7.THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK
Realist view Realism in international relations (IR) is a traditional approach which is rooted in the Ancient Greek era and is still relevant today. The realist view has been under a transformation process during different periods and it keeps on developing, that is why we cannot say that realism in IR is one single theory, but a way of thinking or ‘general orientation’ which allows the establishment of a great variety of realist theories (Donelly 2000, p. 6). In spite of the differences within the realist view, there are some basic assumptions which are recognized by most realist thinkers. Regarding the realist view the conflict prevails international relations because the actors of the international system are characterized …show more content…
The solution is to be well-prepared and face the challenges of the international system. The nation-state which is in the safest position is the one which has the biggest amount of power and in this case its sovereignty is the less endangered. However, this nation-state should keep on working on maximizing its power, if not, another one will precede it and make it fail (Jackson & Sørensen 2013, p. 66; Kiss 2009, p. 222). The above mentioned reasons led to the definition of the international relations as ‘power politics’ which is in fact “an arena of rivalry, conflict, and war between states in which the same basic problems of defending the national interest and ensuring the survival of the state, and the security of its people, repeat over and over again” (Jackson & Sørensen 2013, p. 66). Because of the permanent Page 6 of 56 fear from the power rising of other nation-states and insecurity, there is a fundamental doubt about that the capacity of development of IR can be that effective as the progress in domestic politics (Ibid.). A basic assumption is that there is no central governance in the international system. Main actors are the nation-states and other actors – international organizations, NGOs, individuals – cannot become as important …show more content…
Self-determination is considered for those who live in Kashmir on one way to explore a solution to the problem. In this study, the idea is only explored for Jammu Kashmir due to difficulties getting the data on Azad Kashmir. Five options were explored in this study. The quantitative analysis of the data shows that the demand for Kashmir’s independence is high among the people of Kashmir. However the full independence for Jammu Kashmir does not seem to be possible due to likely opposition from India and maybe even by Pakistan. And another option of joining Pakistan is not only unacceptable to the majority in Jammu Kashmir but it is somewhat of an anathema to India. The option to give more autonomy to Jammu Kashmir within India seems to be a feasible idea to India and to those who wish to remain under Indian administration. But that option will be unacceptable to Pakistan, those who want to join Pakistan and those who wish for full independence. The last option is that of maintaining the present situation, that is maintaining the status quo, which means Jammu Kashmir remains under Indian control, contested by Pakistan and the rebels, the area continues to face constant security problem, the Indian security forces continue to stay in J&K in huge numbers and accusation of them violating the human
Realist view Realism in international relations (IR) is a traditional approach which is rooted in the Ancient Greek era and is still relevant today. The realist view has been under a transformation process during different periods and it keeps on developing, that is why we cannot say that realism in IR is one single theory, but a way of thinking or ‘general orientation’ which allows the establishment of a great variety of realist theories (Donelly 2000, p. 6). In spite of the differences within the realist view, there are some basic assumptions which are recognized by most realist thinkers. Regarding the realist view the conflict prevails international relations because the actors of the international system are characterized …show more content…
The solution is to be well-prepared and face the challenges of the international system. The nation-state which is in the safest position is the one which has the biggest amount of power and in this case its sovereignty is the less endangered. However, this nation-state should keep on working on maximizing its power, if not, another one will precede it and make it fail (Jackson & Sørensen 2013, p. 66; Kiss 2009, p. 222). The above mentioned reasons led to the definition of the international relations as ‘power politics’ which is in fact “an arena of rivalry, conflict, and war between states in which the same basic problems of defending the national interest and ensuring the survival of the state, and the security of its people, repeat over and over again” (Jackson & Sørensen 2013, p. 66). Because of the permanent Page 6 of 56 fear from the power rising of other nation-states and insecurity, there is a fundamental doubt about that the capacity of development of IR can be that effective as the progress in domestic politics (Ibid.). A basic assumption is that there is no central governance in the international system. Main actors are the nation-states and other actors – international organizations, NGOs, individuals – cannot become as important …show more content…
Self-determination is considered for those who live in Kashmir on one way to explore a solution to the problem. In this study, the idea is only explored for Jammu Kashmir due to difficulties getting the data on Azad Kashmir. Five options were explored in this study. The quantitative analysis of the data shows that the demand for Kashmir’s independence is high among the people of Kashmir. However the full independence for Jammu Kashmir does not seem to be possible due to likely opposition from India and maybe even by Pakistan. And another option of joining Pakistan is not only unacceptable to the majority in Jammu Kashmir but it is somewhat of an anathema to India. The option to give more autonomy to Jammu Kashmir within India seems to be a feasible idea to India and to those who wish to remain under Indian administration. But that option will be unacceptable to Pakistan, those who want to join Pakistan and those who wish for full independence. The last option is that of maintaining the present situation, that is maintaining the status quo, which means Jammu Kashmir remains under Indian control, contested by Pakistan and the rebels, the area continues to face constant security problem, the Indian security forces continue to stay in J&K in huge numbers and accusation of them violating the human