Summary International Relations Theory

‌

‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌

INTERNATIONAL‌‌RELATIONS‌‌THEORY‌ ‌
2019-2020‌ ‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌
‌

BACHELOR‌‌SOCIAL‌‌SCIENCES‌‌ PROF.‌‌DRIES‌‌LESAGE‌ ‌
D.L.Y.‌ ‌
‌

,International‌‌Relations‌‌Theory‌ ‌ ‌ ‌D.L.Y.‌‌ ‌

CHAPTER‌‌ONE‌ ‌
INTRODUCTION‌ ‌



1.‌‌THEORISING‌‌THE‌‌SYRIAN‌‌WAR‌‌(2011‌‌-‌‌?)‌‌ ‌

1.1.‌‌WHY‌‌HAS‌‌THE‌‌UNSC‌‌NOT‌‌STOPPED‌‌THE‌‌WAR?‌ ‌

● UNSC‌‌(United‌‌Nations‌‌Security‌‌Council)‌‌watch‌‌over‌‌war‌‌and‌‌peace‌‌ ‌
○ Impose‌‌peace‌‌by‌‌legally‌‌binding‌‌decisions‌‌ ‌
● Fails‌‌to‌‌impose‌‌peace‌‌in‌‌Syria‌‌ ‌
● Russian‌‌VETO‌ ‌
○ Russia‌ ‌unhappy‌ ‌with‌ ‌foreign‌ ‌intervention‌ ‌after‌ ‌what‌ ‌happened‌ ‌with‌ ‌the‌ ‌Western‌ ‌intervention‌ ‌in‌‌
Libya‌‌and‌‌what‌‌happened‌‌with‌‌Khadafi‌‌ ‌
■ Greenlighted‌‌UNSC‌‌mandate‌‌regarding‌‌intervention‌‌in‌‌making‌‌Libya‌‌a‌‌“no‌‌flight‌‌zone”‌ ‌
■ Killed‌‌in‌‌NATO‌‌mission‌ ‌
■ Ended‌‌up‌‌in‌‌regime‌‌change‌‌ ‌
○ Principles‌‌problem‌‌(also‌‌CN)‌‌ ‌

1.2.‌‌WHY‌‌DO‌‌RUSSIA‌‌AND‌‌IRAN‌‌SUPPORT‌‌ASSAD?‌ ‌

Russia‌ ‌ Iran‌ ‌

● Navy‌‌in‌‌Mediterranean‌‌ ‌ ● Backing‌‌Assad‌‌ ‌
● Influence‌ ‌in‌ ‌Syria‌ ‌(competition)‌ ‌after‌ ‌Syria‌ ‌cosied‌‌ ● Logistical,‌‌technical‌‌and‌‌financial‌‌support‌‌ ‌
up‌‌to‌‌RU‌‌and‌‌CN‌‌instead‌‌of‌‌the‌‌West‌ ‌ ● National‌‌interests‌
● Assad‌ ‌important‌ ‌for‌ ‌world‌ ‌hegemony,‌ ‌RU‌ ‌cannot‌‌ ● Syria‌‌is‌‌the‌‌only‌‌ally‌‌of‌‌Iran‌ ‌
lose‌‌SY‌‌to‌‌the‌‌West‌‌ ‌
● Putin‌ ‌must‌ ‌protect‌ ‌Assad‌ ‌at‌ ‌all‌ ‌costs‌ ‌in‌ ‌order‌ ‌to‌‌
show‌‌his‌‌capabilities‌ ‌
● Putin’s‌‌image‌‌and‌‌Russia’s‌‌prestige‌‌are‌‌at‌‌stake‌‌ ‌
● Losing‌ ‌SY‌ ‌as‌ ‌ally‌ ‌would‌‌be‌‌harmful‌‌since‌‌they‌‌lost‌‌
numerous‌ ‌allies‌ ‌in‌ ‌the‌ ‌recent‌ ‌past‌ ‌(Baltic‌ ‌states‌‌
after‌ ‌collapse‌ ‌of‌ ‌Soviet‌ ‌Union,‌ ‌Hussein‌ ‌of‌ ‌Iraq,‌‌
Malasovich‌ ‌of‌ ‌Yugoslavia,‌ ‌Yanukovych‌ ‌of‌ ‌Ukraine‌‌
and‌‌Khadafi‌‌in‌‌a‌‌way)‌ ‌
● Stakes‌ ‌increase,‌ ‌RU‌ ‌increases‌ ‌effort‌ ‌to‌ ‌protect‌‌
remaining‌‌allies‌‌(military‌‌aid,‌‌arms‌‌trade)‌ ‌
● From‌ ‌2015‌ ‌on,‌ ‌RU‌ ‌army‌ ‌enters‌‌SY,‌‌creates‌‌tipping‌‌
point‌‌in‌‌the‌‌war‌‌by‌‌backing‌‌Assad‌‌(national‌‌interest‌‌
or‌‌prolonging‌‌war?)‌ ‌

