The Concept of Tragedy in English Literature

The Concept of Tragedy in English Literature 

A tragedy in English literature is a dramatic piece of work where the main protagonist or character is brought to the state of ruins or who suffers from extremely sorrowful conditions as a result of a moral weakness, the incapacity to deal with unfavorable circumstances or a tragic flaw. Tragedy as a genre in English literature is comprised of literary works that deal with such themes (Bateson 2017).

The tragedy of great power politics, on the other hand, refers to the work by John Mearsheimer, an American scholar, dealing specifically with international relations. In this work, Mearsheimer both explains as well as argues in favor of offensive realism. He does so by stating all of the key assumptions associated with offensive realism, talking about how offensive realism has evolved over time from early realist theory and the predictive capability of offensive realism (Mearsheimer 2001). The world as perceived and portrayed by John Mearsheimer is one that is reigned by conflict between powerful nations, a conflict that is never likely to come to an end (Mearsheimer 2001).

A well-known example of a country that has been at the receiving end of great power politics is Iraq. The country has been the site of contestation for control over oil fields, with the United States of America, the Soviet Union and prominent Middle Eastern countries like Jordan playing a leading role in aggravating the conflict, and turning Iraq into a site of complete disaster (Cohen 2017). Iraq served as the location for two major Gulf wars, one that occurred in the decade of the 1990’s and the other in early 2000s, killing and displaying hundreds and thousands of people overnight. While the war in Iraq has officially come to an end, following the retreat of American troops under the Obama administration, the country remains war torn and ravaged, serving as a perfect example of what the ambitions of great powers can do to a beautiful and prosperous nation (Cohen 2017).

Realism has been quite a dominant and well-accepted theory as far as the study of International Relations is concerned. Realism in IR theory is one that is based around the view that countries or states are residing in a position of complete anarchy and in the complete absence of higher international authority (Booth and Erksine 2016). Countries or states according to Realism, are considered to be those that are directed by goals and it is often claimed by theorists of realism that survival is ensured through the implementation of power (Booth and Erksine 2016). Realism equates national security with survival and security. Defensive realism is a type of realism that promotes non-action taking paths. This in turn ensures what may be termed as a balance of power. Offensive Realism on the other hand promotes exactly the opposite. Anarchy is a form of power, as understood in international relations, which on the basis of classical realism causes the worst forms of oppression and devastation to take place, with the worst dimensions of human nature being expressed in the bargain. The independence and survival of a particular country or state is in essence the primary goal of that country or state and this is attested by the importance that is given to territorial integrity and sovereignty (Booth and Erksine 2016).

Understanding the Tragedy of Great Power Politics

In spite of being such a dominant theory in the domain of International Relations, Realism has experienced a number of attacks by theoreticians in the course of the last twenty years, with such theoreticians pointing to oversimplified beliefs of international orders and lack of relevance as the main drawbacks of Realism (Daddow 2017). Yet it is a fact well established that all political theories suffer from some imperfection or the other. The question therefore arises, as to whether the number of imperfections that are associated with Realism are enough to disqualify as a theory of International Relations altogether. It must be remembered that Realism makes a contribution to a thorough understanding of contemporary world politics by offering a number of ways and means by which to describe such politics (Daddow 2017). Towards the end of the period of the cold war, human rights and democracy were promoted, with the United States of America leading as the leader of the modern progressive world order. World turbulence did not decline as a result of all this however, and while liberalism emerged and Realism declined, Realism as a theory did not disappear altogether. An insightful example of this can be offered by alluding to the events that took place during the 9/11 crisis in America. The theory of Realism in International Relations is one that can easily explain the logic behind the war against terrorism that was pursued by the US administration right after the events of 9/11. 9/11 is till date considered to be a symbol of instability in the world. Realism has always been and continues to be a dominant IR theory since security and national interest will remain important factors for a country’s growth and development always (Daddow 2017). However, there are many other theories that also exist as well as contribute to international relations today, with the reality being that tension continues to exist a great deal in each and every part of the world. Economic crisis for instance has been affecting the countries of the world in recent years. In the final analysis though, Realism will be relevant and significant always if important dimensions of political living, such as security, war, power and sovereignty remain the focal point of the present day world order (Daddow 2017).

