over local government agencies. They have been known to promote institutional pluralism by working with government and private agencies. They can work with any marginalized section of society. Their aim has been development strategies that promote responsibility, autonomy and self sufficiency. They have encouraged social responsibility which has been helpful for many sections of society. They also play an important part in global politics to spread democracy and human rights (Shamima 2006, 44).

Main body

NGOs in east and southern Africa for instance have contributed to democracy by preparing poorer sections of society to be represented in the policy making process. Since the membership of NGOs rests on commitment, they are said to possess a greater level of integrity and show greater seriousness of purpose than private and public sector agencies. It can be argued that NGOs constitute crucial pillars of civil society, playing as they do an integrative role while contributing to institutional innovation. NGOs tend to be highly motivated and usually view hardships as a challenge rather than punishment. Unlike business organizations, their smaller sizes, the selective nature of their tasks, and personal leadership allowed them to be innovative and adapt themselves to new circumstances and to experiment and accept risks (Mendelson 2004, pg 29).

Some observers have however advised caution while viewing NGOs. The lack of homogeneity also means that NGOs incorporate different ideologies, approaches and values. In some countries they have been accused of being spy networks and agents of Western imperialism. There is a wide range of NGO types existing in a great diversity of biophysical and socioeconomic conditions which affect their manner of operation and the type of clientele they serve (Mendelson 2004, pg 29).

Their values influence the relationship with their clients from two perspectives. One perspective is concerned with the issue of power in decision making, design, and adequacy. The other relates to how the issue of value preference is managed. Here, considerations of self-determination, interdependence, freedom of choice, dignity and autonomy influence the nature, content, and design of developmental programs. More often than not there has been variance in terms of values and expectations between stakeholders and NGOs, a situation that has led to failure in developmental undertakings. NGOs are said to adopt the ideologies of their sponsoring agencies or states which may not necessarily coincide with those of the stakeholders. The differences in ideology may create hardships in terms of approach, perception, and solutions to the problems of social development.

Ideally, NGOs should come to the aid of the poor on their terms. The poor should state the type and nature of assistance, and define the specific objectives, activities, inputs, outputs and outcomes. In reality, however, NGOs tend to come with a specific agenda. In most instances this does not coincide with the specific needs of the poor. This discrepancy often leads to the problem of divergence (Hillhorst 2004, 34).

Where locals have failed to reject the agenda, they have been turned into passive recipients without leverage to alter any content of the agenda. Besides the problems of lack of fit between the NGOs’ agenda and the felt needs of the poor, there is virtually no participation by the latter which leads to lack of ownership, misdirection of resources, wrong choice of priority areas, lack of sustainability, and poor coverage (Hillhorst 2004, 34).In numerous instances, this has created suspicion about NGOs as self seeking instead of caring for the interests of the poor. Also, this may in part explain why NGOs are regarded to be proxies of their funders. NGOs do what they do not for reasons of altruism at all. They are not in the business of providing charity, though the activities appear humanitarian and lead people to regard them as altruistic. These activities are simply a front which allows them to carry out their hidden agenda which confirms a popular belief that NGOs working with the poor have their own interests to fulfill other than those of the beneficiaries. In this case, therefore, the interests of the poor become secondary. Seemingly, their primary obligation is not to the poor, but to themselves.

The rising influence of NGOs is one of the most significant developments in international affairs over the past 20 years. Social movements have been part of the political and economic landscape for centuries. A range of NGOs, including church and community groups, human rights organizations, and other anti-apartheid activists, built strong networks and pressed US cities and states to divest their public pension funds of companies doing business in South Africa (Hillhorst 2004, 44).This effort, combined with domestic unrest, international governmental pressures, and capital flight, posed a direct, sustained, and ultimately successful challenge to the white minority rule, resulting in the collapse of apartheid (Hillhorst 2004, 44).In the USA, because of the decentralized structure of the US political system, based on federalism and the separation of national powers, access points for NGOs are numerous and include the executive, legislative, and judicial branches at the national level, and comparable entities at the state and local levels. It is also important to recognize that the pertinent level of government for decision-making in a particular policy area is often shifting. Although Europe exhibits a ‘quasi-federal’ political structure in that the EU, member states, and local governments are responsible for certain policies, the direction of policy-making over the past two decades is clearly towards the EU level.

The percentage of EU-motivated contentious protests rose rapidly after the 1993 Maastricht Treaty, suggesting the architects of social movements saw new opportunities for influence via the evolving structure of the EU itself.

The expansion of the EU’s policy-making powers has been followed closely by NGOs. The primary actors within the EU – the Commission, Parliament, and Council of Ministers – provide multiple opportunities for access to the policy-making process. The Commission (a quasi-executive branch) is responsible for introducing legislation and administering existing programs, whereas the Parliament and Council possess legislative functions (although the Council is widely regarded as the most powerful of the three entities). For NGOs, the main access points are the Commission and Parliament, and both are attractive for different reasons. NGOs attempt to influence the Council by accessing member state governments in national capitals (DeMars 2005, 46).

Globalization has generated six constraints relevant to NGOs: new forms of global poverty, new waves of complex emergencies, new pressures for greater efficiency and accountability, weak global institutions, a decline in the capacity of national governments, new pressures to respond globally and greater financial competition. The internationalization of humanitarian NGOs enhanced their credibility and authority, and legitimized their ‘voice’ at the global level, recognized as full-fledged representatives in discussions with international organizations. It was this global expansion of NGOs that gave them the right to speak out from the front ranks in international bodies, and to demand a role in making the strategic choices of the European Union and UN agencies.

Substantively, NGOs have been active and successful in the promulgation and enforcement of international environmental law, human rights, labor rights, children’s rights, gender and racial equality struggles, and sustainable development, to mention a few. Nongovernmental organizations engage in issue identification, value setting, and pressure other actors to take or abstain from taking particular causes of action. In particular, NGOs have exerted great influence in negotiations of regimes regarding the protection of oceans, ozone layer, and Antarctica, and have been actively monitoring and exerting pressure on states to comply with their international legal obligations (DeMars 2005, 46).

The tremendous success of NGOs in the environmental movement, in spite of lack of legal personality, is particularly noteworthy. Another remarkable success has been NGOs’ efforts and willingness to assist developing countries, which do not have adequate regulatory infrastructure, to move toward complying with their international environmental obligations. NGOs have been successful in playing this role, in part, because they are in most cases seen as grassroots organizations, which engage people at “the level at which they feel the most immediate effects – their own environmental and economic conditions.” In doing so, NGOs disseminate an ecological sensibility that is neither restricted to governments nor exclusively within the domain of government control (Edwards 2001, 56).

