Introduction

• ‘National Interest’ is a key concept in International Relations.
• All the nations are always engaged in the process of fulfilling or securing the goals of their national interests.
• The foreign policy of each nation is formulated on the basis of its national interest, and it is always at work for securing its goals.
• It is a universally accepted right of each state to secure its national interests.
• A state always tries to justify its actions on the basis of its national interest.
• The behaviour of a state is always conditioned and governed by its national interests.
• “The meaning of national interest is survival—the protection of physical, political and cultural identity against encroachments by other nation-states”—Morgenthau.
• Power defined in terms of national interest gives meaning to international politics. This realist proposition, propounded by Morgenthau, as the second and most important signpost of realpolitik may seem to be a little exaggerated but, nevertheless, it is true to some extent.
• It is the position of a particular state in the international arena by virtue of its national power that determines how it is going to exercise its will over others.
• When the question of will of a state comes into consideration, undoubtedly, the concept of national interest figures in one’s own idea.
• But to pinpoint at certain basic national interests of any particular state it becomes very difficult.
• For, as Frankel wrote ‘National interest’ is a singularly vague concept. It assumes a variety of meanings in the various contexts in which it is used and, despite its fundamental importance, these meanings cannot be reconciled. Hence, no agreement can be reached about its ultimate meaning.
• However, certain attempts have been made to provide a bare meaning of the concept. This has been tried from subjective and objective angles.
• The former interprets national interest as “a constantly changing pluralistic set of objective preferences”, the latter assumes that national interest can be objectively defined, or at least, can be examined with the help of some objectively definable criteria.
• Rosenau had proposed a distinction between the use of the concept for the purpose of political analysis and that of political action.
• He was of the opinion that as an analytical tool, it can be employed to explain or evaluate the sources of adequacy of a nation’s foreign policy, and as an instrument of political action, it can serve as a means for justifying, denouncing or proposing policies.
• Frankel proposed a classification of the uses of the term ‘national interest’ into ‘aspirational’, ‘operational’, ‘explanatory’ and ‘polemical’.
• On the aspirational level, national interest refers to some ideal set of goals, which the state would like to realize, if possible.
• At the operational level, national interest is the sum total of interests and policies actually pursued.
• On the ‘explanatory’ and ‘polemical’ level, in political argument, the concept of national interest is used to explain, evaluate, rationalize or criticize foreign policy.
• However, a powerful objective exposition of national interest was given by Morgenthau.
• Though highly criticized, yet not without value and relevance, he contended that statesmen think and act according to interest defined in terms of power.
• The content of national interest is determined by the political traditions and the total cultural context within which a nation operates.
• Inherent in the meaning of national interest is the minimum requirement of states to protect their physical, political and cultural identity against aggressions by other states.
• Therefore, the residual meaning inherent in national interest is ‘survival’.
• ‘Survival’ involves preservation of physical identity (maintenance of territorial integrity), political identity (preservation of existing politico-economic regimes), and cultural identity (conservation of ethnic, religious, linguistic and historical norms found in a state).
• From these general objectives, Morgenthau argues that statesmen derive their specific policies which may range from cooperative to conflictive policies like competitive armaments, balance of power, foreign-aid, alliances, subversion and economic and propaganda warfare.
• On the whole, as Clinton points out ‘the national interest’ refers to a general regulative principle of diplomacy, which represents the common good of the society, in its relations with other national units, as the end of diplomatic action.
• But the usage of the term ‘the national interests’ refers to myriad narrower goals which serve the broader end of ‘the national interest’ by maintaining or increasing the power of the state.
• National interests may range from vital or primary interests to secondary interests and again from permanent to variable interests.
• There can also be general interests and specific interests.
• Simultaneously, there can be in the international arena a play between identical interests, complementary interests and conflicting interests.
• The main purpose of the whole idea of national interest is in giving direction to long-term objectives of the foreign policy of a state and giving meaning to its actions in a short-term context.
• In a very generic sense, national interests are “that which are deemed by a particular state (actor) to be a…desirable goal.”
• Lerche define it as “the general, long-term, and continuing purpose which the state, the nation, and the government all see themselves as serving.”
• Dyke defines it as that which states seek to protect or achieve in relation to each other.
• According to Charles Beard (marxist), this can never be an objective or quantifiable process because interests cannot be separated from human motive and concern. There is no such thing as an objective reality called as the national interest. Consideration of the notional interest is a subjective assessment.
• According to Beard, interest, subjectively considered, may take the form of an idea, and every idea pertaining to earthly affairs is attached to some interest considered as material thing and is affiliated with social relationships. There are no ideas without interest, and no interest without ideas.
• This claim has important implications for all analyses of the national interest which attempt to disaggregate its component parts. It represents a challenge to claims made by classical realists that permanent, fixed national interest can be identified as objectives which should determine the conduct of the foreign policy of states. It also means that the national interest cannot be reduced to its component parts for scientific measurement and assessment. Any analysis of the national interest must entail an inquiry into the ideas which express and represent the interest to be considered.
• For critical perspectives of the national interest, the claim that a complex society can have common interest is largely a myth which serves the interest of dominant groups.

Meaning and Definition

• National Interest is a vague and ambiguous term that carries a meaning according to the context in which it is used.
• Statesmen and policy-makers have always used it in ways suitable to them and to their objective of justifying the actions of their states.
• Hitler justified expansionist policies in the name of “German national interests.”
• The US presidents have always justified their decisions to develop more destructive weapons in the interest of “US national interest.”
• To build up a strong nuclear base at Diego Garcia was justified by the USA in the name of meeting the challenge posed by erstwhile USSR as well as for protecting the US interests in the Indian Ocean.
• During 1979–89, the erstwhile USSR justified its intervention in Afghanistan in the name of “Soviet national interests.”
• China justified its border disputes with India and the Soviet Union in the name of attempts to secure the national interests of China.
• Now the P-5 countries talk of Non-proliferation and arms control in terms of the national interests of all the nations.
• All these and many more examples can be quoted to stress the ambiguity that surrounds the concept of National Interest.
• This ambiguity hinders the process of formulating a universally accepted definition of National Interest.
• However, several scholars have tried to define National Interest.
• Definition of National Interest:
  1. National Interest means: “The general, long term and continuing purpose which the state, the nation, and the government all see themselves as serving.” —Charles Lerche and Abdul
  2. National Interest is: “What a nation feels to be necessary to its security and well being … National interest reflects the general and continuing ends for which a nation acts.” —Brookings Institution
  3. “National Interest is, that which states seek to protect or achieve in relation to each other. It means desires on the part of sovereign states.” —Vernon Von Dyke
  4.  “The meaning of national interest is survival—the protection of physical, political and cultural identity against encroachments by other nation-states”. —Morgenthau
  5. National Interest means: “The values, desires and interests which states seek to protect or achieve in relation to each other” “desires on the part of sovereign states”. —V.V. Dyke
• National Interests can be defined as the claims, objectives, goals, demands and interests which a nation always tries to preserve, protect, defend and secure in relations with other nations.