Comparative views of Globalisation: realism vs idealism applied in the context of LDCs.

This thesis aims to investigate the duality of actions taken by states in international relations when dealing with Least Developed Countries (LDCs). On the surface, states often project their involvement as humanitarian aid, motivated by idealistic principles aimed at assisting and uplifting these underprivileged nations. Nevertheless, a closer examination reveals that these actions also serve to maintain power dynamics and control over the LDCs. This research delves into two general theories, realism and idealism, to shed light on the underlying motivations behind state actions towards LDCs and the latter’s ultimate dependence on other states. The first section provides a comprehensive comparison of the two general theories of international politics: realism and idealism. It traces the roots of the realist tradition and explores twentieth- century classical realism and neorealism, along with objections raised against neorealism. Additionally, different approaches to idealism are examined, spanning from the interwar period to the present day, including criticisms and limitations. The second section focuses on the application of realism and idealism in the context of LDCs. It presents an analysis of LDCs, highlighting key data to understand their socio-economic challenges and vulnerabilities. The lens of idealism is then employed to examine how states' actions towards LDCs are driven by humanitarian ideals, often facilitated through international organizations like the United Nations. Conversely, realism is utilized to uncover the underlying power dynamics and control mechanisms that states exert over LDCs, which are often disguised behind humanitarian motives.