Revision summary
Idealism in IR treats law, morality, public opinion and organisations as real forces, not only military power. Kant’s perpetual peace and Wilson’s League/UN lineage are the core facets, with collective security and disarmament as programmes. It is not naive pacifism; it seeks to change incentives through institutions. Morgenthau and Waltz remain the main critique: interest, anarchy and self-help. Contemporary relevance is institutional and normative — UN, NPT, courts — not a claim that power politics has ended.
Model answer
Introduction
The idealist approach to international relations holds that world politics can be steered by law, morality, public opinion and institutions, not only by relative military power. It is older than the word ‘idealism’. Immanuel Kant and Woodrow Wilson remain the syllabus names. Its facets still organise the United Nations, arms control and human rights. Realists say those facets are decoration. The comment must judge contemporary relevance, not nostalgia.
Body
Facets of the approach
First, human nature and progress. Classical idealism, unlike Morgenthau’s account of interest defined as power, treats education, commerce and republican government as forces that can reduce war. Kant’s Toward Perpetual Peace linked republican constitutions, a federation of free states, and cosmopolitan hospitality. Second, international law as a real constraint, not a slogan: treaties, arbitration, and later the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. Third, international organisation: the League of Nations after Wilson’s Fourteen Points, then the United Nations Charter’s ban on aggressive force. Fourth, collective security rather than shifting alliances. Fifth, disarmament and open diplomacy as moral-political programmes. Sixth, in later liberal form, economic interdependence and democratic peace as empirical cousins of the older moral claim.
Idealism is not the claim that states are already good. It is the claim that institutions and norms can change incentives and that foreign policy should be judged by justice as well as by survival. Wilson tried to replace the old diplomacy of spheres with national self-determination and a league. The 1930s punished that hope. The 1945 Charter tried again with a Security Council that admitted power through the veto.
Realist objection
Morgenthau argued that politics among nations is a struggle for power and that moral crusades produce hypocrisy. Waltz argued that anarchy forces self-help regardless of the goodness of leaders. The League failed in Manchuria and Abyssinia. The United Nations fails when a permanent member is the aggressor, as in Ukraine. Those facts are the realist brief.
Contemporary relevance
Idealism remains relevant as the working language of order. Climate agreements, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, refugee law, and the everyday work of the World Health Organization and the World Trade Organization are unintelligible if one counts only tanks. NATO itself claims a community of democracies, which is an idealist wrapping on a realist alliance. The International Criminal Court’s warrants, however uneven, show that atrocity is still named as crime.
Relevance is partial. Great-power war, tariff nationalism, and the stalling of disarmament (question 1(e)) show that Kantian peace is not the structure of 2024. Idealism is relevant as a standard and as a set of institutions, not as a prediction that power politics has ended. A PSIR answer that discards it cannot explain why states still sign charters. An answer that treats it as sufficient cannot explain Ukraine, Gaza, or nuclear modernisation.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD ID[Idealist approach] --> K[Kant perpetual peace] ID --> W[Wilson League UN] ID --> L[Law organisations disarmament] R[Morgenthau Waltz] --> P[Power and anarchy] L -.constrains but does not abolish.-> P
Conclusion
The idealist approach joins Kantian peace, Wilsonian organisation, international law and the hope of progress. It is still the grammar of the UN and of much arms-control talk. It is not a complete theory of the 2020s. Its contemporary relevance is as constraint and aspiration inside a still-anarchic system.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
The changing global order and ongoing regional conflicts, with the global powers taking sides, have jeopardized the progress made towards disarmament in the past. Comment.
Next question in the 2024 paper (Q1). View answer →
-
Is liberal institutionalism the same as classical idealism?
It is a later, more rational-choice cousin. Keohane keeps anarchy and adds regimes. Classical idealism spoke more of morality and progress.
-
Did idealism die in 1939?
As a prediction of peace, it failed. As a programme of institutions, it was rebuilt in 1945 and still structures diplomacy.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2025 · Q1(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the psychological approach to the study of comparative politics. -
2024 · Q1(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the interpretive approach to the study of comparative politics. -
2024 · Q1(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Explain the central tenets of the World-Systems Theory. -
2023 · Q2(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
In what ways does the functionalist approach in International relations help in maintaining peace and order in global politics? -
2022 · Q1(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the commonalities between the Marxist and Realist approach to the study of International Politics. -
2021 · Q1(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
"Marxist approach to the study of international relations has lost its relevance in the post-cold war era." Comment.
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the interpretive approach to the study of comparative politics.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
The interpretive approach studies political action as meaning in context, following Weber’s verstehen and later cultural and linguistic turns. It replies to behaviouralism’s search for covering laws by asking how votes, nations and authority are understood locally. Thick description, ethnography and discourse analysis are typical tools. It explains legitimacy, nationalism and everyday state practice that a constitution or a class map alone cannot supply. Limits are relativism, weak generalisation, and neglect of material and institutional constraint if used alone.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Explain the central tenets of the World-Systems Theory.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
Wallerstein’s unit is the capitalist world-economy since the long sixteenth century, not the isolated nation-state. Core, semi-periphery and periphery form a durable three-tier division of labour. Unequal exchange and strong/weak states move surplus toward the core. The theory rejects modernisation’s national ladder and differs from Waltz’s interstate anarchy as first cause. Limits include economic determinism and underplaying state autonomy and culture; mobility exists but hierarchy persists.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
The expansionist tendencies of the current Russian regime indicate its intentions for the realization of a Greater Russia on the lines of the Soviet era. Comment.
Comparative Politics
Russia’s wars in Georgia and Ukraine, plus pressure on Belarus and nuclear signalling, show expansionist intent in the post-Soviet space. The Greater Russia story denies full independence of neighbours, especially Ukraine. The Soviet analogy fits geography of control more than ideology: today’s regime is nationalist and oligarchic, not a communist world-system. Morgenthau and Waltz explain power and structure; they do not make the war merely defensive. Comment: accept expansionism; reject a simple USSR restoration.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.