On the Primacy of States
From Valwiki
Contents |
OOC Details
Explanation of the document
On the Primacy of States is a theory paper by Bremen von Rothschild, Loremaster and Professor of International Relations at The Imperial Academy of Dalmar.
In essence, On the Primacy of States endorses the RL theory of Realism in International Relations, which argues that the state is the primary actor in the international system. In doing this, Bremen uses IRL offensive realist theory to suggest that Dalmar's aggression is not only the outcome of 'rational self-interest', but also a natural product of attempts to guarantee security.
IC availability
On the Primacy of States is not widely published because of its academic nature, but because of its recent publication is widely available from libraries and certainly the Imperial Academy. While knowledge of the document is not widespread in most circles, it is commonly discussed in relation to Dalmar's diplomatic justification for their foreign policy.
The Work: On the Primacy of States by Bremen von Rothschild
Dedication
This book is dedicated to his Imperial Majesty Tsar Nikolas Wolfe III, whose firm hand guides the course of proud Dalmar, and her Imperial Majesty Tsarina Indra Alexandra Donn'machna Reginleif-Wolfe, who shines brilliantly against the stars.
- - Bremen von Rothschild.
On the Role of the State
Historical precedent suggests that the state is the primary actor in the international system. While the role of powerful individuals and sub-national groups such as Tarus Rubues and The Dragoons should not be overlooked, ultimately it is the existance of national entities which allow the international system to function. For instance, periods of prosperity, such as the Imperial Age, are characterised by the strength of the states that exist, where periods of relative poverty, as can be seen in the Deluge Era, suffered from a power vaccuum at the state level. This demonstrates an important point; while wealth within states is not distributed equally, standard of living is universally higher within strong states than outside them.
In essence, the state has three core functions: to create a stable internal structure, to organise a prosperous economy, and to protect its territory from external threats. In each case the state acts in the interest of its citizens, and therefore the head of state has the sovereign right to represent their people. It is this fact that makes the state the primary unit of government in the international system; whatever else they claim, sub-national bodies represent themselves, and themselves alone. They are not empowered to interact with other states, and their narrow interests do not allow them to make informed judgements about the appropriate domestic and foreign policies to pursue.
On the Behaviour of the State
While the first two functions of the state are necessary for any prosperous nation, On the Primacy of States is concerned explicitly with the third. The state has a responsibility to pursue the interests of its citizens, a task which is not compatible with compromise in international relations. In other words, if a state compromises its ideal foreign policy position, it invariably serves the interest of another state unless that compromise is the only way for the state to survive. This idea can be effectively termed 'rational self-interest', that a state acts in a rational fashion by following the course of action that is to its benefit.
Historically, there are numerous examples of this. For instance, Empyria's policy of neutrality towards all states other than Alkaria during much of the Imperial Age follows 'rational self-interest' as it allowed Empyria to capitalise on its natural trading advantage by staying out of national conflicts while simultaneously guaranteeing its security through the Alkarian alliance. Likewise, Celdin's alliance with and later absorbtion of the sub-national elves of Fort Lhaeo shows 'rational self-interest'; the elves were not large enough to provide realisitc economic competition, but were a useful strategic partner. It is possible to establish similar justifications for most foreign policy and, as a result, 'rational self-interest' can and should be considered the natural means of understanding the behaviour of the state.
On the Security of the State
While the examples provided demonstrate that economic concerns are important within 'rational self-interest' theory, the state's concern about security remains paramount. In particular, the 'security concern' occurs along with the emergence of unstable states. Indeed, this concern is well founded; throughout Kharlian history, weak states have resulted in dangerous situations for the states that surround them. For example, the Imperial Age Taronian War, during which Daes was able to destroy Valikorlia city with his Mage Cannon due to Taron's inability to prevent him doing so, demonstrates the risk that insecure states pose to the international order.
Furthermore, it is possible to establish that the longterm survival of a state is determined by the state's ability to guarantee its security. For instance, the Rothschild Doctrine pursued by Alkaria in the Imperial Age represents a policy directed specifically at security, and that singularity of focus allowed Alkaria to survive as a state until the destruction of the flood. On the other hand, the inability of Staghorn to create ongoing security led to revolution sparked by outside individuals, and similarly, Imperial Age Lahan's inability to secure itself against Alkarian attack caused it to become a desert nation.
This leads to the crucial fact of international relations, then; the state's ultimate aim must be stability and security. If a state perceives another nation as a potential threat to its security, then the imperatives of 'rational self-interest' demand that this threat be neutralised. While alliances and treaties present one possible solution, intervention remains the most viable method of protecting security. Not only does it represent the natural reaaction to a perceived threat, it is more reliable than a treaty because it gives the state control over their security interests. Controlled aggression in response to threats posed by other states is a realistic necessity; if a state is not totally confident of its security, it cannot be confident of its ability to protect its citizens from outside threats.
Conclusion: On the Primacy of States
To conclude, then, it is necessary to make several observations. First, the state has three core responsibilities: internal stability, economic management, and providing security from outside threats. In carrying out these responsibilities, the state's role as representative of its citizens grants it paramount status. Next, the state pursues 'rational self-interest' as the natural means of protecting the interests of its citizens, in both economic and securtity terms. The interests of a state's citizens are inherently placed before the interests of others. Finally, security presents the single greatest threat to a states ability to protect its interests. Controlled aggression, as a means of creating and maintaining the security of a state's citizens, represents the natural expression of 'rational self-interest' theory.
Consequently, military intervention may not be ideal from a theoretical standpoint, but in some cases it remains the most effective means of promoting a secure international realm and hence protecting the interests of a state's citizens.
- - Bremen von Rothschild, Professor of International Relations at the Imperial Academy of Political Science.
