The term “international relations” means: the various relations between the countries of the world (represented by the people of their governments), especially in their political aspect. It is well known that most countries are linked to each other – especially now – by close, multiple and complex relations, in all or some areas of life. It is rare that there are two countries now that have no relationship at all.
So far, international relations are characterized by the dominance of the “anarchy” element in most of them… that is, there is no supreme authority (or ruling authority) that undertakes the process of authoritative distribution of values in the community of states, to which states recognize this right. Or in other words, the absence of a global government (agreed on, and recognized as having the right to rule), that sets laws, supervises their implementation, works to oblige countries to them, then prosecutes them, and punishes those who violate them. As a result of the dominance of this element in the relations between states, the law: the final say of the one with the greatest and strongest capabilities (the law of the jungle) has become dominant… as we find that the strong among the states are often able to impose their will on the weaker, when the interests of the two parties contradict and differ. These are the most prominent features of this type of relationship between people.
There are other major “characteristics” that characterize international relations, and the most important of these characteristics is that the relations between any countries always fluctuate between two contradictory phenomena: (international) cooperation and conflict. If cooperation (friendliness) prevails between two specific countries at a certain time, with a degree of 80%, for example, then conflict (disagreement) must prevail with a degree of 20%, and so on. Also, the current relations among states are governed by force and interests… which justifies the assertion that: There are no permanent friendships or permanent enmities between states, but there are permanent interests. Today's friend may become tomorrow's enemy, and today's enemy may become tomorrow's friend, if interests change, and so on. That is, these relationships are always changing, with the passage of time. Change and impermanence, in the long run, is a major feature of these relationships.
****
This is one of the most important features, if not the most important. However, there are several other features that characterize international relations. We highlight here one of the most prominent of these features. By it we mean the great similarity of "international relations" with "interpersonal relations". Man is embodied in the form of: a government, a party, an organization, a group, an organization…etc. In the end, states and their politicians (Politicians)… who are individuals, act, often, as humans act, in the processes of give and take, or action and reaction. This great similarity between the relations between individuals (relatives, acquaintances, etc.) and the relations between states (represented by the people of their governments) is clearly visible. Yes, there is a difference between the decision-making process in relations between people, and the political decision-making process, which is taken by politicians, and affects the lives of millions of people. However, with these differences, the similarity in the course and dynamics of international relations (action / reaction) almost reaches the degree of 80%. The difference remains within 20%.
****
In the following, we present “examples” that support what was mentioned. Countries “M” and “N” are neighboring countries, and relations between them worsened as a result of certain differences. It happened that a devastating earthquake occurred in the country «M». State “N” hastened to offer condolences and tangible humanitarian assistance to those affected by the earthquakes in “M”. What do we expect the “reaction” of state “M” to be to what state “N” did?! State “M” will often thank State “N”, and this will often reflect positively on the relations between them, and these relations will improve, and souls will be somewhat purified. However, if country “N” ignored the catastrophe that occurred in country “M”, then this would arouse injustice among the leaders of “M”, and it might be considered, by them, a hostile act, which would worsen relations between them and deteriorate.
And if we apply this example to relationships between individuals, and assume that there are two friends: “X” and “Y”, and that differences led to the deterioration of their relations. And it happened that the father of “S”, for example, died, so “S” hastened to offer condolences and sympathy to his friend, “S”. Here, X's reaction is often gratitude, thanks to Y. And this will often reflect positively on the relations between them, so that the souls will become pure, and the waters may return to their course. However, if “S” is ignored, “S” is lost, then this will often cause injustice to “S” and lead to a further deterioration in the relations between them. And pastor on that.
These two examples illustrate the similarity in the processes of "action/reaction", between relations between individuals and relations between states. After all, all the “decision makers” in both types of these relationships are human beings, with the same emotions. They accept, reject, rejoice and grieve, make peace and fight…etc.
Before concluding, we point out that the phenomenon of international relations is one of the most important human-social phenomena. The development of international relations, at a specific time, and between certain parties, can lead to the consolidation of human well-being and the consolidation of his survival on this earth, and it may lead to the opposite… that is, relations can develop between certain countries, in a way that leads – after God's will – to the misery of all mankind, or some of them, and to threaten the survival of mankind, and to cause its destruction, especially in the era of terrible weapons of mass destruction. It can cause the opposite to happen. It is from the seriousness and importance of the phenomenon of international relations that the science of international relations derives its great importance to human well-being, and even to his survival, in many cases. It is the science that specializes in studying these relations, a scientific study… that aims to understand the phenomenon of international relations (theorizing it), as it exists. And then trying to possess the (scientific) ability to influence (positive and negative) the course of these relations, in a way that ultimately serves the purposes of those concerned.
Charity Yahya Fadel