Multi Factional Disputes in Iraq 

One of the most important threats to the internal instability in the country of Iraq, is not so much the armed conflict and terror imposed by the terror groups and the devastation caused by the Gulf Wars, but the conflict that is generated by the tensions between the Arabs and the Kurds over Kirkuk, an oil rich area in the country (Brown 2018). The dispute is centered around which parts of Kirkuk belong rightfully to the Iraqis, and which are the parts that belong rightfully to the Kurds. The autonomy that should be exercised by the Kurds while living in Kirkuk is also something that the two communities are not able to agree upon (Harff 2018).

An Example of a Country that has suffered due to Great Power Politics – Iraq

A major security issue in Iraq is centered around the Mosul Dam on the Tigris River. The Mosul Dam is one of the most important sources of electricity for the city of Mosul, generating hydro-electric power in large quantities that keeps the city of Mosul well powered at all times of the year (Marr 2018). The fact that this Mosul Dam was recently taken over by the Islamic State implies that this terror outfit now controls about seventy five percent of the electric supply not only for Mosul but for other important cities and towns of Iraq as well. The ISIS has been using the Mosul Dam to serve their own purposes, with the revenue that is brought by the distribution of hydro-electric power to the cities of Iraq, including Mosul, now being used to fund terrorist activities (Marr 2018).

The regional security issues that prevail in Iraq are those that are brought on largely due to the infiltration of the Islamic State in the region. The Islamic State is a terrorist outfit that has been wrecking havoc in the region for quite some time now (Harff 2018).  In essence, the birth of the Islamic State is a response to the terror that was generated by the US peacekeeping forces in Iraq following the trial and the assassination of Saddam Hussain, the Iraqi dictator who had reigned over the country over several years (Brown 2015).

English School Crisis 

One of the most important and well-identified security issues in Iraq is of course the English school crisis. Due to the terror that has been prevailing in the country for quite some time now, it is difficult for Iraqis to get access to any quality education that can prepare them for a suitable international career. Iraqi professors believe that the destructions of schools and educational institutions in the country as a result of the Gulf Wars and the terror imposed by ISIS has affected the educational opportunities for people in the country, especially when it comes to accessing English education (Diwakar 2015).  While a number of UK universities have professed a willingness to impart English education in the country, the fact that the lives of teachers and professors who come to impart an English education over here may be in jeopardy is keeping the people of the country from benefitting from a high standard English education that will place them at par with people receiving a similar education in other countries of the world. The armed conflict and security issues in the country have generated major repercussions for the lives of the people in terms of quality living, one of them being the denial to a good English education (Diwakar 2015).

Relevance of the Theory of Realism

The regional security issues that are prevailing in the country of Iraq are those that are brought on by the ISIS in the region. The Islamic State has been randomly kidnapping and assassinating people, not only from Iraq but from the western countries too, largely as a response to the terror that was imposed by American troops during the period of the Gulf Wars (Zakaria 2018). The ISIS is now all powerful in Iraq, with civilians in the country being at their complete mercy. It is difficult for the people in the country to lead a normal life with houses being bombed at random, with land mines exploding every now and then, and with the ISIS invading and terrorizing different parts of the country as and when they feel like doing so. Hundreds and thousands of people from Iraq have fled the country to take refuge in nearby countries such as Jordan and Lebanon, while many have also crossed shores to take refuge in the countries of North Europe (Zakaria 2018). Some of them have even managed to make their way to the United States of America and to the United Kingdom. The refugee exodus or influx of refugees in the developed countries of the world is caused today mainly by the regional security issues in the Middle East and in the country of Iraq in particular. The people living here want to escape from the clutches of the ISIS at any cost, and are looking to the countries of the Global North to provide them with asylum and comfort in their desperate hours of need. Very few civilians in Iraq manage to lead a normal life, with daily living being such a precarious and dangerous affair (Pauly 2017).

The Liberal Paradox – Understanding the Un-Ethical Nature of US Involvement in Iraq 

