The Sucessful Developement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Essay Example

The Sucessful Developement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Essay To start off this essay, try painting a picture about a certain neighborhood. This neighborhood does not have any overarching governing body, nor is there a single overarching security force. In short, this neighborhood’s residents are left to fend for themselves. Assuming that there has been an unfortunate event in the neighborhood, whereby one house was broken into by some thieves, what could possibly be the reaction of the residents in that community? Will they seek to protect their own homes and not bother to care about their neighbors? Will they protect their homes and be malicious of their neighbors, thinking they could have been conspirators to the crime? Or will they work together and cooperate in one collective effort to solve the case and to protect themselves? This is an analogous picture of what the international realm may look like for scholars and the questions posted are classic questions that theories of International Relations seek to shed light into. In an international world that is ruled by anarchy, it has been a classic notion that states are left to fend for themselves. In this scenario, security of states is of great importance, if not the outright priority. As international events unfold, different scholars seek to explain the various international phenomena by choosing a theoretical framework that will best explain and account for the phenomenon they choose to account for Be that as it may, what this paper will aim to discuss is the recent development is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), as an association of states, by using the pertinent theoretical frameworks in the discipline of International Relations.   The first part will discuss a brief introduction of the Shanghai Cooperation and what are the recent developments pertaining to it, while the second part of the paper will discuss briefly what theories in International Relations exist that may be of use to the discussion of the recent events in SCO. Using the chosen theories, this paper will discuss how the core tenets of such theories can possibly explain the recent developments in the SCO for example, using a certain theory, why would a certain actor in the SCO story act this way and what were the interests of that actor etcetera. We will write a custom essay sample on The Sucessful Developement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on The Sucessful Developement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on The Sucessful Developement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer A lot of international organizations exist in status quo. The reasons for their establishment may vary from one case to another. And for scholars, it is interesting to take a look at this phenomenon in the context of the emerging new world order. With the end of the Cold War, it is interesting to observe how states and other emerging world players will configure themselves. In line with recent developments, the formation of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is worthy of scholarly attention. Upon its formation on June 15 2001, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization has six permanent members: the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Tajikistan, the Republic of Uzbekistan and the Russian Federation (Brummer, 2007). It is an international organization through its founding members that cover about three fifths of Eurasia (GlobalSecurity.org, 2007). This organization or association of states, though fairly young compared to other international organizations has turned out to be an influential political, economic and security international player (Brummer, 2007). The SCO had a predecessor and it was called, the Shanghai Five mechanism, which came from the five of the, now, six members’ (except the Republic of Uzbekistan) effort to further disarmament in the border regions and to strengthen confidence-building (GlobalSecurity.org, 2007). Upon the signing of the Treaty on Deepening Military Trust in Border Regions and the Treaty on Reduction of Military Forces in Border Regions by these five member states, what started off as an annual meeting of their leaders ended up to be a regular practice (GlobalSecurity.org, 2007). The coverage of their agenda soon expanded to talk about cooperation in various areas like politics, security, diplomacy and economics, and then later on extended the membership to Uzbekistan (GlobalSecurity.org, 2007). When asked in why Uzbekistan wanted to join the organization, the reply of President Karimov indicated that the primary reason was to protect the country from any possible aggressive move by the SCO (Nich ol, 2005). The Declaration on the Establishment of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization gave birth to the organization as it is known now (GlobalSecurity.org, 2007). Recently, however, there have been some developments in the SCO and some issues have risen from these developments. Firstly, the inclusion of other states to the membership of the SCO has caught the attention of a lot of scholars and players in the international field, not so much as a reaction to its expansion but to the profile of the members that wish to be included.   