The ability of NGOs to exert influence at the grassroots level acts as a form of governance. By acting at the local level, NGOs help define the parameters of acceptable behavior, which eventually become the basis from which norms are generated.

NGOs can succeed in making their voices heard in global politics if they take care of certain factors. There are many procedures and laws which NGOs have to adhere to. In nuclear arms control talks and many other areas, governments have relied on these to restrict or exclude NGOs with agendas opposing their own national objectives. In more unusual instances, rules and procedures can pave the way for non-state actors to play a role. The Ottawa process leading to the 1997 Convention banning anti-personnel landmines restricted full participation to states with a demonstrated commitment to a strong treaty, and permitted other countries to attend as observers only. This goes a long way to explain the considerable input which some NGOs, notably the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL), could have in this case by virtue of their support among the fully participating states (Edwards 2001, 56).

If the aims and agendas of some participating governments overlap with those of aspiring NGOs, the former may naturally be prompted to seek to include representatives of the latter on their own delegations or in an independent role. Problems framed as larger humanitarian, global or societal concerns rather than the affairs of particular governments clearly facilitate the involvement of NGOs, supposedly as representatives of civil society. Technically or scientifically complex issues about which NGOs possess information and expertise which governments do not have, or are not willing or deemed credible to use in an objective manner, also favor their engagement. Reduction of acid rain emission has been successfully negotiated by the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) (Edwards 2001, 56). Researchers believe that NGOs can play a positive role in international negotiations. There has even been discussion of new types of agency and representation (Edwards 2001, 56).

Conclusion

Guidelines are required to ensure the level of participation of NGOs in international negotiations. A standard criterion must be established to give the NGOs a greater say in international negotiations. Some matters are clear, however. Firstly, at a time when peace and security are threatened by global and humanitarian problems and intra-state conflicts as much as by inter-state disputes, the traditional criteria of statehood and sovereignty governing admission to international negotiating should be expanded. Ignoring NGOs does not make sense on the basis of them not being states.

References

Shamima Ahmed (2006). NGOs in International Politics . US: Kumarian Press. 34

Sarah E. Mendelson (2004). The Power and Limits of NGOs. London: Columbia University Press. 29.

Dorothea Hilhorst (2004). The Real World of NGOs: Discourses, Diversity and Development. US: Zed Books. 34.

Michael Edwards (2001). Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post-Cold War World. US: Kumarian Press. 56.

William E. DeMars (2005). NGOs and Transnational Networks: Wild Cards in World Politics. US: Pluto Press. 46.

Introduction

Political issues always have more than one aspect to consider when it comes to making vital decisions. In that sense, political issues in the context of international relations is more sensitive, as the image of the international relations is shaped by the political affairs, and military actions which often involves the participation of more than one party.

This paper analyzes a political issue on the basis of the aforementioned that I do believe is affecting the international relations arena, which is the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.

Discussion

The withdrawal of troops is not only a logical stop in military actions, where soldiers will be able to return safe to their homes. Not only a discontinuance of enormous financial expenditures that can have a better usage. It’s a return to the language of diplomacy which is the essence of politics. The relations among countries all over the history of civilizations were dependent on the art of diplomacy, while the contemporary situation is featured by the fact that the essential part of these relations depend on mass media and the populations of the countries.

Starting from the congress passing the withdrawal bill (Cnn.com) and the President-elect Barack Obama’s approach to scheduled troop reductions in Iraq (Julian E. Barnes), it can be seen that the direction of implementing pure diplomatic decisions is starting to take place.

This issue is of special significance to my generation, because we believe that words, i.e. diplomacy are capable of solving political issues. This is not addressed to situations of high alerts, rather than a course of peaceful existence marked by a new millennium where older generation’s memories of world wars remain in the past.

This issue is also important, because it implies that political involvements in international incidents will keep its main goal in solving the problem, rather than directly participating in them.

Despite that the desire for peace in the entire world seems mythical, I can assess that this desire is reachable when the first priority is kept as conversation and dialogue. In that context the international relations are not merely having a representative in an embassy in another country helping their citizens. In my understanding, it’s a multilevel process that keeps the relations between countries based on mutual benefits coexisting peace.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is necessary to mention that international relations stay among the most essential components of the world welfare, as international trade, mutual support, tourism and etc. Additionally, diplomacy is an essential part of that component as a mean of finding common grounds for negotiation. Therefore I believe that the aforementioned political issue is important as a confirmation of international relations’ importance.

Works Cited

1. Barnes, Julian E.. “Gates on board with Obama’s Iraq plan.” Los Angeles Times. 2008.
2. Nolfo, E.D. History of International Relations 1918-1999. Unknown Binding publishing, 2000.
3. “Senate passes Iraq withdrawal bill; veto threat looms.” Cnn.com. 2007.

Introduction

Politics of the MENA region (Middle East and North Africa).

Foundation

Post-WW I.

Effects

• Ottomans defeat.
• Collaboration with UK to form Arabic Kingdom.
• Division into independent states.

Post-WW II Effects

• Betrayal.
• Democracy and communism.
• Positive influence of cold war (Economic and political stability).

Notes

History is complete with political hiccups behind it. This paper covers an evaluation on the international politics of the MENA region alongside discussions on the history behind its political platform.

The foundation of the politics around the MENA region was post-World War I where the Ottomans experienced a tremendous defeat. There was collaboration of the Arabs and Britain with an intention of forming the Arabic Kingdom. This goal was not achieved and disappointment was registered by the end of the World War I. Importantly, there was division of the area into independent states.

In the fall of World War II, betrayal was the order of the day, prompting decolonization and democracy. This enhanced political and economical stability.

Cold war effects on diplomatic front

• Great Britain-US merge, compelling Soviet to honor talks.
• French takes a softer stand.

Why MENA region

• Resources (oil), trade-links, position (strategically):
  • British enjoyed influence in MENA giving more economic support.
  • MENA disliked Soviet.
  • Soviet pondered the more favored British system to spur growth.
  • MENA skeptic of British support.

Notes

Great Britain collaborated with the US to gang up against the threat of Soviet since it showed no urgency to withdraw from its previous colonies as per the diplomatic talks. However, the French were a bit relaxed on this. There was belief by the West that should the Great Britain and France discontinue there occupation, the Soviet Union would step up. The UK-France union sort to have its expansion of powers to the MENA region, graced with resources such as oil production, trade-links, and are strategically located. Colonization may have seemed to end, but the actual independence transition was still underway. The British dominated this area.

The system of Soviet Union was clearly not embraced vis-à-vis its rivals.’ Despite the economic support, MENA mistrusted British.

How is decolonization of French different?

• used direct rule.
• They had intentions to maintain and oversee help in package of the military support in mind.