Realism as a theory is one which emphasizes the important role that is played by the nation state in political matters, especially when it comes to promoting the interests of the nation state (Lee 2014).  The broad assumption which is made by Realism is that all nations of the world or rather, all countries of the world are motivated by the interests of their respective nations, something that often finds manifestation in the guise of moral concerns (Lee 2014). A number of scholars are of the opinion that while Realism is an effective theory for explaining the security crisis in Iraq, namely the two Gulf Wars that prevailed in the country in the decade of the 1990’s and the early 2000’s, it is not without its de-merits. Some feel that the entire agenda that was undertaken by the US administration to invade the country in the name of rescuing the people from a dictatorship and for promoting democracy, was done so in the guise of pursuing and enforcing a liberal agenda, with the real intention being to capture the oil fields in the country (Pauly 2017). There was absolutely nothing ethical about the actions undertaken by the US government when it came to sending peacekeeping forces to Iraq to restore balance and stability in the country. What the US instead managed to do was to act as oppressive as the dictatorial regime in Iraq under Saddam Hussain had been, abusing and hurting people at random in order to impose a white supremacy (Cohen 2017). While the US had entered the country and had taken an active role in going after Saddam Hussain primarily for the purpose of destroying autocracy and restoring democracy, this was only a farce. In reality, it was the control of the oil fields that was desired by the US and nothing more (Deudney and Ikenberry 2017).

Iraq in Context

Apart from US oppression in Iraq, the involvement shown by the US administration in Iraq in the name of establishing a democratic regime only ended up in creating more conflict in the region. The Sunni’s and Shia’s became more divided than ever as religious sects, especially since the US peacekeeping forces collaborated with the Sunni militia in order to achieve stability in the region (Cohen 2017). The Sunni’s took this opportunity to wreck havoc on the Shia community, resulting in the total and complete abuse of human rights. Moreover, since it was the intention of the US to establish democracy not only in Iraq but in the entire Middle Eastern region as a whole through its intervention in Iraq, what the US managed to end up doing, was isolate other neighboring countries who were not in favor of the American democratic agenda like Syria and Lebanon. The US through its realistic agenda in Iraq managed to how improve relations with and solidify connections with one important country in the Middle East, and that is Iran (Hyde-Price 2017). The nuclear program of Iran and the crucial role that was played by Iran in the Palestine-Israel conflict can be perceived as a manifestation of its harmonious relations with the USA, which in turn lead to the complete isolation of the country in the Middle Eastern region. The US thus managed to divide the Middle Eastern region by a considerable extent through the promotion of its realist albeit democratic agenda in Iraq, contributing to further instability in the region rather than playing an active role in ensuring internal stability. Iraq at best became completely anarchic following the second Gulf War, with chaos and disorder intending on making its presence felt in the country for a long time to come (Hyde-Price 2017).

When it comes to understanding the role played by international networks in supporting the Iraq War by the US, it must be remembered that the United Nations did not support such realist agenda’s and declared the war to be entirely illegal in nature (Deudney and Ikenberry 2017).  Kofi Annan, who was the secretary general of the United Nations at the time, declared that the war that was led on Iraq by the USA was fully illegal in character and that this was not a war that had been sanctioned by the Security Council of the UN. What Kofi Annan also explicitly stated was that the entire character and nature of the war against Iraq was one that went against the founding principles of the United Nations that is the principles and objectives outlined in the UN charter (Dorn et al. 2015). What can thus be construed by such a declaration made by the United Nations is that the realist agenda of the USA was unethical and illegal and that the international community played no role in supporting it. While the US definitely had allies like the United Kingdom to back its efforts in the Middle East in the early 2000’s, the international network of countries led by the United Nations vehemently opposed it, just as it had opposed the Gulf war that had been launched against Iraq in the 1990’s (Deudney and Ikenberry 2017). The gross violation of human rights, the kangaroo trial of Saddam Hussein and the abuse that was inflicted in Iraq by the US peacekeeping forces following Saddam Hussein’s execution makes it clear that what the US was doing in Iraq was nothing liberal and democratic, and that it had invaded the nation only to capture the rich oil fields, something that was entirely in keeping with Realist Doctrine (Cohen 2017).