Iran, as a very controversial country in terms of its relationship with the rest of the world vis-à  -vis the United States of America, has been subjected to a series of deliberation (Brummer, 2007). The question of whether it will be granted membership in the SCO is something that has interested the keen observers of international relations. The main concern was what would be implications of Iran’s inclusion to the six-member association and consequently, how would the United States of America react to this inclusion. Secondly, post 9/11, the evaluation of the policies and reaction of the Shanghai Coopera tion Organization towards perceived (or otherwise) terrorist threats in their region, is something that the United States of America has concerned itself with (Nichol, 2005). The next section of this paper will juxtapose these recent events with the literature in International Relations—focusing on pertinent theories in the discipline that can explain the milestones in the development of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and using a comparative approach in discussing them. While it is not true that international phenomenon may only be explained by either realism or idealism, it is interesting to juxtapose discussions of different international events using the two because of the contrasts in their basic assumptions and tenets. Before this paper further discusses the developments in the SCO, it would first help to have a quick overview of the premises of each of these two theories, as these will be the tools to help understand and hopefully explain what transpired in these milestones and why they were so. Realism, as espoused by scholars like E.H. Carr, asserts that states are the main actors in world politics and that their interests lie in the pursuit of power at the expense of others (Mearsheimer, 2005). In a way, it more or less follows the logic of a zero-sum game, whereby one player’s gain is another player’s loss. The implication of this in policymaking is that decision-makers will most likely base their decisions on power calculations, as opposed to that of Idealism which focuses on the moral dimension and on liberal ideas for decision-making considerations (Mearsheimer, 2005). One of the canons of idealism, and most often cited by other scholars, is that of Immanuel Kant’s Perpetual Peace, whereby he asserts how states should act towards each other to achieve peace and prevent war (Kant, 1975). Writers, like Herz, argue that idealists believe that it is an imperative to change the world and champion the realization of a world turning into a secure global community—that would entail states abiding by international law and observing respect and recognition of each other (Hacke and Puglierin, 2007). The inception of the SCO may be seen as an idealist characterization of what international cooperation can do, whereby states seek to cooperate with each other to achieve a common goal. As stated earlier, when the SCO was established, the initial intent was to push the disarmament of the states in the border areas and to strengthen confidence-building. These reasons are liberal in nature—disarmament is antithetical to the realist push that states should be wary of other states and should protect themselves at any cost, and confidence-building is founded on trust and cooperation among partner states. While its inception is liberal in intent, as the time progresses, the developments in the SCO soon lend to realist assumptions. When it expanded membership, the intention of the new member (and even those seeking membership in status quo) may be contended to have realist bearings. As stated above, when Uzbekistan sought membership, it was not for cooperation nor was it based on tru st on other states but, instead, it was to ensure its own safety by establishing ties with China and the other states in the SCO. But the annexation of Uzbekistan is not the only development that lends to realist assumptions. Lately, Iran sought membership to the SCO as well, although it was not granted, there stands a chance that it can happen (Brummer, 2007). From a geopolitical perspective, Iran’s inclusion would have been a political statement saying that between the West and Iran, China and Russia would have taken the side of Iran (Brummer, 2007). This scenario can lend to realist assumptions by focusing on the intention of Iran to gain allies, against a perceived threat and clearly this puts security above all other concerns. It can also lend to liberal assumptions by focusing on the fact that Iran has chosen to be part of a collective effort in dealing with adversaries, as opposed to a unilateral aggressive approach that will more probably lead to war and heightened co nflict. The intention of China on forwarding the SCO agenda can also be explained using realism. There have been writings that talk about China’s effort to gain influence in its regional area and the intention behind the formation of the SCO may well be subsumed under this. In fact, there have been assertions that China has had the intention of challenging the unipolar order by taking on the leadership position of a anti-hegemonic coalition against the United States of America (Foot, 2006). Foot further stresses that China may well be building up its military and economic capabilities to challenge the USA (Foot, 2006). Taken from this angle, this obviously lends to realist assumptions of China using a formation of an international institution to forward its own interest—that is, to secure itself and to gain power by challenging the strength of the leading international player. But it can also be explained in a realist point of view, by showing how this is China’s way to achieve a level of security for itself, but at the same time, it may also be a form of cooperating with the international community. Terrorism being a global problem has also been addressed by the SCO by having its members hold anti-terrorist exercises to promote common security and to gain economic benefits as well (Foot, 2006). Taken from this context, it is logical to say that the SCO has acted in favor of liberal ideas of forwarding collective cooperation. China being one of the torchbearers of the SCO has also coursed cooperation through economic ties with the United States (Langlois and Langlois, 1996). Fighting against terrorism by joining forces with other states lends to liberal ideas of aiming for peace and preventing war, even if it sounds moralistic, and forwarding causes for global security through collective action. But just as the previous