Culture in the Study of International Relations and Practice
Culture can be broadly defined as the full range of the learned human behavioral patterns. Cultures often vary across different geographical regions and may be affected by the ethnicity of the practitioners. However, cultures are dynamic and adapt to the changing world and the situations they are presented. Over the last century and even more over the last few decades, globalization and the resulting international relations have led to linkage and interactions of cultures across the world. In turn, the world cultures have played a significant role in determining the nature and major aspect of international relations, especially in practice. This paper will explore the role of global cultures in the study of international relations and practice with an emphasis on Wendtian constructivism.
Constructivists argue that major aspects of international relations are socially and historically constructed; this is as opposed to the conception that they are simply the inevitable culmination of human nature or any other material aspects of the world politics. Wendt’s approach to international relations and politics is by seeking to establish the theory of the international relations as a social construction instead of the materialist and positivist notions exposed by other theorists. In this theory, the concept of identity is argued to play a significant role in both interpersonal and intentional relations and interactions.
Wendt hypothesizes fours identities that affect relations. Personal identity is the core identity and is the sense of “I” and can expand to include “we.” The second identity is most analogous to culture and applies to the people who are perceived to share particular characteristics such as traits, value, and skill or share historical commonalities. This identity best highlights the role of culture in international interactions; such identities in the international relations correspond to “forms of state” or “regime types,” examples of such include monarchic, communist, democratic, theocratic and capitalist among others. Therefore, when a nation identifies itself to be in particular form or regime type, it will interact with others from its self-defined identity. The third identity is defined by a culture’s shared expectations and is accomplished in relation to others when the identity occupies a position in the social structure and observes particular behavioral norms with regard to other identities. The fourth identity is a collective identity where the distinction of “self” blurs with others. Interests emerging from the identities determine how international interactions occur.
Cultural imperialism is simply the cultural aspect of imperialism. Imperialism in this context of international relations means the formation and maintenance of unequal relationships between civilizations where the relationship largely favors the more powerful civilization. This is usually apparent where the cultures of powerful nations through economies and industrialization determine the general cultural values of other civilizations globally. This has led to the imposition of culture by a hegemon such as the United States, leading to a convergence of cultures being predicted such as the “American century.” However, it is apparent that growing globalization and interdependence do not necessarily lead to convergence. While cultures may adopt some aspects of globalization; for example, products and services such as Coca-Cola and McDonalds they retain their core values as evidenced by Islamic cultures. In addition, resistance to the hegemonic culture often results to the opposing cultures when faced with the elimination of their defining aspects, resisting the imposed culture.
Hard power is the coercive power that is applied by the use of threats and inducements. In international relations, it is primarily based on coercive diplomacy, military intervention, and economic sanctions. On the other hand, soft power simply persuading others to abide by nations will. Culture is relevant to both applications of power as it determines their general effectiveness. For example, a country with similar culture will be more open and likely to be influence by soft power that a country with a radically different culture. A country with a fierce militarist independent culture will also likely to resist hard power from a foreign nation.
In conclusion, it is apparent that culture plays a major role in both the study and the practice of international relations. Relationships can be observed through Wendtian identities and interests to highlight how they interact and even why specific nations relate to each other in particular ways. In addition, cultural imperialism and resulting convergence of cultures can be seen in the present world especially with the hybridization, convergence, and resistance.
Bibliography
Behravesh, M., 2011. The Thrust of Wendtian Constructivism. [Online] Available at: http://www.e-ir.info/2011/03/09/the-thrust-of-wendtian-constructivism/[Accessed 8 May 2016].
Conversi, D., 2010. The Limits of Cultural Globalisation?. Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies, 20(3), pp. 36-59.
