International Relations 101: What Scholars Say About the World Today

According to a survey, IR lecturers say that the US should abandon Afghanistan, pay attention to China and deal with climate change.

If you turn on the TV news, you will be bombed by the authority that provides world affairs for 30 seconds. But how do international relations scholars see things?

William and Mary College recently completed education, research and international policy research on about 3,500 international relations (IR) teachers around the world.

Depending on the field, there may be more interesting results for experts (for example, if you want to know the proportion of professors using dialectical research or interpretation), not most people.

But the part about policy issues is to understand exactly how the professor sees the world. There are several important discoveries about the views of American IR researchers.

To the east, to young people! They said that the most important strategic area for the US today is the East Asia, not the Middle East and North Africa.

Beijing consensus: the main problem in the next decade is the rise of China - and the global climate change

Wells Club: Trade organizations such as the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization are beneficial to the US, but not necessarily for developing countries.

Beyond Afghanistan: The three big problems facing the United States are the Arab Spring, the rise of China, the global debt crisis (the war in Afghanistan is far behind).

Ivory Tower Eagles and Pigeons: Most scholars support the American war against Libya in 2011. But if Iran produces nuclear bombs and militants are trying to hand over Pakistan, if there is a war between the North and South, most people will oppose the use of power or democratic in Syria and Yemen We support change.

Cup half half full: Infrared scholars are very optimistic. They said the world has become less dangerous to the United States since the end of the Cold War. The Arab Spring is suitable for the Middle East and the United States. In the next 30 years the war between the United States and China is unlikely to occur

Some of these views are consistent with the Obama administration's prospects, especially the desire for the end of the war in Afghanistan and the restructuring of East Asian challenges. However, concerns about climate change are not consistent with the behavior of the president or parliament.

Bill Buckley says that the top 2,000 people in Boston's phone book would be better than the 2,000 teachers at Harvard University. Besides, the thin air above the ivory tower can certainly obscure your judgment. However, professional scholars can also provide useful insights on global issues.

I would like to hear your opinion on this article. Please send a letter to the editor or write it on letters @ theatlantic.com.

We live on a planet, but we live in multiple worlds or in the world world (Ling 2014; Onuf 2013). As a field of research, international relations have recently paved the way for many global ideas. Publications, conferences and academic participation prove this. However, while considering many worlds on the planet, people are paying attention to how the chronological order of global environmental research is considered, or how international relations are regarded as the field of investigation.

An unintended observer may expect that international attorneys and international relativists share research interests and academic challenges that overlap. Indeed, in the decades before the Second World War, practitioners in both fields pursued, interpreted and implemented international law pursuing common interests. However, as a subject history, the "realistic" theorist refused to accept international law as a way to pursue the national interests of the country, so World War II does not trust international law among political scientists very much It was an event of the watershed. Concept of semantic constraints. Over the next 40 years, international scholarships (IR) and international law (IL) scholarships have developed along separate and rarely intertwined tracks. Legalists emphasize autonomy of the law rather than politics, concentrating on identifying, criticizing, and certifying specific legal rules and decision-making processes.