discussions, the actions of China towards terrorism may also lend to realist assumptions. One particular example is in reference to the efforts of the United States of America in its fight against terrorism. Post-September 11, the members of the Shanghai Cooperati on Organization did not have a collective response to the proposal of the United States, but instead its members acted individually (Nichol, 2005). This proves the realist argument that states, despite the existence of international institutions, will still act selfishly and in favor of its own national interests. It is obvious that China did not want to lend a hand to this specific United States policy, although it was willing to cooperate with its members in dealing with terrorism in their regional area. China’s definition of its national interests, in this context, was to ensure that terrorism does not thrive in its region, and yet not give the United States the leverage to dictate or influence its policies toward security. This shows how there can be an interplay in the way realism and idealism explains a certain international phenomenon. The next question is, how does this make sense and does this not mean that one of the two theories may lose its ability to explain things if the other can explain it the same phenomenon with equal validity? In seeking to explain political phenomenon, one can use theories as tools to help account for such events. In doing so, scholars may fall to the trap of focusing too much on dichotomies the North and South, Realism and Liberalism. While mutual exclusivity increases the validity of a theory (or a school of thought, for that matter) to distinguish it from other existing theories, this does not necessarily mean that the truth of the other is the shadow of the doubt for the other. In fact, if theories are made to help us explain political phenomenon, then perhaps it pays to have a more comprehensive picture by using the lens of various theories to account for an event. Does realism and liberalism really have to be categorized as contrasts or is it possible that they can complement each other? Lucian Ashworth even asserts that the debate between these two schools of thought may have never existed, as the liberals’ (often called â€Å"idealists† by later realist writers call them) writings were not really addressed properly by realists (Ashworth, 2006). This is not to point out that liberalism has lost its capacity to explain, but what Ashworth is pointing out, is the fact that the line establishing this dichotomy is not absolute, and hence, may be blurred. There have been points raised by writers like Joseph Nye Jr.,that lend to the idea that perhaps the two can complement each other. He argues that in cases when mutual interests or a possibility in the future may suggest that there are plenty of benefits to be had for cooperating, states may actually adopt new strategies in their quest to forward their interests (Nye, 1988). This point may be used to explain why the members of the SCO chose to cooperate in their fight against terrorism in their own region, but chose not to cooperate as a group with the United States of America. This is so, because states and the associations they form can define their interests differently and their interests can also change (Nye, 1988). In this example, what happened was what the other theory cannot account for; the other can shed light to. Realism cannot fully explain how states define their interests and how these interests change, but liberalism can answer that by pushing forward the concept of co llective security, albeit this term needs more discussion as to how it can be operationalized (Nye, 1988). To be blunt about it, the true value of theories being able to explain political phenomenon rests not solely on the exclusivity of their explanations, but on the comprehensiveness of its account. Following Hacke and Puglierin’s   point, the realism in its absolute form can only offer a naked struggle for power, and hence any sound political thought must have elements of both utopia and reality (Hacke and Puglierin, 2007). To have a more comprehensive account of why members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization behaved in certain ways, in certain points in time, one must go beyond the dichotomy of what is considered realist and idealist. Instead, it pays to keep in mind that using relevant aspects of theories (as tools) can help paint a more comprehensive picture that will help account for the explanation of a political phenomenon. REFERENCES Ashworth, Lucian M. â€Å"Where are the idealists in interwar International Relations?† Review of International Studies Vol.32, No. 2 (2006): 291-308. Brummer, Matthew. â€Å"The Shanghai Cooperation Organization.† Journal of International Affairs 60 (2007): 185-199. Foot, Rosemary. â€Å"Chinese strategies in a US-hegemonic global order: accommodating and hedging.† International Affairs Vol.82,   No.1 (2006): 77-94. GlobalSecurity. â€Å"Shanghai Cooperation Organization.† Military. 2007. 15 Oct. 2007 http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/int/sco.htm . Hacke Christian and Jana Puglierin. â€Å"John H. Herz: Balancing Utopia and Reality.† International Relations Vol.21, No.3 (2007): 367–382. Kant, Immanuel. â€Å"Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch 1975†. 2007. 15 Oct 2007 http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/kant/kant1.htm Langlois, Catherine and Jean-Pierre P. Langlois. â€Å"Rationality in International Relations: A Game-Theoretic and Empirical Study of the US-China Case.† World Politics Vol.48 (1996): 358–90. Mearsheimer, John J. â€Å"E.H. Carr vs. Idealism: The Battle Rages On.† International Relations   Vol.19, No.2 (2005): 139-152. Nichol, Jim. â€Å"Central Asia’s Security: Issues and Implications for U.S. interests.† CRS Report for Congress. (2005): 1-49. Nye, Joseph S. Jr. â€Å"Review: Neorealism and Neoliberalism.