Ininternational politics, realism is based on a belief that ccovers andgoverns our society is objective laws, which are inherently providedby nature. In this way, the society only improve and developdrastically in respect to the laws governing the society. On theother hand, idealism is based on the belief that the society onlybenefit from its interdependence and that wars and battles bringabout adverse effects and affect negatively the development. In thisregard, countries are important actors in the internationalrelations.
Oneof the main difference between the world prior 1945 and the worldafter 1945 with regard to international relations is the dorminantglobalization and the continuous interdependence within countries.The present international relation system is shown by the increase ininterdepence , improved mutual responsibility and overdependency onsovereighn states.
Thetransition from idealism to realism was as a result of the desire forjustice, fairness and equality. Many countries face devastation, andtherefore, they desire for universal law. After the second world warwith universal law, a lawbreaker would compensate the victim of theinjustice or injured individual.
TheNorth Vietnam war between USA lasted about 10 years. The U.S. lostthe Vietnam war against Vietnam country, which was underdeveloped.The Vietnam war is not regarded as a just war simply, because it didnot meet the 6 Jus Ad Bellum of a just war. The six Jus Ad BellumClitters are the
Probability of success
USAdon’t have a just cause to declare a war against Vietnam. U.S. isstruggling against communism to destroy the dangerous acts of NorthVietnam. In this regard, U.S. is not able to correct the dangercommited despite regarding communism as a dangerous activity(Hildebrandt, 2009). The west have adopted libaration, thusdisapproving communism and thinking communism must be terminated. InVietnam war, U.S. didn’t have a fair cause to engage in war withVietnam. Further scrutiniy shows that U.S. was mainly aiming toremain dorminant in South East Asia (Hildebrandt, 2009).
Ifany side suffer from this war, there would have been a comparativejustice principle. Prior to Veietnam, neither U.S. nor Vietnam hadsuffered from any problem. North Vietnam post a key threat and woudhave spread communism in later days. USA had never suffered fromcommunism before the war, hence the U.S. didn’tt suffer frominjustice. Also, North Vietnam didn’t suffer from any problem toengage in war with U.S. It is only communism that was worried aboutthe U.S. going to war. Communism would have spread if USA would nothave battled with North Vietnam (Hildebrandt, 2009).
Onetheory that majorly contributed to the collapse of USSR is theimperial overstretch theory. Through this theory, it is believed thata given union or empire can overstretch itself beyond any ability inorder to maintain and expand its military and economic proceeds.
TheUSSR had lacked rsources and belived on the ovestretched theory. Butsince power ascendancy correlates with economic development andavailable resources, its ability and security needs were aconstrained as a result of how base of resources. A burden wasimposed on USSR as a result of competition with USA, exposing them tolevel they could not cope up with competition. USA led in arms race,but USSR had limited options.
Anotherimportant theory that also led to collapse of the USSR is thedefective economic system theory. USSR economics were doomed, sincethey were not planned. The economics generated outputs, which wereless than the inputs. They had a defective economic organization. TheMarxism or communism did not work for the USSR, so it collapsed.
Thefinal theory that led to collapse involves the internal factors orreforms. This was affected by the realists. The bundled reform theoryinvolved internal factors mainly the public opinion ended the coldwar. The orders of business was accepted by the realities of thepublic. This acceptance of atrocities led to public alienation togovernment losing legitimacy. In addition, Afghan war which drainedUSSR made people lose faith in the government.
Hildebrandt,R. (2009). UShegemony global ambitions and decline : Emergence of theinterregional Asian triangle and the relegation of the US as ahegemonic power, the reorientation of Europe.Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.