Realism Framework in International Relations and Human Rights
The realism theory of international relations holds that the states are the primary actors in international relations and focus on maximizing power and security. In international relations, the interests of the states are emphasized above the morality of their actions. The acts of states, political parties, and army are assessed through the interests of the state, not the moral principles governing those acts. International bodies in realism have less power compared to national power and interests. The theory fails to address the human rights violations that occur through the acts of the states, military and political powers. The mechanisms set to address the problems focus on states feeling safer as compared to the rights of individuals within a society. Human rights concern has no place in international relations unless they serve the same interests as the states.
Realism principles focus on the sovereignty of the states through statism, survival, and self-help. The state is given ultimate power above to make and enforce laws within its territory. The framework fails to address the issues of human rights through the acts of the states since there exist no limits to the actions that the state can take for national interests and survival. Realists believe states can use military force to get individuals to comply with the nation’s will. Considering the Iraq war and the realist principles of survival and self-help, the United States attack can be justified by the need for U.S to ensure its well-being and not to rely on institutions such as the UN to provide security. The U.S linked Iraq with the use of weapons of mass destruction and the 9/11 attack. To ensure that the United States was safer, it had to attack and eliminate Saddam Hussein. This also demonstrated their strength and established a status quo that would ensure. It was against the human rights to execute Saddam Hussein without trial. Questions of human rights raised on the death of Saddam Hussein would be referred to like the realism principle of United States national interest of safety. The United States exercised its sovereign duty of protecting its people against future attacks.
Realism offers the balance of power as a mechanism for regulating the abuse of power in international relations. Alliances are formed in international relations to ensure that the powerful states do not threaten the weaker states. Maintaining equilibrium of power ensures there is no hegemony to dominate other states. In states, a similar mechanism exists through the separation of powers to ensure no single political body has the ultimate power. Power is separated through different branches of government, such as the executive, legislature, and the judiciary. These branches act as checks and balances for each other. Other international bodies such as the United Nations Security Council assess the acts of political parties, states, and the army to ensure they do not violate human rights laws in search of national interests.
The legitimacy and effectiveness of the strategies would be analyzed through their impact on the sovereignty of the state. The mechanisms should not diminish the powers of the state to pursue power and ensuring survival in international relations. Although the strategies consider the morality of the actions, the state interests have greater magnitude. The sovereignty of the state should guard against supranational powers. The practical goals of the state should be attainable through the strategies. The strategies should also deter aggressors from attacking other states.