† World Politics Vol. 40, No. 2. (1988): 235-251. The Sucessful Developement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Essay Example The Sucessful Developement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Essay To start off this essay, try painting a picture about a certain neighborhood. This neighborhood does not have any overarching governing body, nor is there a single overarching security force. In short, this neighborhood’s residents are left to fend for themselves. Assuming that there has been an unfortunate event in the neighborhood, whereby one house was broken into by some thieves, what could possibly be the reaction of the residents in that community? Will they seek to protect their own homes and not bother to care about their neighbors? Will they protect their homes and be malicious of their neighbors, thinking they could have been conspirators to the crime? Or will they work together and cooperate in one collective effort to solve the case and to protect themselves? This is an analogous picture of what the international realm may look like for scholars and the questions posted are classic questions that theories of International Relations seek to shed light into. In an international world that is ruled by anarchy, it has been a classic notion that states are left to fend for themselves. In this scenario, security of states is of great importance, if not the outright priority. As international events unfold, different scholars seek to explain the various international phenomena by choosing a theoretical framework that will best explain and account for the phenomenon they choose to account for Be that as it may, what this paper will aim to discuss is the recent development is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), as an association of states, by using the pertinent theoretical frameworks in the discipline of International Relations.   The first part will discuss a brief introduction of the Shanghai Cooperation and what are the recent developments pertaining to it, while the second part of the paper will discuss briefly what theories in International Relations exist that may be of use to the discussion of the recent events in SCO. Using the chosen theories, this paper will discuss how the core tenets of such theories can possibly explain the recent developments in the SCO for example, using a certain theory, why would a certain actor in the SCO story act this way and what were the interests of that actor etcetera. We will write a custom essay sample on The Sucessful Developement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on The Sucessful Developement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on The Sucessful Developement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer A lot of international organizations exist in status quo. The reasons for their establishment may vary from one case to another. And for scholars, it is interesting to take a look at this phenomenon in the context of the emerging new world order. With the end of the Cold War, it is interesting to observe how states and other emerging world players will configure themselves. In line with recent developments, the formation of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is worthy of scholarly attention. Upon its formation on June 15 2001, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization has six permanent members: the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Tajikistan, the Republic of Uzbekistan and the Russian Federation (Brummer, 2007). It is an international organization through its founding members that cover about three fifths of Eurasia (GlobalSecurity.org, 2007). This organization or association of states, though fairly young compared to other international organizations has turned out to be an influential political, economic and security international player (Brummer, 2007). The SCO had a predecessor and it was called, the Shanghai Five mechanism, which came from the five of the, now, six members’ (except the Republic of Uzbekistan) effort to further disarmament in the border regions and to strengthen confidence-building (GlobalSecurity.org, 2007). Upon the signing of the Treaty on Deepening Military Trust in Border Regions and the Treaty on Reduction of Military Forces in Border Regions by these five member states, what started off as an annual meeting of their leaders ended up to be a regular practice (GlobalSecurity.org, 2007). The coverage of their agenda soon expanded to talk about cooperation in various areas like politics, security, diplomacy and economics, and then later on extended the membership to Uzbekistan (GlobalSecurity.org, 2007). When asked in why Uzbekistan wanted to join the organization, the reply of President Karimov indicated that the primary reason was to protect the country from any possible aggressive move by the SCO (Nich ol, 2005). The Declaration on the Establishment of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization gave birth to the organization as it is known now (GlobalSecurity.org, 2007). Recently, however, there have been some developments in the SCO and some issues have risen from these developments. Firstly, the inclusion of other states to the membership of the SCO has caught the attention of a lot of scholars and players in the international field, not so much as a reaction to its expansion but to the profile of the members that wish to be included.   