Afghanistan Through the Lens of Neo-Classical Realism

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Jun 1, 2024
https://doi.org/10.61506/02.00281
Download
PDF
Statistic
Vol. 10 No. 2 (2024): Journal of Policy Research

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Dr. Ayyaz Gull
Assistant Professor, Institute of Global and Historical Studies, KSK Campus, GC University Lahore, Pakistan
Zaeem ul Hassan
M.Phil Scholar, Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan
Farhat Mehmood Bosaal
Assistant Director Research (General), Punjab Assembly, Lahore, Pakistan

Abstract

This study aims to explore Afghanistan through the lens of Neo-Classical Realism. In order to encapsulate the proper foreign policy accumulation there are various theories that suggests and depicts foreign policy behaviors of several states. A theory not only defines politics of emotions but it also predicts the behavior of a state in a certain particular time. In international relations there are several theories that are used as a lens in order to understand the behavior of a state, the foreign policy of a state and to predict the future behavior according to which international arena would behave. There are two major strands in international relations that are used for analysis, and they provide a different and opposing view whenever a state behavior is concerned. These two strands are realism and liberalism. Realism in a theory that explains the behavior of a state in international politics. It states that in international system there is a lack of a centralized political authority due to which the state interactions are not viewed in a particular manner. It also emphasizes that there is an anarchy prevailing international system which can be regulated and can be maneuvered to bring out some favorable results by a sovereign power. The theory emphasizes the role of a state in international system and the way national interests and power grabbing of each state paves a new way towards international. The philosophical ideas that are in the theory have a very long history but in international relations the theory emerged after World War Two. The followers of this theory claim that they offer the most accurate behavior of a state and the explanation that they provide is more accurate to understand the policy perception and prescription for various elements that destabilized the international affairs.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
[1]
Gull, A. , ul Hassan, Z. and Mehmood Bosaal, F. 2024. Afghanistan Through the Lens of Neo-Classical Realism. Journal of Policy Research. 10, 2 (Jun. 2024), 652–657. DOI:https://doi.org/10.61506/02.00281.
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Allison, G. (2017). The Thucydides Trap. Foreign Policy, 9(6), 73-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262028998.003.0006
  2. Baylis, J. (2020). The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations. Oxford university press, USA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hepl/9780198825548.001.0001
  3. Biden, J. R. (2020). Why America must lead again. Foreign Affairs, 99(2), 64-76.
  4. Cheng, M. (2022). AUKUS: The changing dynamic and its regional implications. European Journal of Development Studies, 2(1), 1-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24018/ejdevelop.2022.2.1.63
  5. Dodge, T. (2021). Afghanistan and the failure of liberal peacebuilding. Survival, 63(5), 47-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2021.1982197
  6. Gillan, K., Pickerill, J., & Webster, F. (2008). Anti-war activism. Palgrave Macmillan UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230596382
  7. Hashimy, S. Q. (2022). War Crimes in Afghanistan. World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues, 26(2), 24-39.
  8. Javaid, U. (2016). China’s interests and challenges in South Asia. South Asian Studies, 31(02), 459-471.
  9. Lorenzo, R. (2016). The Puritan culture of America's military: US Army war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315553726
  10. Malkasian, C. (2021). The American war in Afghanistan: A history. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197550779.001.0001
  11. Nye, J. S. (1990). Soft power. Foreign policy, (80), 153-171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1148580
  12. Ramsey, M. D. (1999). Power of the States in Foreign Affairs: The Original Understanding of Foreign Policy Federalism. Notre Dame L. Rev., 75, 341.
  13. Ripsman, N. M., Taliaferro, J. W., & Lobell, S. E. (2016). Neoclassical realist theory of international politics. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199899234.001.0001
  14. Shahid, M., Ishfaq, U., & Ashfaq, K. (2023). US Withdrawal from Afghanistan: An Analysis of the Root Causes. Global Foreign Policies Review, VIII, 8, 1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31703/gfpr.2023(VI-IV).01
  15. Tariq, M., Rizwan, M., & Ahmad, M. (2020). US Withdrawal from Afghanistan: Latest Development and Security Situation (2020). sjesr, 3(2), 290-297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36902/sjesr-vol3-iss2-2020(290-297)
  16. United States. President. (1994). A national security strategy of engagement and enlargement. White House.
  17. Waldman, M. (2013). System failure: the underlying causes of US policy-making errors in Afghanistan. International Affairs, 89(4), 825-843. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12047
  18. Waltz, K. N. (1993). The emerging structure of international politics. International security, 18(2), 44-79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2539097
  19. Zimmerman, K. (2023). Global Jihad: Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State's Struggle for Power and Global Dominance. In Routledge Handbook of Transnational Terrorism (pp. 509-519). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003326373-54