The purpose of this essay will be to assess the theories put forward by Kenneth N. Waltz is his book “Men, the State and War”. The structure of this paper will start with a general introduction to the topic and my thesis statement, continuing with an explanation of the three main aspects of Waltz’s theory. A case study on a contemporary issue will be then done to verify the applicability of the author’s arguments. Waltz explains how people are reluctant when talking about peace, nowadays generations struggle in believing in the existence of peace. Perhaps is it because it is not the right question to ask and instead we should question the means by which peace can be sought. The author gives three images which attempt to explain the causes …show more content…
According to the author the internal organization of states is the key for understanding war and peace. Moreover the character of the state is the main factor in determining state’s behaviour, this is why this argument is very much linked to the previous one. The state presents some defects that should be removed in order to establish the basis for peace. Waltz attempts to find a definition for a good state, he uses other authors claims to support his thesis such as Marx, Kant, Woodrow Wilson, Hobbes, Mill and Adam Smith. He supports his critique by taking into account the two main ideals of his time: Marxism and Liberalism. According to Marx a good state relies on and manages it 's means of production, in Kant 's view a good state is accorded to abstract principles of right, according to Wilson a good state depends upon the national self-determination and Democracy. (Waltz, 1998, p. 133). The defects Waltz is talking about can manifest under several aspects such as the type of government, which is generally bad, which consist in the deprivations imposed by despots upon their subjects produce tensions that find their expression in foreign adventure. Moreover, the author claims that there are defects in governments which are not inherently bad such as restrictions imposed by the governments toward the citizens in order to protect their rights and in order to avoid them interfering with executing foreign policy. Finally, geographic or economic deprivations meaning that the state has not deprived countries of their sovereignty or undertaken war to satisfy its economic