Iran, as a very controversial country in terms of its relationship with the rest of the world vis-à  -vis the United States of America, has been subjected to a series of deliberation (Brummer, 2007). The question of whether it will be granted membership in the SCO is something that has interested the keen observers of international relations. The main concern was what would be implications of Iran’s inclusion to the six-member association and consequently, how would the United States of America react to this inclusion. Secondly, post 9/11, the evaluation of the policies and reaction of the Shanghai Coopera tion Organization towards perceived (or otherwise) terrorist threats in their region, is something that the United States of America has concerned itself with (Nichol, 2005). The next section of this paper will juxtapose these recent events with the literature in International Relations—focusing on pertinent theories in the discipline that can explain the milestones in the development of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and using a comparative approach in discussing them. While it is not true that international phenomenon may only be explained by either realism or idealism, it is interesting to juxtapose discussions of different international events using the two because of the contrasts in their basic assumptions and tenets. Before this paper further discusses the developments in the SCO, it would first help to have a quick overview of the premises of each of these two theories, as these will be the tools to help understand and hopefully explain what transpired in these milestones and why they were so. Realism, as espoused by scholars like E.H. Carr, asserts that states are the main actors in world politics and that their interests lie in the pursuit of power at the expense of others (Mearsheimer, 2005). In a way, it more or less follows the logic of a zero-sum game, whereby one player’s gain is another player’s loss. The implication of this in policymaking is that decision-makers will most likely base their decisions on power calculations, as opposed to that of Idealism which focuses on the moral dimension and on liberal ideas for decision-making considerations (Mearsheimer, 2005). One of the canons of idealism, and most often cited by other scholars, is that of Immanuel Kant’s Perpetual Peace, whereby he asserts how states should act towards each other to achieve peace and prevent war (Kant, 1975). Writers, like Herz, argue that idealists believe that it is an imperative to change the world and champion the realization of a world turning into a secure global community—that would entail states abiding by international law and observing respect and recognition of each other (Hacke and Puglierin, 2007). The inception of the SCO may be seen as an idealist characterization of what international cooperation can do, whereby states seek to cooperate with each other to achieve a common goal. As stated earlier, when the SCO was established, the initial intent was to push the disarmament of the states in the border areas and to strengthen confidence-building. These reasons are liberal in nature—disarmament is antithetical to the realist push that states should be wary of other states and should protect themselves at any cost, and confidence-building is founded on trust and cooperation among partner states. While its inception is liberal in intent, as the time progresses, the developments in the SCO soon lend to realist assumptions. When it expanded membership, the intention of the new member (and even those seeking membership in status quo) may be contended to have realist bearings. As stated above, when Uzbekistan sought membership, it was not for cooperation nor was it based on tru st on other states but, instead, it was to ensure its own safety by establishing ties with China and the other states in the SCO. But the annexation of Uzbekistan is not the only development that lends to realist assumptions. Lately, Iran sought membership to the SCO as well, although it was not granted, there stands a chance that it can happen (Brummer, 2007). From a geopolitical perspective, Iran’s inclusion would have been a political statement saying that between the West and Iran, China and Russia would have taken the side of Iran (Brummer, 2007). This scenario can lend to realist assumptions by focusing on the intention of Iran to gain allies, against a perceived threat and clearly this puts security above all other concerns. It can also lend to liberal assumptions by focusing on the fact that Iran has chosen to be part of a collective effort in dealing with adversaries, as opposed to a unilateral aggressive approach that will more probably lead to war and heightened co nflict. The intention of China on forwarding the SCO agenda can also be explained using realism. There have been writings that talk about China’s effort to gain influence in its regional area and the intention behind the formation of the SCO may well be subsumed under this. In fact, there have been assertions that China has had the intention of challenging the unipolar order by taking on the leadership position of a anti-hegemonic coalition against the United States of America (Foot, 2006). Foot further stresses that China may well be building up its military and economic capabilities to challenge the USA (Foot, 2006). Taken from this angle, this obviously lends to realist assumptions of China using a formation of an international institution to forward its own interest—that is, to secure itself and to gain power by challenging the strength of the leading international player. But it can also be explained in a realist point of view, by showing how this is China’s way to achieve a level of security for itself, but at the same time, it may also be a form of cooperating with the international community. Terrorism being a global problem has also been addressed by the SCO by having its members hold anti-terrorist exercises to promote common security and to gain economic benefits as well (Foot, 2006). Taken from this context, it is logical to say that the SCO has acted in favor of liberal ideas of forwarding collective cooperation. China being one of the torchbearers of the SCO has also coursed cooperation through economic ties with the United States (Langlois and Langlois, 1996). Fighting against terrorism by joining forces with other states lends to liberal ideas of aiming for peace and preventing war, even if it sounds moralistic, and forwarding causes for global security through collective action. But just as the previous