Hello aspirants,
Today’s revision capsule of PSIR optional preparation covers KEY CONCEPTS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. There are four 20-markers, eleven 15-markers, and three 10-markers from this topic in the last 12 years.
KEY CONCEPTS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
- NATIONAL INTEREST
Details & ScholarsConstant-permanent / VariableCore = security-sovereignty-strategic autonomy; Variable = e.g. India’s non-alignment → multi-alignment.Realist viewHans Morgenthau: rooted in human nature & power-desire.Liberal viewPursued through cooperation, trade, institutions.Constructivist viewAlexander Wendt et al.: socially constructed by culture & ideology.Marxist critical viewCharles Beard, Raymond Aron, Joseph Frankel, Burchill Scott, Mohammad Younus – national interest masks ruling-class / imperial ambitions; “obfuscation of class conflict.”Two-part realist classificationCore & Variable (Morgenthau).Robinson’s sixfold listPrimary, Secondary, Permanent, Variable, General, Specific.ComponentsEconomic, Security, Geopolitical, Ideology/Culture.Historical evolutionFrom Peace of Westphalia, Cold War, post-Cold War.Pseudo-concept debate“Vague & subjective,” yet defended by realists.
- POWER
DimensionContentCentral realist maximMorgenthau: “Whatever be the ultimate end, power is the most ultimate end.”EvolutionFrom Thucydides, Machiavelli (military) → economic & soft dimensions (liberals) → social norms (Wendt).ElementsPolitical stability, Geography, Demography, Military, Economic status, Social cohesion, Intelligence (RAW, IB, CIA, Mossad), Technology/R&D, Leadership (Kautilya – Saptanga; ‘King as Nabhi’).Determinants & HierarchySuperpowers (USA, USSR), Great Powers (Russia, France, UK), Middle Powers (India, Australia, Turkey, Israel, Italy, Germany, Pakistan), Small Powers (Maldives, Sri Lanka, Bhutan).Soft PowerJoseph Nye – “ability to make others want what you want.” Culture, movies, education.Smart PowerSuzanne Nossel; popularised by Nye – calibrated mix (Carrot + Stick).Fast PowerJohn Chipman – agility, speed, tech-driven “survival of the fastest.”
- POLARITY OF POWER
TypeStability verdict (Structural Realists Kenneth Waltz, John Mearsheimer) & ExamplesUnipolarity2nd-most unstable; post-1991 USA “hyperpower overstretch.”BipolarityMost stable; Cold War, nuclear deterrence.MultipolarityLeast stable, accidental war risk (Mearsheimer); classic Europe, emerging with China/India rise.
- BALANCE OF POWER
Definitions by Morgenthau (policy, state of affairs, equal distribution) & Ernst Haas (eight meanings).
Assumptions: anarchy, states pursue interest, war readiness, no preponderance.
Forms: Internal vs External balancing; alliances, arms race, buffer partitions.
Critiques: Stephen Walt – “balance of threat”; stability-instability paradox; relevance fades in unipolarity but returns with new multipolarity.
Golden age: A.J.P. Taylor – 1848-1914 Europe; Concert of Europe (1815).
Hegemonic Stability Theory: Charles Kindleberger, Robert Gilpin – Pax Britannica / Pax Americana.
- COLLECTIVE SECURITY vs COLLECTIVE DEFENCE
| Collective Security (liberal) | Collective Defence (realist) |
| UN, League of Nations, “security of one is security of all.” | NATO Article 5 – bloc vs specified threat. |
| Universal, enemy undefined; aims to forestall conflict. | Exclusive alliance, pre-named adversary. |
| Critique: idealistic, veto politics, slow implementation. | Critique: bloc mentality, sparks rivalry (e.g. Russia–Ukraine citing NATO). |
UN innovations: Acheson “Uniting for Peace” Resolution, Korean Crisis 1950, Gulf War I (1991).
- SECURITIZATION – COPENHAGEN SCHOOL
Founders: Barry Buzan, Ole Wæver, Jaap de Wilde.
Security = “speech act”; issues become existential when labelled so.
Sectors: Military, Political, Economic, Social, Ecological (Buzan’s five pillars).
Examples: Arctic, European migration.
Links to Constructivism: “Anarchy is what states make of it.”