French denied Muslims equal rights, prompting independence

Consequences of independence struggles:

• Bloodshed.
• Algeria and Tunisia became states.
• Joined Britain and the US to become ant-imperialists.

Relationship was delicate (since British and US were anti-communists).

Egypt’s Gamal maintained a balance between warring factions only to ditch communist-Soviet later.

Notes

The French explored a unique decolonization system. Unfortunately, the results experienced afterwards were akin to that of the British. The French used direct rule that entailed civilization missions, organization of the land partitioning methods among other leadership skills that directly reached the citizens. These cases were particularly in the North Africa.

According to Issawi (2013), the mentality and urge to be self-dependent was embraced by the North Africa from the early 1920s due to lack of trust on the French. The Muslims were denied equal rights prompting the fight for independence.

Following the challenge, bloodshed marred independence struggles. Consequently, Algeria and Tunisia attained independence. Algeria joined the British and American former colonies, becoming anti-imperialist. However, the alliance was delicately poised since the Britons loathed communism.

Americans desperate for support from North Africans

Americans outdo Soviet by encouraging Middle East states to merge by encouraging ‘CENTRY’ (Central Treaty Organization) to consolidate its superpower status.

These mind games are sustained to-date, characterized by poor governance/leadership.

The Americans could not count on the Egyptians, Tunisians and Libyans amongst other former colonies for their support and this was a desperate situation for them. On the other hand, the Soviet Union would get less attention from the same countries, but there was no guarantee. Organizations were formed from these countries which helped strengthen its ruling power from the leadership effects. There were formations of alliances such as the ‘Central Treaty Organization’ or ‘CENTRY.’ This organization consisted of the Iraq, United Kingdom, turkey and Pakistan.

The issues of power and political strategies began in the early 1920s in the MENA. Unfortunately, this issue is ongoing in the 21st century, promoting more issues that need to be addressed such as poor governance and leadership skills.

Question & Answer

Amid the Cold War Era, what did the developing tension between the United States and the Soviet Union eventuated to?

1. The association of the Warsaw Pact.
2. The intrusion of Hungary and Czechoslovakia.
3. The Berlin Airlift.
4. A settlement banning atomic tests.

• Correct Answer: Number D.
• Correct Answer: Number4.

Amid-1970’s, the US and Soviet joined hands to limit atomic weapons multiplication by forming the ABM (Antiballistic Missile Treaty) which banned space-based weapons.

Reference

Issawi, C. (2013). An economic history of the Middle East and North Africa. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Introduction and Summary of Readings

The spheres of international monetary economics, political economy, and finance are considered to be the areas of numerous discussions and misunderstandings. In spite of the fact that certain groups of people have to gain control over the fields identified, as a rule, if some mistake or challenge takes place, almost all countries around the whole world have to undergo numerous changes, suffer from economic or financial, or even both crises, and be unable to take the actions which may improve the situation within a short period of time.

One of the latest events which covered the whole world was the economic crisis of 2008. However, the main point is that this crisis is regarded as unpleasant surprise for many leading countries that was still predictable or even predicted.^[1]

In order to understand the reasons of the crisis and its effects of the economic and financial sectors, a number of researchers and economists try to offer their assumptions, ideas, and analyses. In this paper, attention will be paid to the works of three amazing economic writers: Joseph E. Stiglitz, Paul Krugman, and Robert Wade. Their ideas are captivating reflections on the economic crisis that took place in 2008 and covered the whole world. Each paper is a unique evaluation of the events and the possibility to explain what caused the crisis.

“Financial Regime Change?” is Wade’s attempt to consider the political aspect of the regimes under which world economy is developed. What he offers is to focus on the “dominant ‘global’ model of financial architecture of the last two decades, the credibility of which has been seriously damages.^[2]”

Krugman’s “Can Europe Be Saved” contains the information about the introduction of a single European currency as the “logical next step^[3]” and the events which took place in Europe to cope the crisis spreading over the whole world.

Finally, “From Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy” by Stiglitz is the evaluation of the economic crisis and the financial sector in different developed and developing countries and their direct connection to the USA system.

Analysis

For a long period of time, it was not that easy to define true reasons of the economic crisis that caught the world in 2008. The conditions under which people could develop their financial operations, create dreams, and build plans seemed to be rather successful; however, one day, several countries faced a challenge defined as inability to control the housing bubble and perform the functions which were necessary to manage risk.^[4] The world and the USA in particular were not ready to solve so many problems at the same time.

The point is that the USA is the country that serves a successful example in different spheres of life for many developed and developing countries, and when it became evident that the country could not resist a number of real estate problems. Even the activities of the financial markets turned out to be unsuccessful, and Stiglitz admits that “the banks got hoisted by their own petard: the financial instruments that they used to exploit the poor turned against the financial markets and brought them down.^[5]”

However, it is necessary to admit that the USA was not the only country that had to re-evaluate its positions and opportunities. As soon as the problems in the economic and financial fields became evident, several European countries got involved into the crisis. Of course, the situation in the USA was not crucial for the development of economic crisis in such countries like Spain or United Kingdom, still, a certain portion of relations between the banks influenced the development of financial problems.

At the beginning of the 2000s, the situation with the foreign currency markets worsened considerably: housing bubble and its impact on the percentage of GDP in America, for example, prove that all past experience was not as influential as it was in 2008. Wade indicates that in 1980, US debt in finance was about 21%, and in 2007, it was about 116%.^[6]

This is why the level of experience and the quality gained during the last years did not provide the Americans with the possibility to control their political economy as well as financial sector. Though many American economists tried to link the crisis of 2008 with the events during the Great Depression, it was not enough to avoid losses and benefit from the incomes identified.

In addition, all three authors under analysis admit the UK’s role in the development of the crisis around the whole world. Certain attention should be paid to the promotion of Euro as the only common currency in Europe.^[7]

It is necessary to underline that a number of advantages of a single currency are evident: people should not take care of currency exchange while visiting different countries, export and import is based on one single system, and it always seems to be easy to gain the necessary control over one currency that promote successful existence of several currencies at the same time.

However, some countries were not ready or eager to accept one currency as they were confident in the power of their own currencies. This is why it was hard to find the necessary alternative and achieve appropriate agreements on the international arena.

Taking into consideration the ideas offered by the writers, their main weakness is that all of them try to find a country or even certain people to blame on or evaluate past experience to find some solution to the current problems. It is wrong to believe that there is one particular source of negative experience and crisis in the world.

Each country has its own grounds, make its own mistakes, and suffer because of its own inabilities under certain conditions. The crisis is the result that people stop taking care of their mutual prospects but become too egoistic, this is why the problems on the international arena appears, and economic as well as financial sectors undergo a number of difficulties.

