Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
The principal rationale of this essay is to delve into, discuss and analyze the regional squabbles among the Middle Eastern States. It seeks to critically evaluate how the Balance of Power theory and Huntingtons Clash of Civilization theory pertain to the economic and political disputes in the Middle East. This essay also gives a synopsis of the two International relations theories and consequently applies their philosophical presumptions in analyzing regional disputes.
The Balance of Power Theory
Reading from Rourkes work, it is evident that the Balance of Power paradigm is the one philosophical theory that has undergone a series of historical developments, assuming diverse forms and points of view. The overall theoretical conception has, however, remained much relevant to global economic and political affairs (Rourke, 2008, pg198-331).
John Rourke, a renowned researcher on International relations politics, notes that the balance of power paradigm is a theory explaining the state of equilibrium between two or more forces competing for power and superiority. He contends that this state of parity is characterized by diplomatic behaviors, aimed at empowering ones State while trying to topple others in a more politically maneuvered approach (Rourke, 2008, pg 198-331).
Predictions of the Balance of Power theory
This theory has often been used in analyzing the recent events of the Middle East, a region flawed with importunate conflicts and wars. From the February 6th, 2007, New York Times article, titled, In the public view, Saudis counter Iran in the region , we are faced with a typical scenario where the balance of power theory may be called upon to help clarify certain issues on regional disputes.
The battle that takes a center stage in the Middle Eastern States is actually composed of remarkable unfolding events. Dominating the struggles are Saudi Arabians and Iranians, both trying to weigh their regional strengths on the economic and political powers. According to the New York Times Article, as Saudi Arabia opts to take a central, aggressive control in reshaping regional conflicts, Iran fabricates ways of benefiting from the civil war tones, to counter the Saudis. In reaction to this, the Saudis heighten their public movements in Iran. They also ally with the Sunni-led of Lebanon, a move aimed at establishing itself as a superpower in the region. Manifestations of power balance continue to unveil, with Iran embarking on the nuclear program. Consequently, the U.S is threatened to be overtaken by Iran, as the world superpowers. The Bush administration decides to support Saudi Arabia against Iran. These are clear indications that each of the rival states seems to be in an unstable state when their regional economic and political influences are on the verge of dwindling. The balance of power theory is therefore justified in this case.
Huntingtons Clash of Civilizations theory
The Clash of Civilization theory is among the most controversial theories in history. Many critics discord it as a non-substantive claim, not universally plausible. It, however, underscores the fact that Samuel Huntingtons Clash of Civilization theory has also been one of the most philosophical and influential over the Centuries. This theory contends that regional or global disputes are not the result of economic and political ideologies, but the consequences of conflict between civilizations (Rourke, 2008, pg 198-331). Civilizations, according to Samuel Huntington, are cultural entities composed of nationalities, ethnic groupings, regions, and some other tenets that distinguish the states from one another.
Predictions of Huntingtons theory
Considering this theoretical conception, we can see the sense of cultural disparities highlighted in the New York Times Article. There are indeed a number of nationalities from different geographical regions involved in disputes, not necessarily because of economic and political reasons, but partly as a result of their differences in religious doctrines, cultures, and social norms.
Assessment of the two theories
While the balance of power theory views International relations in terms of economic and political powers, Huntingtons Clash of Civilization theory begs to diverge by perceiving the same on the basis of cultural entities. Conversely, both of them agree that conflicts and disputes are common factors in International relations. The point is thus on how to help settle the regional disputes.
Conclusion
In the case of the Saudi counter Iran region , the balance of power theory promises more solutions as compared to Huntingtons Clash of Civilization theory. The latter keeps the States on the toe. In efforts of trying to strike a balance in their economic and political superiorities, no state is likely to lag behind others. The former, that is, Samuel Huntingtons theory, does not promise much in this case. It rather concentrates more on cultural identity and self-awareness that may take some time before the different entities come to terms with their socio-political and economic realities. Balance of power theory is therefore preferable in analyzing the Middle East disputes.
References
Rourke, John. International politics on the world Stage.12th Ed. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.2008.124-450.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.