First Assigment

1-Resume
The document explains what we can call “The international Relations method”, which settles
the bases for the I.R analysis. For these analyses are needed tools that can provide an
arguable sustainable method, through which different events (conflicts, alliances, etc.)
around the world can be analysed. It is for this reason that this science analyses things in 2
different levels: Microinternationality and macrointernationality.
First, the microinternationality includes the analysis of governmental institutions that act
concerning their own particular reality. They can have an effect on an international level but
its main aim is to order their country.
On the other hand, when talking about macrointernationality, it is understood that is

something that concerns the global establishment, as for example a world war could be. In
fact, macrointernationality is the sum of all other microinternatiolaties, as a complex system
made by other more simple realities.
Nevertheless, international relations can not be understood without other variables

(frequently ignored by classic professor of the I.R) of study. Principally this other division is
time periodification.
The need for time periods comes from the necessity of having a certain context in order to
make more rigorous and precise analysis to give a better solution.
Time periods also applies to both macro and micro internationalities in this way:
-The microinternationality follows 2 criterias to settle the time periods: The internal
structure of the international actors (states) and their performed actions. Taking into
consideration this, there are 3 distinguished periods.
a) The short term (1-5 years), in which the actors perform a starting line for the
following events with potential to change their internal functioning, but
without actually doing a structural reform.
b) The medium term (5-10 years), in which substantial institutions may have
been restructured and changed they're approach to reality. It may be due to a
government change for example.
c) The long term (more than a decade), in which the whole internal structure will
experience substantial changes. As a general rule, these changes in the
microinternationality also appear in the macro perspective as the deep
changes may affect entire regions.
-Regarding the macrointernationality, there are also 3 distinguished periods: The

genesis, the development and the crisis periods. (Graphically described, it resembles the
famous Gauss bell.)
a) Genesis: Is the period where the rise of a new international culture and the
crisis of the precedent culture collides (forming breaking points and
transitional periods). The influence of creativity and innovation is also very
notorious.
b) Development period: The development period lasts much more than the other
ones because, in fact, it can be divided into other 2 periods, the growing
development and decreasing development. The first one settles the new
relations proposed in the genesis period while the second one starts to
announce the following crisi period. The main characteristics of the
development period are, firstly the consolidation of a new era and the
hegemony of this new approach of international relations.
c) Crisis period: This period is characterized by the gradual total dysfunction of

an hegemonic reality and the rise, one again, of a new one finally substituting
the previous one.
2-Personal thought
From my personal point of view, as any other could tell, I see a very high potential of
developing the International Relations science. It seems to me that it has the right theoretical
approach to international reality but its method is still incomplete:
In order to make scientific research true, we have to take into account many factors to
determine a valid description of a certain phenomenon. In our field, as we just saw, these
factors include: Actors, relations and structures in a certain time.
That is why for me, this method lacks context, in the sense of having a space coordinate
somewhere in the formula. As other materias as history or geography, they give causes in
time and space for the proper understanding of a problem. Thing that, in fact, also happens
in international relations but instead it does not have its place in the method.
Another thought that comes to my mind, is that as in international relations we are talking
about big and very complex realities, and therefore the different realities in its particular
country may be very different from the others, because of many reasons: First that no all the
countries are in the same time period (genesis, development, crisis), which leads me to think
that it is not very fair to convine all of these particularities in a global internationality
(macro). For this reason, I believe (at least at this moment) that it is very difficult to establish
a general method to solve or to try to understand all the various and different problems all
around the world.
As for all things, it may be a matter of time for international relations to develop as a
scientific methodical subject.

First Assigment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

First Assigment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

First Assigment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1-Resume

On the other hand, when talking about macrointernationality, it is understood that is

Nevertheless, international relations can not be understood without other variables

-Regarding the macrointernationality, there are also 3 distinguished periods: The

c) Crisis period: This period is characterized by the gradual total dysfunction of

You might also like