Application

Nowadays, the situation seems to be better than it was in 2008. Some countries like the USA or Great Britain find the solutions to their economic and financial problems.^[8] However, to improve the conditions and promote safe living conditions, it is necessary to maintain some special activities and ideas.

Information offered in the articles and personal understanding of the issue is of analytical character, this is why the authors aim at discussing the events and defining their positive and negative aspects, and their ideas can hardly be applied to some current problems and challenges.

Still, one lesson may be taken from the works: each crisis, economic problem, or financial challenge has its own roots and reasons, however, it is not always possible to define a true nature of problems. And to improve the situation, it is necessary to avoid the idea of making some fast decisions but try to analyze the situation from a variety of perspectives.

Conclusion

In general, the ideas offered in the articles by Stiglitz, Krugman, and Wade are powerful indeed: the economic crisis of 2008 is an important event that promotes a number of changes on the international arena. Numerous banks and other financial organizations have to re-evaluate their possibilities and their weaknesses in order to create better conditions for the citizens. And if someone wants to make some improvements in a particular sphere, it is better to evaluate the whole situation and then offer solution and integrate ideas.

Works Cited

Krugman, Paul. “Can Europe Be Saved?” The New York Times, 2011. Web.

Stiglitz, Joseph, E. “From Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy,” in Essential Readings in World Politics by Karen A. Mingst and Jack Snyder. (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2010).

Wade, Robert. “Financial Regime Change?” Manifest, 2008. Web.

Footnotes

1. Joseph E. Stiglitz, “From Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy,” in Essential Readings in World Politics by Karen A. Mingst and Jack Snyder. (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2010) 554-573.
2. Wade, Robert. “Financial Regime Change?” Manifest, 2008.
3. Krugman, Paul. “Can Europe Be Saved?” The New York Times, 2011.
4. Stiglitz, 554.
5. Stiglitz, 561.
6. Wade, 6.
7. Krugman, 2.
8. Stiglitz, 565.

International political economy (IPE) focuses on two interrelated fields that are crucial for the state, economy and politics. Researchers identify three major perspective within the discipline: mercantilism, liberalism and structuralism (Wullweber 2014, 80). Gilpin (2001, 52) notes that economy is a dynamic system that evolves and responds to the changing environment and also causes changes. It is possible to note that the three perspectives respond to the three stages of economy development. The three perspectives have some traits in common, but they are also quite different in major points.

First, it is necessary to note that the three perspectives developed during different periods. Mercantilism existed between sixteens and the late eighteenth centuries (Balaam & Dillman 2012, 57). Liberalism replaced this perspective in the 18^th century and was primary during the 19^th century. However, structuralism came into being in the 19^th century and many people utilized this perspective. It is necessary to note that liberalism and structuralism are both quite widely used by different researchers in the contemporary world (Smith, El-Anis & Farrands 2014, 34).

One of major similarities between the perspectives is their focus on such concepts as the state, economy, power, wealth, production, and authority. The three perspectives focus on the relationships between the state and economy as well as the way they affect each other. Another important similarity is that wealth accumulation and associated conflicts are seen as natural. It is also important to add that the idea of the conflict is leading in the three perspectives as it is accepted that there are conflicting forces that try to control production and wealth distribution (be it a state or a person).

It is necessary to note that the three perspectives are characterized by quite different views on wealth accumulation/production and mercantilism stands out against the other two perspectives. At this point, it is necessary to note that mercantilism is seen as “the oldest and psychologically most deeply embedded” perspective, that is based on the ideas of power and wealth accumulation (Balaam & Dillman 2012, 56). In terms of this perspective, people strived to develop a specific balance between trade and production. Thus, it was a norm to bring resources (usually gold and silver as well as other materials) from colonies, produce and sell goods in the state (and, in later periods, to sell products in colonies). The major good for the state was the ability to accumulate more wealth and those who could do that (usually merchants) received unprecedented assistance of the state. Merchants paid significant taxes and rulers provided them with numerous opportunities to continue their activities as well as monopolize entire sectors of economy. Development of industries and creating jobs was never a focus at that period as people concentrated on imports of gold. Development of industries was a by-product of merchants’ and the state rulers’ activities and policies.

The other two perspectives have a different view on the matter, which can be explained by peculiarities of the epochs. First, it is necessary to note that mercantilism flourished during the feudal system and gave a potent impetus for development of industries. However, the perspective was not viable in a highly industrialized world. Liberalism and structuralism are based on the ideas of internal development of the economy (Ike and Eze 2013, 16). In other words, it is believed that the state has to produce goods and distribute them in different markets rather than try to obtain resources and accumulate wealth. In terms of the two perspectives, it was essential to accumulate wealth through extensive production, optimization and technological development. These two perspectives took into account the need to distribute opportunities among people. According to liberalism and structuralism, all people have the right to enjoy resources and benefit from the use of these resources.

As far as other differences are concerned, the three perspectives hold different views on the way the state can, should or has to control wealth distribution. This is one of the most significant differences and they need to be considered in detail. As has been mentioned above, mercantilism is based on the principle of wealth accumulation and state support of people accumulating wealth. Rulers of the state provided administrative support to merchants who filled the treasury (Turner 2013, 153). Therefore, it is possible to note that the state had total control of the wealth accumulation and distribution.

Liberalism, a perspective that replaced mercantilism, opposed strict control of the state. More so, the perspective was based on the idea of liberation for the state control, as it was believed that the more the state is involved the worse for the economy (Balaam & Dillman 2012, 28). Proponents of the perspective stressed that economy should be regulated by natural laws of the market and any interference may break the natural cause of affairs and harm further development of the economy. Supporters of liberalism stress that a person has the right to start a business, to use resources and to accumulate profit without the permission from the state. The perspective is quite widespread these days (Tilzey 2006, 1). Importantly, according to liberalism, individuals have an inherent desire to act for the good of all and, hence, they will share their profits to make the state strong (Petre 2013, 122).

Structuralism also has a specific view on the state control and it opposes both perspectives mentioned above. Proponents of structuralism stress that the market cannot be self-governed, as people tend to strive for wealth accumulation, which can often be achieved at the expense of others (Commons 2012, 158). Structuralism holds it that the lack of the state control will lead to the economy where a small group of people will accumulate a significant amount of wealth while other people will be deprived of resources (Balaam & Dillman 2012, 84). Supporters of structuralism emphasize that the state has to control fair distribution of wealth among all people. This is likely to be quite a strict control, though, it is crucial according to proponents of the perspective.