Multi-factional Disputes in Iraq

The American political scientist Kenneth Waltz is a man who is well-known for his defense of structural realism, and for propounding what is termed as Neo-liberalism. According to Waltz, the interaction that is carried out in between sovereign states is something that can be explained very readily by the pressures that are exerted on such states due to the anarchic nature of the international system. In the view of Waltz, the international system constrains and limits the choices of states, compelling them to take the sovereign decisions that they do, in the interest of their nations (Waltz 2000).  He talks about neo-liberalism as being divided into two different branches, with the first branch being offensive neo-liberalism and the second branch being defensive neo-liberalism. Offensive realism in the view of Waltz is what occurs when nations pursue local hegemony over certain neighboring states as a means to assert their authority in their local relations with a number of rival states (Waltz 2000). Defensive realism on the other hand occurs when nations seek a solution or a status quo and focus entirely on maintaining the balance of power in a region rather than pursuing their individual interests of hegemony. Revisionist states in his view are those that wish to alter the balance of power, should things get too dictatorial or autocratic in a particular nation of the world. In the context of the conflict and instability in Iraq, it can be said that what the US did in Iraq through the two Gulf Wars, was done largely with a revisionist or liberal agenda but it can ultimately be classified as a case of offensive realism (Waltz 2000). The US justified its initiatives in Iraq according to the tenets of Defensive Realism. It stated clearly that its aim in carrying out the Iraq War was to bring the dictatorship in Iraq to an end and to restore a democratic and balanced system of power in the country. However, what the USA ultimately ended up doing may be regarded as offensive realism. It invaded the country with the ulterior purpose of capturing the oil rich fields in the country, and in the hope of establishing some sort of hegemony in the region by taking full control of the country, and collaborating with Iran to be a dominant force in the Middle Eastern Region (Waltz 2000).

There are many critical theories as well as alternative theoretical perspectives that question existing status quo, which interpret knowledge as something that is dependent on power and which emphasize social change and identity formation. These are known as non-positivist or non-traditional theories and perspectives. At times, such theories are also referred to as post-positivist or reflectivist. What such theories represent in essence a radical move away from neoliberal and neorealist theories. Alexander Wendt for instance argues that self-help is not a casual or logical consequence of anarchy. In his view the interests and the identities of a state are socially constructed (Wendt 1992). Wendt argues that neo-realism is not effective for bringing about change in the modern day world and what is required instead is a norm based constructivist theory (Wendt 1992). The International Society Approach or the English School associated with Wendt emphasizes the normative and systemic constraints on state behavior (Suganami 2001). The English School alludes to the classical view of a human being as a man who is rational and socially responsible, who is not only capable of cooperation but who is also capable of learning from his past mistakes. States can bind themselves quite easily to other states with the help of treaties, identifying and developing common values instead of acting aggressively. In the context of the crisis and conflict in Iraq, one can therefore say that normative realist agenda is what the United States could have implemented instead of sticking entirely to Realist doctrine to pursue its interests. It could have arrived at an understanding or an agreement with neighboring countries in the Middle East regarding the autocratic regime in Iraq and could have coerced the country into a dialogue in the most peaceful way possible, in order to enforce the importance and need for a democratic system of governance (Suganami 2001). Instead of simply acting along the tenets of offensive realism and invading the country to establish a hegemonic presence in the region, the US could have fostered a spirit of collaboration and cooperation in the region, and while the path towards peace may definitely have been a longer one, peace would at least have been achieved and anarchy prevented. The aggressive US intervention in Iraq via the two Gulf Wars resulted in the complete destruction of peace and stability in the country, anarchy, disorder and distress, leading to the emergency of terrorist outfits like ISIS that continues to wreck havoc in the country today (Suganami 2001).

Security Issues in Iraq

Social and Material Worlds are Real 

There are five key ideas or implications that are associated with Realism. The first is that both the social and the material worlds are real, or rather that, anything which can produce real or realistic effects is real (Yanchar 2015). Thus policies and programmes are real and can have real effects, negative or positive, unintended or intended. In much the same way, social constructs and institutions will have a real impact or effect on how well such policies and programmes work (Yanchar 2015). The US decision or policy to invade Iraq had real effects. It resulted in destruction and devastation all around, taking millions of lives and brining about instability in a country.

Realism acknowledges that observations and enquiries are shaped as well as filtered through the brain. There is also nothing called final knowledge or final truth (Rogers 2015). A better understanding can thus be worked towards understanding the reasons behind the implementation of specific programs and policies. Thus, the US arbitrary action Iraq according to this theory, may just have some basis, one engages in an in-depth analysis and understanding as to why such a decision was taken in the first place (Rogers 2015).

The third important implication of realism is that social systems are in essence open systems. Outcomes of policies and programs are defined by a number of different causes and not a single cause. The US decision to go ahead and invade Iraq was a policy that was decided upon by a number of important causes and factors and not a single one (Baylis et al. 2017).

The fourth important implication of Realism is that it offers a specific understanding of the way in which causation is seen to work. The aims and objectives of programs and policies need to be reviewed and analyzed to know how causation works. Thus the objective of US intervention in Iraq must be understood, that is, what it is that the US aimed to achieve through its military intervention in the country (Kirshner 2015).