- SECURITY THEORIES & SCHOOLS
| School | Referent & Threat | Key names / Notes |
| Realist | State vs other states; John Herz security dilemma. | Waltz, Mearsheimer. |
| Liberal | States & individuals; institutions, democratic peace. | Woodrow Wilson, Karl Deutsch – security community. |
| Marxist | Human vs capitalism; exploitation. | Andrew Linklater amongst critical voices. |
| Feminist | Human vs patriarchy; everyday insecurity. | |
| Critical / Emancipatory | Linklater – moral boundaries, grassroots democracy. | |
| Copenhagen / Constructivist | Threats are socially constructed (securitization). |
- DETERRENCE & MAD
Psychological concept; requires rational actors.
| Concept | Details & Scholars |
| MAD | Mutually Assured Destruction – second-strike, nuclear triad. |
| Game-theory fathers | Bernard Brodie, Herman Kahn, Thomas Schelling, Mearsheimer. |
| Extended deterrence | US umbrella for Japan, ROK. |
| Critiques | Nina Tannenwald – “nuclear taboo”; Henry Kissinger sceptical; liberals push abolition. |
| Pre-emptive strike | Highly contested; triad survivability undermines credibility. |
- SECURITY DILEMMA
Coined by John Herz; refined by Robert Jervis (“offence-defence balance”).
Constructivist re-interpretation: George Sorenson “insecurity dilemma”, Amitabh Acharya on Third World contexts.
- TRANSNATIONAL ACTORS (TNA)
| Actor | Realist view | Liberal / Other views | Critical notes |
| MNCs | Agents of states. | Development engines. | Marxists: exploiters; East India Company precedent. |
| NGOs | Minimal role. | Positive agents; UN ECOSOC Art 72 consultative. | Marxists: proxies, regime-change tools. |
| Terror groups | State proxies. | – | John Lewis Gaddis – post-CW asymmetry; “snakes” after Python. |
#Key Words and Scholars
- “Fast-track & proactive diplomacy,” “balance of threat,” “sharp power (Nye, authoritarian propaganda),” “3-D chess-board model,” “security community,” “ABM / INF withdrawals,” “Game of BoP in Asia-Pacific,” “buck-passing / bait-and-bleed,” “Uniting for Peace,” “Peacekeeping as extra-constitutional growth,” “pre-emptive nuclear strike,” “failed states,” “class conflict,” “survival of the fastest,” “nervous state of peace” (Nehru), “concert of Europe,” “MAD’s balance of terror,” “second generation nuclear states,” “A.F.K. Organski power-transition,” “soft balancing,” “asymmetrical balancing,” “security of one is security of all,” Bernard Brodie, APJ Taylor, Ernst Haas, Stephen Walt, AFK Organski, Bernard Brodie, Herman Kahn, Thomas Schelling, Nina Tannenwald, Henry Kissinger, Noam Chomsky, Barry Buzan, Ole Wæver, Jaap de Wilde, Andrew Linklater, John Herz, Robert Jervis, George Sorenson, Amitabh Acharya, Charles Kindleberger, Robert Gilpin, David Hume, Woodrow Wilson, Kenneth Waltz, John Mearsheimer, Alexander Wendt, Charles Beard, Raymond Aron, Joseph Frankel, Burchill Scott, Mohammad Younus, Ernst Haas, A.J.P. Taylor.
Practice Questions
Question 1. National Interest is an essentially contested concept. Comment. [2022/10 m]
Question 2. Explain the concept of balance of power. What are the various techniques of maintaining balance of power? [2020/15 m]
Question 3. Explain the instruments and methods devised for the promotion of national interest. [2016/20m]
📌 Model answers available on the Telegram channel: https://t.me/psirbyamitpratap – keep notifications on.
See you tomorrow on Day 33. Keep practicing!
—Amit Pratap Singh & Team
A quick note on submissions of copies and mentorship
- 2025 Mains writers: Cohort 2 of ATS starts on 13 July. The above practice set will serve as your revision tool, just do not miss booking your mentorship sessions for personalised feedback especially for starting tests. Come with your evaluated test copies.
- 2026 Mains writers – Cohort 4 of PSIR O-AWFG & ATS starts on 24th July 2025. keep uploading through your usual dashboard. Act on the feedback and improve consistently.
- Alternate between mini-tests (O-AWFG) and full mocks (ATS) has been designed to tackle speed, content depth, and structured revision—line-by-line evaluation pinpoints your weaknesses and errors. Follow your PSIR O-AWFG & ATS schedule and use the model answers to enrich your content, as rankers recommended based on their own success.