In conclusion, it is possible to note that mercantilism, liberalism and structuralism are three major perspectives within IPE that concentrate on the relationship between the state and economy. It is possible to note that the three perspectives have certain similarities and differences. As for similarities, they all focus on such concepts as power, wealth, production and distribution. It is also important to note that mercantilism stands out against the other two perspectives. It is based on the idea of wealth accumulation through export of resources. The other two perspectives focus on development of the market, technology, production. The three perspectives are also different in their attitudes towards the state control. Mercantilism and structuralism support the idea while supporters of liberalism are ardent opponents of the control. It is also necessary to add that liberalism and structuralism are still found in the contemporary world and it still quite unclear which of these two perspective is the most efficient.

References

Balaam, David, and Bradford Dillman. (2012). Introduction to International Political Economy. New York, NY: Pearson.

Commons, John Rogers. (2012). Legal Foundations of Capitalism. Clark, NJ: The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd.

Ike, Nnia, and Ukamaka Teresa Eze. (2013). “Liberalism and Realism: A Matrix for Political Economy”. International Journal of Business and Management Review, 1 (4), 15-25.

Gilpin, Robert. (2001). Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Petre, Silviu. (2013). “Politics Versus Political Economy in European Dfeence: A Constructivist Critique of Transnational Liberalism”. The Public Administration and Social Policies Review, 2 (11), 121-139.

Smith, Roy, Imad El-Anis and Christopher Farrands. (2014). International Political Economy in the 21^st Century: Contemporary Issues and Analyses. New York, NY: Routledge.

Tilzey, Mark. (2006). “Neo-Liberalism, the WTO and New Modes of Agrienvironmental Governance in the European Union, the USA and Australia”. International Journal of Sociology of Food and Agriculture, 14 (1), 1-28.

Turner, Henry S. (2013). “Corporations: Humanism and Elizabethan Political Economy.” In Mercantilism Reimagined: Political Economy in Early Modern Britain and Its Empire, edited by Phillip J. Stern and Carl Wennerlind, 153-177. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Wullweber, Joscha. (2014). “International Competition and Nanotechnology Policies: Discourse, Hegemony, and International Political Economy.” In The Global Politics of Science and Technology, edited by Maximilian Mayer, Mariana Carpes and Ruth Knoblich, 75-91. New York, NY: Springer.

The world systems approach, firstly introduced by sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein, is an attitude towards world history and societal alteration, which implies that there is a worldwide economic scheme, where certain nations have numerous advantages while the rest of countries are oppressed. For instance, a person is not able to comprehend a behavior and performance of another person without orientation on their environs, practices, and philosophy; therefore, a country’s fiscal scheme cannot be assumed without orientation on the world organization the given countries are an element of.

There are several key features of this approach. First of all, the world systems theory is recognized as a three-stage order that consists of the core, periphery, and semi-periphery zones (). Secondly, the core nations control and use the peripheral countries in their own interests, for example, for employment and raw resources. As a result, the outlying nations are reliant on core countries for wealth and money. Moreover, the semi-peripheral nations are a sequence of both core and peripheral regions (Dollar 81). This world systems theory highlights the social construction of international discrimination.

Core nations are leading industrial countries that use peripheral countries for employment, workforce and raw resources (Anderson and Taylor 254). They are robust in soldierly power and are not contingent on any other state. They assist the securities of the economically influential countries; they are attentive to the higher abilities and capital-concentrated manufacture. Core countries are influential, and this influence provides them with an ability to pay less for raw materials and resources and use cheaper workforce, which continuously strengthens the inadequate position between the core and peripheral nations (Shannon 62).

Periphery states appear to be on the other side of the economy. These states do not have a resilient dominant administration and may be organized by other countries. Moreover, these states transfer raw resources and workforce to the core countries and do not have any developed manufacturing. These states have low-proficiency, work-concentrated manufacture, or, in other words, cheap labor as well. Periphery states are usually mentioned as third-world states (Kaplan, Wheeler, and Holloway 56).

The Statecraft simulated world is represented by six disparate countries, where each country has its own supplies, resources, political direction, economy and the stage of advancement. In order to evaluate the possible position of each country, we have to grade, classify and establish the most applicable factors, such as the available resources, the governmental system and political approach, the durability and the protection of other countries in the Statecraft simulated world, and the distribution of political forces within the framework of the existing world.

In the Statecraft simulator, the core countries are Panam, Boomerang Island, Mordor, and JAP-N. These countries have considerable not only military but industrial and labor expenses; moreover, they have a strong support of the other countries in the simulated world. The periphery states of the simulated world are Jupiter and Rordudordu. These states do not possess many raw resources and materials; they are dependent on the core countries. Despite the fact that Rordudordu is trying to develop scientifically, it yet failed to achieve the level of core countries.

The attack on the Sapphire Island would give the attacking country the opportunity to obtain not only the additional territory but also the resources of the territory. The core countries would want to establish an extra military base on the territory of the island if the given core country is aggressively adjusted. The attack on the weaker countries would supply the core nations with cheap and even free workforce and limitless resources of the given periphery country.

This practice and rules of obtaining the worldwide peace or at least the welfares if global supremacy is observed in the real world as well. The first core region had been located in northwestern Europe and consisted of England, France, and Holland (O’Hara 39). Nowadays, the United States is a perfect instance of a core nation, as it possesses enormous sums of money, and its workforces are moderately well compensated. Moreover, the United States had infrequently in its times past more than a few lands under its government in the same manner as a colonial custody.

In Marx’s analysis of political economy and following Marxian examines, the capitalist manner of manufacture discusses the systems of establishing manufacture and supply between the capitalist civilizations. Isolated money-manufacture in numerous methods (for example, leasing, investment, mercantile trade, fabrication for income, etc.) goes before the expansion of the capitalist manner of manufacture as such. The capitalist manner of manufacture, founded on wage-labor and individual possession of the incomes of construction, and on industrial equipment, started to expand swiftly in Western Europe from the industrial revolution, well along spreading to rest of the planet. The Marxist view of international political economy reflects the progression of the first core countries, which were founded in northwestern Europe and consisted of England, France, and Holland. The capitalist manner of manufacture is categorized by “private ownership of the means of production, extraction of surplus value by the owning class for the purpose of capital accumulation, wage-based labor, and, at least as far as commodities are concerned, being market-based” (Grossman 6).

Works Cited

Anderson, Margaret, and Howard Taylor. Understanding a Diverse Society, Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 2007. Print.

Dollar, David. Globalization, Inequality, and Poverty since 1980, Boston, Massachusetts: Development Research Group, 2001. Print.

Grossman, Henryk 2006, Archive: Marx, Classical Political Economy and the Problem of Dynamics. Web.

Kaplan, David, James Wheeler, and James Holloway. Urban Geography. York, Pennsylvania: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2004. Print.