The final important implication of Realism is that it provides specific ways by which things or incidents can be thought of in context. The context in which the US invasion of Iraq took place must thus be understood (Baylis et al. 2017). Iraq was an autocratic regime and Saddam Hussein was a ruthless tyrant. The US intervention was at least in name done to help the people of the country overthrow the oppressive regime, so that a democratic system of governance could be developed, one which would facilitate them to lead a quality life marked by dignity (Kirshner 2017).

Regional Security Issues in Iraq

Conclusion 

Thus, Realism is a theory that can indeed be used to very accurately describe the role played by the United States of America in instigating the two Gulf Wars, the first one in the 1990’s and the second one in the early part of the 21^st century. While it appears that the US was guided by noble motives, that is, the restoration of peace and democracy in Iraq and the oppression of military autocracy, what the wars and the invasion of the USA rather ended up doping was to create instability in the region. Iraq faced anarchy and disorder since the end of the second Gulf War, stability was never restored, the US administration allowed its peacekeeping forces to wreck havoc on the local population and democracy seemed a distant dream, it still does. The birth of ISIS and the spread of militancy all over the country and the Middle Eastern region as a whole simply indicate that Realism as a doctrine, so widely adhered to by the economic and nuclear powers of the Global North, should be disbanded altogether, if peace, cooperation and collaboration are ever to be achieved in the international system.

References 

Bateson, F.W., 2017. A guide to English literature. Routledge.

Baylis, J., Smith, S. and Owens, P. eds., 2017. The globalization of world politics: an introduction to international relations. Oxford University Press.

Booth, K. and Erskine, T. eds., 2016. International relations theory today. John Wiley & Sons.

Brown, C.M., 2015. Mobilizing the Caliphate: ISIS and the Conflict in Iraq and Syria. Politicka Misao, 52(4/5), p.203.

Cohen, A., 2017. Eurasia in balance: the US and the regional power shift. Routledge.

Daddow, O., 2017. International relations theory. Sage

Deudney, D. and Ikenberry, G.J., 2017. Realism, Liberalism and the Iraq War. Survival, 59(4), pp.7-26.

Diwakar, V., 2015. The effect of armed conflict on education: evidence from Iraq. The Journal of Development Studies, 51(12), pp.1702-1718.

Dorn, A.W., Mandel, D.R. and Cross, R.W., 2015. How Just Were America’s Wars? A Survey of Experts Using a Just War Index. International Studies Perspectives, 16(3), pp.270-285

Harff, B., 2018. Ethnic conflict in world politics. Routledge

Hyde-Price, A., 2017. Realism and the European Neighbourhood Policy. In The Routledge Handbook on the European Neighbourhood Policy (pp. 60-69). Routledge.

Kirshner, J., 2015. The economic sins of modern IR theory and the classical realist alternative. World Politics, 67(1), pp.155-183

Lee, A., 2014. Realism and Power (Routledge Revivals): Postmodern British Fiction. Routledge.

Llewellyn, K., 2017. Jurisprudence: realism in theory and practice. Routledge

Marr, P., 2018. The modern history of Iraq. Routledge.

Mearsheimer, J.J., 2001. The tragedy of great power politics. WW Norton & Company.

Pauly, R.J., 2017. Strategic Preemption: US Foreign Policy and the Second Iraq War. Routledge.

Pérez Huber, L. and Solorzano, D.G., 2015. Racial microaggressions as a tool for critical race research. Race Ethnicity and Education, 18(3), pp.297-320.

Rogers, T., 2015, March. Critical realism and learning analytics research: epistemological implications of an ontological foundation. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 223-230). ACM

Suganami, H., 2001. Alexander Wendt and the English School. Journal of International Relations and Development, 4(4), pp.403-423

Waltz, K.N., 2000. Structural realism after the Cold War. International security, 25(1), pp.5-41.

Wang, H., Luo, G. and Hong, H., 2016. Beyond Socio-Materiality and Sense-Making: Planting Symbolic Power and Critical Realism into Strategy-As-Practice Logic. Open Journal of Business and Management, 4(02), p.177

Wendt, A., 1992. Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics. International organization, 46(2), pp.391-425.

Yanchar, S.C., 2015. Truth and disclosure in qualitative research: Implications of hermeneutic realism. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(2), pp.107-124.

Zakaria, R., 2015. Women and Islamic militancy. Dissent, 62(1), pp.118-125