Essay on Democratic Peace Theory
Added on - 28 May 2020
Showing pages 1 to 4 of 11 pages
Running head: DEMOCRATIC PEACE THEORY AND A PEACEFUL WORLD ORDERDemocratic Peace Theory and a Peaceful World OrderName of the studentName of the UniversityAuthor note
1DEMOCRATIC PEACE THEORY AND A PEACEFUL WORLD ORDERDemocratic Peace Thesis talks about the fact that states that do not want engagingthemselves in that of armed conflict with that of other identified democracies. This theoryhighlights on the element of peace and outlines the motives that dissuade the state from anykind of sponsored violence. There are some theorists who refer to it as “mutual democraticpacifism” or that of “inter-democracy nonaggression hypothesis” which specifies that thestate of peace is not singular between democracies and it can easily be sustained between thatof democratic nations (Rasler and Thompson 2016).This essay talks about the democraticpeace thesis and discusses the significance of this theory for the nations.The proponents of the democratic peace thesis believe that there are several factorsthat help in motivating peace among the democratic states. The leaders who are democraticare compelled to accept blame on account of the war losses to that of a voting public(Poznansky 2015). The statespeople who are publicly accountable have to establish thediplomatic institutions in order to resolve the international tensions. The democracies do notview the countries that have adjacent policy as hostile. The democracies have greater publicwealth as compared to other states and they want to stay away from war so that they canpreserve their infrastructure along with resources (Inglehart, Puranen and Welzel 2015).This theory highlights the idea that the democracies do not go into war with eachother and this idea has immensely helped in guaranteeing peace between the democraticstates. Democratic peace thesis attacks the traditional hegemony of realism within theAmerican International Relations Theory. There is the prevalence of a spirited debatebetween that of the proponents of democratic peace theory and that of the critics who havemade a number of counterattacks (Kolstad and Wiig 2016). The democratic peace thesis hasbeen rooted in the written material of Immanuel Kant specially in his work “PerpetualPeace”. According to Kant’s writing, peace is the reasonable outcome that occurs on accountof the interaction taking place between states that has a republican form of the government.
2DEMOCRATIC PEACE THEORY AND A PEACEFUL WORLD ORDERHe holds the notion that republican constitution creates the favourable prospect for attainingperpetual peace. It occurs owing to the fact that the citizens are very cautious about thedisastrous effects that war has on their life and they do not easily want to wage a war. Theconstitution which is not republican finds it a lot easier to declare a war because it demandsthe least sacrifice of the ruler. The logical implication of the paradigm of Kant is that liberalrepublicanism should be diffused and should be made universal that can help in achievingperpetual peace between the states (Poznansky 2015).The states should share a common liberal perspective that can help in preventing warto a great extent. Sharing a liberal perspective is important otherwise war will becomenecessary for preventing the despotic governments of oppressing their own people. The semi-evangelical view of the liberalism helps to strengthen the democratic peace theory. Theregimes that are authoritarian conceive of the liberal states to be threatening because theirideology of valuing diffusion would threaten the authoritarian power of the ruler (Rasler andThompson 2016). The liberal states are not threatened by the universal outlook of the liberalrepublics because they share the same kind of government.The term “democratic peace” is a bit ambiguous and misleading because it blendsdemocracy with that of other terms. There are some scholar who like to refer to it as “liberalpeace theory”. According to Kant, democracy that is a form of sovereignty is often confusedwith that of republicanism which is a form of government. A republican constitution provesto be a compelling factor that can help in attaining perpetual peace. He feels that the mode ofthe government is more important than that of the form of sovereignty for the people. Theliberal states in the words of Kant have some characteristics that sets them apart from that ofthe authoritarian and other kind of nondemocratic form of government (Dieterich, Hummeland Marschall 2015). The republican government is based on the rule of law and lays stress
3DEMOCRATIC PEACE THEORY AND A PEACEFUL WORLD ORDERon separation of powers and respect in relation to the human rights. There also exists aninterdependent social along with economic relations and this helps in creating stable peace.The liberal, democratic states have a normative dedication to that of the liberal idealsand they make use of liberal justifications in relation to going to the war. Michael Doyel hasargued by saying that violent intervention of the liberal states are justified on the public frontas important for preserving the way of life: defending freedom (Inglehart, Puranen andWelzel 2015). In the event of the adversary sharing commitment of protection of basis rightsthen it becomes much more difficult for that of the democratic governments to justify theincidence of war on their citizens.Politics within that of a democracy can be conceived of to be a nonzero-sumenterprise. By the act of co-operation everyone will be entitled to gain something though theymay not gain equally. The winners will be restrained from crushing those people who arelosers. The winners in the present times can ally with that of the losers and this can give riseto conflicts. On the occasion of the conflicts degenerating into that of physical violenceeveryone can lose. It is the “realists” who remind people about the powerful norms in relationto self-defense and acceptability of the factor of military deterrence (Cuhadar and Druckman2015). These norms are more extensive in the international arena as compared to that ofdemocratic states. The politics among that of the nations bears a more zero-sum hue and thesovereignty of the existence of the state comes at risk. The principle of anarchy within that ofnonzero-sum enterprise can be found to be more acute in case of “structuralist realist” theorypertaining to the international relations. The internal system of government becomes almostirrelevant and the entire behaviour is determined on the basis of the structure of internationalsystem and their respective position within that structure (Barkawi 2015). Peace becomes afleeting condition that becomes dependent on deterrence along with that of eternal vigilance.By this kind of structure, stable peace cannot last and eventually the democracies would be