O’Hara, Phillip. Encyclopedia of Political Economy, London. Great Britain: T & F Books, 2009. Print.

Shannon, Thomas. An Introduction to the World-System Perspective, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 2006. Print.

There is a never-ending debate between the supporters of a laissez-faire economy and proponents of government regulation. While government intervention may help provide equality and social stability, it puts restrictions on personal freedom and the market economy, which prompts many people to argue against it. This essay will address this problem, considering different perspectives to identify what is better – to be free or equal.

One of the prominent advocates of the free market was American economist Milton Friedman. He condemned interventionist policies suggesting that they limit international and domestic free trade (Friedman & Friedman, 1990). Friedman believed that the market economy would eventually make more for combating poverty than government regulation by encouraging economic growth through voluntary association stimulation (Free to Choose Network, 2015). In fact, statistics suggest that global poverty has almost halved in recent decades (Free to Choose Network, 2015). While many factors were involved, it is possible to attribute these results to the expansion of the market economy.

However, there are several issues that cause debate. When individuals engage in competition, some win, and some lose, resulting in inequality (Free to Choose Network, 2015, 26:36-26:41). In many countries, from India to the USA, rich people have much more resources and political power than everyone else (Sachs, 2011). Friedman believed in equality of opportunity (Free to Choose Network, 2015). However, it is hardly feasible since many people would still have different starting positions: some children have richer parents, receive a better education, while others are born to dysfunctional families in poor neighborhoods. Therefore, many people argue that governments should step in redistributing wealth through taxes and welfare policies. Social security programs can lift many over the poverty line and even lower suicide rates (Rambotti, 2020). On the other hand, regulating competition may reduce motivation for risk-taking restricting innovation (Free to Choose Network, 2015). Moreover, in many countries, the growing proportion of older people may impede social security payments maintenance. Therefore, alternative ways should be sought.

To conclude, stimulating economic growth by allowing free trade can improve the living standards of many people around the globe. Moreover, many would prefer to be free if equality means disregard for their merits. However, there are still challenges associated with everyday inequality, especially visible during crises, justifying certain interventions. Overall, the views on that matter diverge depending on ones economic success and ideological beliefs.

References

Friedman, M., & Friedman, R. (1990). Free to choose: A personal statement. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Rambotti, S. (2020). Is there a relationship between welfare-state policies and suicide rates? Evidence from the US states, 2000–2015.Social Science & Medicine, 246. Web.

Sachs, J. D. (2011). Need versus greed. Project Syndicate. Web.

Free to Choose Network (2015). Free or equal – full video [Video]. YouTube. Web.

Susan Strange was a notable economist, researcher, and scholar who was born in Dorset on the ninth of June in the year of 1923. She obtained her professional education at the London School of Economics (LSE), which made her competent in the sphere of politics and economic strategies. Strange became famous for establishing such discipline as the International Political Economy (IPE). The following paper will discuss and cover Susan Strange’s contribution to the study of power in International Political Economy to evaluate and demonstrate the scholar’s viewpoints and statements as to the given theme.

The Main Concepts of Power in IPE

It would be proper to state that Susan Strange provided her philosophy and clear perception of power in the academic discipline that was mentioned above as IPE. In particular, she managed to outline four dimensions of structural power:

• security
• finances
• production
• knowledge

Although this theory was not officially recognised and implemented by politicians at first, it had a significant impact on the entire political system and education later (May 1996). Strange’s statements were disregarded until the 1980’s. The scholar’s work was not accepted for an extended period due to the lack of similar analyses of structural power by her colleagues from other parts of the world.

However, the four dimensions mentioned above became very useful and beneficial for governing various organisations (Strange 1996). For instance, several countries’ politicians, presidents of business companies, and other economic structures implemented these theses to make their production processes more efficient.

Nevertheless, individuals who used Strange’s theory to operate their corporations or states made different conclusions that also demonstrated certain disadvantages to improve and elaborate on this study. Moreover, it is essential to understand that every dimension of structural power cannot be neglected as these factors’ roles are equal in particular strategies.

The Meaning of Power in the Security Structure

The meaning of power in the structure of security implies that each side of negotiations or other political events must be treated with deference and is obliged to provide safety to its colleagues. In other words, partners should be aware of any actions that one of them is willing to apply in the nearest future. Susan Strange (1996) claims that every person who follows her suggestions may receive specific privileges and advantages in the society afterward.

The author emphasises that safety is one of the most important qualities in any partnership because it makes every member of collaboration enjoy his or her colleagues’ confidence (Strange 1996). Strange (1996) explains that this theory is based on historical events and outcomes that relate to the international political economy. For instance, the first economic issues that concerned every politician (approximately two hundred years ago) laid in the safety of certain Commonwealths and understanding and accounting accurate values of contemporary currencies and products on various markets (Wyk 2000).

It would be proper to mention that people who occupy governing positions in parliaments are responsible for their nations’ security, rights, and freedoms, which politicians are obliged to deliver to citizens under any circumstances.

Susan Strange does not discuss diverse standards of safety that have to be present during countries’ leaders’ meetings. Instead, the scholar argues that national security stems from proper regulations and adjustments of political power because a plethora of issues in this sphere emerge due to the lack of authorities on the international level (May 1996). Therefore, the general meaning of power in the security structure implies politicians’ abidance by rules that require a particular nation’s safety.

Strange’s Explanation of the Production Structure

In general, Susan Strange (1996) understands and explains the production structure of the International Political Economy, as controlling every item produced and developed in territories of a particular Commonwealth forms the local economic system. Moreover, she claims that it is essential to account and have physical evidence or documentation that contains precise information about an organisation or individual who produces certain items, along with all the technologies implemented in a manufacturing process (Strange 1996).

The scholar stresses that only high-quality country’s production, which remains in public demand for an extended period, might make any Commonwealth rich and independent (May 1996). The only possible method for a state to become wealthy is to trade its products and natural resources with neighbouring countries to gain profit and allocate received finances among the local citizens (Wyk 2000).

Hence, in case of some social group’s weak control over various manufacturing processes, another organisation is likely to take over governing positions and realise its new policies in this sphere (Strange 1996). However, when production strategies change due to hope to improve quality, other significant changes might emerge in a particular structure, as previous policies satisfy old consumers and markets. Moreover, various production changes will have an impact (not necessarily negative) on the international trading and political relationships.

Susan Strange supports Karl Marx’s theory in her statements by saying that enormous differences and financial gaps between social classes have an adverse impact on a country’s economic system. Moreover, this factor might influence various changes in power and related structures (Strange 1996).