discussions, the actions of China towards terrorism may also lend to realist assumptions. One particular example is in reference to the efforts of the United States of America in its fight against terrorism. Post-September 11, the members of the Shanghai Cooperati on Organization did not have a collective response to the proposal of the United States, but instead its members acted individually (Nichol, 2005). This proves the realist argument that states, despite the existence of international institutions, will still act selfishly and in favor of its own national interests. It is obvious that China did not want to lend a hand to this specific United States policy, although it was willing to cooperate with its members in dealing with terrorism in their regional area. China’s definition of its national interests, in this context, was to ensure that terrorism does not thrive in its region, and yet not give the United States the leverage to dictate or influence its policies toward security. This shows how there can be an interplay in the way realism and idealism explains a certain international phenomenon. The next question is, how does this make sense and does this not mean that one of the two theories may lose its ability to explain things if the other can explain it the same phenomenon with equal validity? In seeking to explain political phenomenon, one can use theories as tools to help account for such events. In doing so, scholars may fall to the trap of focusing too much on dichotomies the North and South, Realism and Liberalism. While mutual exclusivity increases the validity of a theory (or a school of thought, for that matter) to distinguish it from other existing theories, this does not necessarily mean that the truth of the other is the shadow of the doubt for the other. In fact, if theories are made to help us explain political phenomenon, then perhaps it pays to have a more comprehensive picture by using the lens of various theories to account for an event. Does realism and liberalism really have to be categorized as contrasts or is it possible that they can complement each other? Lucian Ashworth even asserts that the debate between these two schools of thought may have never existed, as the liberals’ (often called â€Å"idealists† by later realist writers call them) writings were not really addressed properly by realists (Ashworth, 2006). This is not to point out that liberalism has lost its capacity to explain, but what Ashworth is pointing out, is the fact that the line establishing this dichotomy is not absolute, and hence, may be blurred. There have been points raised by writers like Joseph Nye Jr.,that lend to the idea that perhaps the two can complement each other. He argues that in cases when mutual interests or a possibility in the future may suggest that there are plenty of benefits to be had for cooperating, states may actually adopt new strategies in their quest to forward their interests (Nye, 1988). This point may be used to explain why the members of the SCO chose to cooperate in their fight against terrorism in their own region, but chose not to cooperate as a group with the United States of America. This is so, because states and the associations they form can define their interests differently and their interests can also change (Nye, 1988). In this example, what happened was what the other theory cannot account for; the other can shed light to. Realism cannot fully explain how states define their interests and how these interests change, but liberalism can answer that by pushing forward the concept of co llective security, albeit this term needs more discussion as to how it can be operationalized (Nye, 1988). To be blunt about it, the true value of theories being able to explain political phenomenon rests not solely on the exclusivity of their explanations, but on the comprehensiveness of its account. Following Hacke and Puglierin’s   point, the realism in its absolute form can only offer a naked struggle for power, and hence any sound political thought must have elements of both utopia and reality (Hacke and Puglierin, 2007). To have a more comprehensive account of why members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization behaved in certain ways, in certain points in time, one must go beyond the dichotomy of what is considered realist and idealist. Instead, it pays to keep in mind that using relevant aspects of theories (as tools) can help paint a more comprehensive picture that will help account for the explanation of a political phenomenon. REFERENCES Ashworth, Lucian M. â€Å"Where are the idealists in interwar International Relations?† Review of International Studies Vol.32, No. 2 (2006): 291-308. Brummer, Matthew. â€Å"The Shanghai Cooperation Organization.† Journal of International Affairs 60 (2007): 185-199. Foot, Rosemary. â€Å"Chinese strategies in a US-hegemonic global order: accommodating and hedging.† International Affairs Vol.82,   No.1 (2006): 77-94. GlobalSecurity. â€Å"Shanghai Cooperation Organization.† Military. 2007. 15 Oct. 2007 http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/int/sco.htm . Hacke Christian and Jana Puglierin. â€Å"John H. Herz: Balancing Utopia and Reality.† International Relations Vol.21, No.3 (2007): 367–382. Kant, Immanuel. â€Å"Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch 1975†. 2007. 15 Oct 2007 http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/kant/kant1.htm Langlois, Catherine and Jean-Pierre P. Langlois. â€Å"Rationality in International Relations: A Game-Theoretic and Empirical Study of the US-China Case.† World Politics Vol.48 (1996): 358–90. Mearsheimer, John J. â€Å"E.H. Carr vs. Idealism: The Battle Rages On.† International Relations   Vol.19, No.2 (2005): 139-152. Nichol, Jim. â€Å"Central Asia’s Security: Issues and Implications for U.S. interests.† CRS Report for Congress. (2005): 1-49. Nye, Joseph S. Jr. â€Å"Review: Neorealism and Neoliberalism.† World Politics Vol. 40, No. 2. (1988): 235-251.