None of IR readers aren’t exposed with theories in understanding geopolitics surrounding the world. Often be da case, a reader (be students, lecturers, policy makers, journalist and bla bla bla) would be asked to state his preferential analysis in arguing incidents and world fault lines. Of course, I am not excluded. Considering dere r few SEA students in my cohort, (n I’m da only one representing The Land of Truly Asia – Bolehlah), many wud turn to me in asking my view, touching on da specific issues.
I admit I’m not an expert in World Politics theories, amidst being a constant reader in following the scholars’ arguments. Not even close. But I av an aspiration in pursuing such discipline in academia, in wanting 2 make a change 4 a better world 4 every1 2 live on. That is not 2 say I hate being a Niccolo Machiavelli follower given da fact dat, realism is best 2 understand international issues, neither totally classify myself as a Kantian (Kant, 1983) who insists dat “perpetual peace” can b achieved through da building of common norms n laws and Commonwealth of Nations. I’m juz being, according 2 Greek Philosopher Lertius Diogenes, “a citizen of da world.”
Although @ dis point of juncture, I.JUST.DONT.KNOW.HOW
However, believing dat da world cud b changed if Homosapiens want it to, I found myself in line wif other constructivist.
Hence I always try 2 put sum elements of hope @ any argument I made – which the people could change if they want to. As expected, I received disquiets n disagreements, including from my professors. Thinking thoroughly, I can unders10 da factors of such repercussions. My class is dominated by our Western classmates n da other half is of course, the locals. All my professors are American educated Korean – who conventionally hold da idea of Western value of Democracy n Realism. The Koreans, from my humble observation cudn’t deviate away from da West as they began to associate themselves wif da West following da Korean War 1950-1953. They see da North as primarily #1 enemy rather than their own brothers and sisters, who were born on da same land, speaking da same language but only share different thoughts –slash- ideologies. I cud unders10 da logic why. Truly I do.
But as we were da 1 decided 2 go 2 war, reversibly, we cud also decide 2 make peace – Central value propagated by the Constructivist which “concerns with human consciousness, treat ideas as structural factors, considers da dynamic relationship between ideas n material forces as a consequence of how actors interpret their material reality.” (Michael Barnett, 2008)
For 40 years, we believed Cold War would serve as a deadlock relations between the West and the Soviet Unions. Da world even nearly turned into a destruction following the imminent alarm of 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Who wud av thought, during those time, Cold War could come 2 and end and Germany 2 b reunited as 1. Could there be truce between the Liberal Democracy and Communist?, they thought. But in da end, those were just not merely myth. It turns out 2 b real.
Dats y, despite da fact we’ve been told, human are irrational, hubris, and violent towards their other kinds, deep inside our hearts, excluding extreme religion beliefs, right wing political stands and racial supremacy, we always longing 4 peace. We desired 4 peace, although most of da time, we’ve been tempted 2 conquer, 2 defeat, n 2 b superior than others.
But as my aspiration remains as personal ideas n reflections, I am always been sidelined. It is always b a downturn after presenting ur views, ur professor disapproves it wif more solid facts n arguments. Of course, da value of a professor’s opinion is absolutely incomparable 2 mine – a doctoral student cum party animal especially in the weekend. Haha. @ a point, I feel disappointed from not being heard, wat more I av an important agenda 4 da world 2 consider.
Going through series of bombarding n tough discussion, I found myself immuned 2 it. My academic thinking is starting adjustable 2 it, without compromising a bit of value I am propagating. I am much stronger class by class, day by day, throwing away as far as possible my inferiority thinking when making da case.
Surprising it is to me, I found that it is much easier 2 wear a realist lense in understanding da conflict (in which a doctoral student is expected to master at). It is only 4 studying purposes n making me following their views (saving time 4 arguments too, ha ha) But conflicts r just facts. It is dere n 4ever, be registered as da same fact unless if we want 2 make a change. N I solely believe, 2 make a change, one need 2 embrace into da causes n development, integrating opportunities within complexities as a stepping stone. This is a process I believe in which I am involving now.
In da end I feel much contended. I juz talked 2 myself perhaps, God thinks Im not ready 2 change da world, yet He spares more time 4 me 2 learn n be matured as a person. Also, why is dere such a rush 2 make a change, since ideas will always remain in one’s soul. It wont die with da body of a believer. But a believer must instill a strong conceptual framework 2 himself n others 2 follow. So, I am juz gonna take dis slowly. Slow n steady baby.
May da idea of peace will never die in our hearts till God decides 2 take dis world over. Amen.
Before penning off, a French explorer n countrymen, Andre Malraux once said, “les ideas ne doivent pas entre pensees, mais vecues.” a.k.a. ideas shud not be thought but lived.
In da name of Peace,
ZI