However, the quality of production in the territory of one country might lead to competition among governmental institutions and private firms. In such instance, these organisations will fight for their country’s wealth, instead of establishing financial control over its territories (May 1996). Strange (1996) said that approximately two hundred years ago, states were fighting for power to increase their well-being, whereas modern Commonwealths strive to obtain wealth that might allow them to be important in the international community. Although resources’ allocation among citizens of a particular state is regulated by policies of defence and foreign relationships, contemporary politicians prefer focusing on industrial strategies and accurate accounting in the economic sphere.

Strange’s Financial Structure Theory

Strange’s theory about financial structure is an essential aspect of her work because this woman discussed the concepts of power in the sphere of economics for an extended period. She explains her contribution to the study of financial resources by saying that this factor remains fundamental for any stable economy because the absence of money might lead to default, as future investments in a country’s development will be impossible (Strange 1996).

Therefore, no profit can be gained, and all the production processes might run out of primary resources. According to Strange (1996), the financial structure gained its significance within the past three decades and became essential in international relationships, import, and export transactions. Moreover, she says that all the means that politicians should invest in contemporary economies do not specifically present finances. Instead, they ought to invest credits that will be beneficial for a country’s population, will gain more profit in the future, and will raise a state’s value among its competitors (May 1996).

The scholar stresses that money can be earned with the help of various methods and industries, whereas credit policies somewhat differ, as they do not imply items to purchase. Therefore, it becomes much more significant for any developing Commonwealth. She claims that credit is an essential factor that a perspective country has to gain to establish reliable relationships with other states on the world’s financial market.

Susan Strange (1996) says that all the factors discussed above (security, finances, and production) are necessary for regulating a country’s currency and preserving its value. Although credit is usually regulated and invested locally, the power to create it depends on such international financial institutions as banks, ministries, and governments (Strange 1996). However, every currency has its value (nowadays, referred to as exchange rate), and its supremacy or inferiority always defines by markets and products that a particular country sells to its neighbours (May 1996).

Before, politicians did not understand that currencies might have different values. Therefore, all the trading transactions among the various countries were not advantageous to any of them, as they all were losing a certain amount of money.

Nowadays, it is impossible to buy something in the United Kingdom, paying with the currency of Uganda and vice versa. Strange (1996) also blamed the government of the United States of America for using their high position and a stable economic system only for their benefit, instead of helping other countries develop and become independent. However, she claims that conscious leaders and true economists have the power that implies phenomenal abilities to create and regulate their state’s credit.

The Structure of Knowledge

The last component of Susan Strange’s theory is the knowledge structure. She says that there is nothing more valuable in the entire world than knowledge because an educated person can accomplish anything in his or her professional sphere to gain other components (security, finances, and production). “The power derived from knowledge most often stems from consent, rather that coercion, authority being recognised on the basis of a socialised belief system or the status conferred by possessing the knowledge, and with it access or control over the means by which it is stored and communicated” (May 1996, p. 180).

Moreover, she says that the society does not pay much attention to the knowledge structure, as it is disregarded by many politicians, whereas a developing and perspective country should invest its resources in the local educational system. Strange (1996) claims that knowledge is the most powerful method of manipulating various governmental processes for a state’s benefit.

Discussion

As it is possible to witness from the material discussed above, Susan Strange’s contribution to the study of power in the International Political Economy involves every aspect of governing structure and necessary procedures. Moreover, the scholar has always put the blame on people who were responsible for the economic system of the United Kingdom during the twentieth century (May 1996). She also claimed that British economists did not understand and could not grasp basic models of power and efficient economic strategies (Wyk 2000).

Instead, Strange established her discipline that addressed both economics and politics to make students competent in these spheres, as these pieces of knowledge cannot be separated from each other (Strange 1996). According to Strange, her theory included only necessary explanations, theses, and discussions, whereas other scholars specialised only in one of the fields mentioned above.

Moreover, Susan Strange developed the meaning of exchange rates that was considered by governmental institutions to trade their production on the international market, as some of the countries noticed that their transactions were not profitable and they kept losing finances. However, many Commonwealths started following the strategy that implied buying products from other states cheap and selling them at a higher price inside their country, which influenced such economies’ inabilities to be independent in the future.

The Meaning of Power

Despite all the terms that scholars and professionals developed about politics and power in a government, Susan Strange said that no one apparently understood authentic meanings of these theses (Strange 1996). To prove her viewpoint, she decided to write about proper methods of power perception and understanding of its purposes. To begin, the scholar says that the concept of power is not as easy to grasp as people think. There are two methods to analyse the word of power – epistemological, and semantic (May 1996).

The latter method implied the usage of historical origins and explaining the word’s meaning, whereas in the first case, many people tried to outline public perception of power and its significance to a particular society. However, Strange said that neither of the methods discussed above provided a conscious explanation of the given term. According to Strange, a true political power is a separate phenomenon that cannot be explained as easy as other scholars do because there are so many aspects of this word that it is impossible to summarise all of them in a single sentence.

Strange (1996) claims that the general understanding of political power will always be undefined because professionals from various spheres can describe it differently, and their conclusions might have nothing in common. For instance, a lawyer might discuss political power as an abstract phrase that emphasises the authority of a certain individual or Parliament in general. On the other hand, a philosopher might describe power as an organ of ascendance and stress on its supremacy among other people who are obliged to follow the regulations of an authoritative person.

Therefore, Susan Strange (1996) stressed that there was a plethora of topical literature, but none of notable scientists and writers was competent in providing a conscious meaning of power. The scholar also says that this word might have different connotations in various phrases. After analysing a wide variety of materials related to the explanation of power, Strange identified that many writers referred to it as to a hegemonic obsession (Strange 1996).

However, she argues this term because it shows an improper and neglecting attitude toward a political system of any country. To conclude this paragraph, it would be proper to say that Susan Strange’s contribution to the study of power in the IPE started with her understanding and perception of this term, which was crucial to define for any economist who wished to become significant and useful to the sphere of international relationships and its further development.

The Manifestations of Power

Although there were many methods for people in the head of a country to demonstrate their authorities among regular citizens, Susan Strange decided to discuss the most common case of power manifestations. She says that average populations can witness the presence of power in their daily routine by turning their TV’s on or talking to someone on telephone because all the communication means in the territory of a particular state are controlled by its government to prevent various terrorist acts and other actions that might cause harm to a political system or to some country’s residents (May 1996).

Moreover, if a government decides that a certain book or its author’s ideas are not preferable to be read by a national audience, this piece of literature might be restricted to popularisation in this Commonwealth (Strange 1996). Usually, such books contain some political ideologies that contradict philosophies of the local authorities.

As it was discussed above, various materials can be censored or blurred on TV screens because a government might not want the purposive audience of several official channels to be aware of different governmental secrets.

Moreover, some press resources are controlled by governments due to obvious benefits to a country’s budget (Strange 1996). For instance, if any stable and famous production company will try to offer its services with the help of mass media, politicians might prohibit such action if the offered items are also produced by governmental structures. Otherwise, a country will lose a significant amount of finances, and as a result, home market prices will rise, whereas the national currency’s exchange rate might decrease. To conclude this section, it would be proper to state that Susan Strange’s contribution to the study of power is useful in explanations of the primary purposes of governmental control over mass media and literature.

Insurance Business

As an economist, Susan Strange discusses not only political issues and responsibilities but economical processes inside different countries as well. Therefore, she contributes to the study of insurance businesses in IPE, as this aspect plays a significant role in a country’s economic system and the world’s financial market in general (May 1996). The scholar says that many professionals in this sphere set values of human lives, which influences the financial system of a country by presenting additional resource-consuming market.

Moreover, the scholar claims that insurance business is a useless field, which is intended to cause even more harm to the world’s populations. People who are involved in this market or invest their money in personal safety increase the chance of some undesirable outcomes as they count on their financial support (Strange 1996). Unfortunately, insurance companies do not give any guarantees to ensure their clients’ safety. However, Strange’s contribution to the study of power regarding insurance business makes people aware of fraudulence that they can face and even support due to their poor knowledge of economics.

Criticism of Strange’s Theories and Works

Many scholars and economists who intensively studied multiple works and ideas of Susan Strange claimed that her understanding of the political system was somewhat difficult to analyse because this woman had never worked in Parliament and never occupied a governing position (Wyk 2000). One of the most criticised aspects of her findings was the structure of the knowledge that was previously discussed in this paper.

Many professionals did not agree with Strange’s attempt to make such words as knowledge and information synonymic as all the information related to financial structures could be implemented to gain profits and benefits for a state, whereas knowledge did not have such power but was able to create certain information (Balaam & Dillman 2011, p.67). “Strange attempts to use ‘knowledge’ and ‘information’ as interchangeable terms, and by doing so suggests that the stuff of the knowledge structure is somehow the same as money might be in the financial structure, a resource that can be used” (May 1996, p. 180).

However, other scholars criticise Strange for not giving a precise explanation of what she means under the word of knowledge because sometimes her statements contradict one another due to a reader’s unawareness of the author’s primary thoughts.

Susan Strange’s Brief Biography

It would be proper to discuss personal life and career of Susan Strange to obtain a better understanding of her contribution to the study of power in the International Political Economy. As it was mentioned in the introduction, the scholar obtained her Bachelor’s degree at the London School of Economics. She passed her final exams during World War Two (Balaam & Dillman 2011, p.32). Moreover, this woman had a family that consisted of six children that she took good care of while working for different journals. The first position that Strange happened to occupy was the profession of a financial journalist at The Economist publishing company (Balaam & Dillman 2011, p.32).

Her further career steps brought her to The Observer, where she was obliged to do the same job until the year of 1965. After this work, she started doing her researches at The Royal Institute of International Affairs and earned royalties from developing unordinary economic and political theories. After a certain period, she decided to return to LSE, where she became the first female to occupy the professor’s position. Her academic career ended at the economics department of the University of Warwick. She had a chance to implement and practise the IPE educational program that she developed earlier.

There was not much information about Susan Strange’s personal life available because she tried to promote her ideas, instead of making people discuss her daily routine. However, it was a well-known fact that the scholar was married twice. Nevertheless, she joined the second marriage after having a serious quarrel with her previous husband in the year of 1955. From the first official relationship, she had two children (a son and a daughter). In the year of divorce, she met another man and married him, after which she gave births to four more children.

Conclusion

The main components of the structural power developed by Susan Strange contradict the entire economic system of the United Kingdom. Moreover, the scholar claimed that her theory was more conscious and efficient than her colleagues’ works because she combined such disciplines as politics and economics in a single study. Although this woman never occupied a position in governmental structures, she blamed politicians for unawareness and incompetence in understanding her statements.

Moreover, she did not like that her strategies in the national political system were disregarded. Nevertheless, Strange’s contribution to the study of power in IPE was significant because she explained the meaning of power and what it included in the way no one else did it before. Such approach made many students who happened to study in accordance with her theory realise different aspects of the structural power.

Her conclusions and assumptions were beneficial only for implementation in education as future professionals received a broader philosophical image of power. However, Strange’s works were not intended to please every member of the Parliament. Instead, she wanted to argue her point of view, with the help of which she strove to explain uncertain terms and political processes to people who were not contributed to governmental systems. Therefore, her precise interpretations and expositions of power made education in the sphere of politics more efficient and productive to individuals who face difficulties with grasping certain materials.

Reference List

Balaam, D & Dillman, B 2011, Introduction to international political economy, 5th edn, Pearson, Boston, MA.

May, C 1996, ‘Strange fruit: Susan Strange’s theory of structural power in the international political economy’, Global Society, vol. 10, no. 2, pp.167–189.

Strange, S 1996, The retreat of the state: the diffusion of power in the world economy, University Press, Cambridge.

Wyk, J 2000, International political dynamics, University of South Africa, Muckleneuk.

The most important aspect of international risk management for a manager is navigating political and legal risks. A manager must be conscious of the political climate of the country in which the company has set up its enterprise. Similarly, they have to be aware of the laws that govern businesses. Familiarity with the political and legal policies of the countries of operation is critical for a manager since organizations are influenced by these factors.

International risk management entails handling political risk which may threaten the interests of a business. For instance, government activities, such as output restrictions and price controls may affect a company, thereby reducing sales. Political risk may also stem from war, labor strikes, terrorism, or any other activity that results in instability (McCubbrey, 2015). Political unrest is one of the major factors that can derail operations. Thus, managers must stay informed on the political issues going on in all their countries of operation.

Political risk is closely tied to legal risk, which is the threat that arises from contraventions of the law. It is whereby an organization fails to meet legal mandates, such as following the right accounting procedures (Cote, 2020). For instance, a manager may be unaware of all the stipulations included in the anti-trust laws of a country. This increases the likelihood of businesses unknowingly engaging in practices that promote unfair competition.

In conclusion, when a business operates in a foreign country, it is affected by the politics, policies, and relations of that country. Being ignorant of the nuances of foreign politics and laws could lead to the fall of an enterprise. A manager can minimize risk by hiring professionals who are familiar with the political-legal landscape to advise the business on appropriate actions. With time, the manager will themselves become conversant with the foreign policies.

References

Cote, C. (2020). 5 common challenges of international business you should consider. Harvard Business School. Web.

McCubbrey, D. J. (2015). Political and legal risk in international business. Global Text Project. Web.