‌‌

1‌ ‌

,International‌‌Relations‌‌Theory‌ ‌ ‌ ‌D.L.Y.‌‌ ‌

● Putin‌‌fears‌‌mass‌‌protests‌‌(fueled‌‌by‌‌the‌‌West)‌‌in‌‌Moscow‌‌against‌‌Putin‌‌regime‌‌ ‌
● Competition:‌‌realism‌‌ ‌
○ Based‌‌on‌‌idea‌‌“you‌‌fight‌‌or‌‌you‌‌perish”‌‌ ‌
○ Great‌‌powers‌‌have‌‌to‌‌rely‌‌on‌‌themselves‌‌(and‌‌allies)‌‌ ‌
○ Opposed‌‌theories:‌‌security‌‌dilemma‌‌(would‌‌still‌‌back‌‌Assad),‌‌RU‌‌always‌‌been‌‌expansionist‌‌(strategic‌‌
culture)‌ ‌
● Geopolitical‌‌reality‌ ‌
○ Geopolitics‌‌in‌‌the‌‌strict‌‌sense:‌‌relations‌‌between‌‌geographical‌‌conditions‌‌and‌‌international‌‌relations‌‌ ‌
○ Russia‌‌has‌‌always‌‌portrayed‌‌interest‌‌in‌‌the‌‌Mediterranean‌‌area,‌‌Indian‌‌Ocean‌‌(Afghanistan,‌‌Iran,‌‌…),‌‌
access‌‌to‌‌high‌‌seas,‌‌buffer‌‌zones‌‌(e‌ .g.‌‌Napoleon’s‌‌incursions‌‌via‌‌DE‌)‌‌ ‌
○ Russia‌ ‌has‌ ‌always‌ ‌had‌ ‌the‌ ‌poisonous‌ ‌idea‌ ‌that‌ ‌they‌ ‌were‌ ‌entitled‌ ‌to‌ ‌these‌ ‌buffer‌ ‌zones‌ ‌in‌‌other‌‌
countries,‌‌s.a.‌‌Baltics‌ ‌
○ Problematic‌‌mindset‌‌from‌‌early‌‌tsars‌‌up‌‌until‌‌Putin‌‌ ‌

3.‌‌WHAT‌‌DO‌‌THE‌‌US,‌‌GULF‌‌STATES‌‌AND‌‌TURKEY‌‌WANT?‌‌ ‌

US‌ ‌ Gulf‌‌States‌ ‌ Turkey‌ ‌

● Support‌ ‌Syrian‌ ‌Kurds‌ ‌(YPG)‌‌ ● Aid‌ ‌anti-Assad‌ ‌as‌ ‌opposed‌ ‌to‌‌ ● Supported‌‌Syrian‌‌rebels‌‌against‌‌
who‌ ‌rebel‌ ‌against‌ ‌Assad‌ ‌until‌‌ Iran‌‌(their‌‌rivals)‌ ‌ Assad‌ ‌(national‌ ‌interest‌ ‌or‌‌just‌‌
2017‌ ‌ ● Balancing‌ ‌choices‌ ‌competitors:‌‌ prolonging‌‌war?)‌ ‌
○ Provided‌ ‌reconstruction‌‌aid‌‌ equal‌‌positions,‌‌more‌‌powerful‌‌ ● Receive‌‌a‌‌lot‌‌of‌‌Syrian‌‌refugees‌‌ ‌
to‌‌SY‌‌ ‌ ⇒‌‌existential‌‌interests‌‌Realism‌ ‌ ● If‌ ‌Arab‌ ‌spring‌‌went‌‌as‌‌Erdogan‌‌
○ Unclear‌‌intentions‌ ‌ ● Religion‌‌aspect,‌‌but‌‌not‌‌key‌‌ ‌ wanted,‌ ‌increase‌ ‌prestige,‌‌
● Provided‌ ‌air‌ ‌support‌ ‌and‌‌ ● More‌ ‌pragmatic‌ ‌perspective:‌‌ demoralise‌ ‌secularists‌ ‌in‌ ‌TR,‌‌
weapons‌ ‌to‌ ‌the‌ ‌Syrian‌‌ religious‌ ‌divide‌ ‌makes‌ ‌it‌ ‌more‌‌ military‌‌allies‌‌in‌‌region‌‌ ‌
Democratic‌ ‌Forces‌ ‌(ally‌ ‌of‌‌ difficult,‌ ‌but‌ ‌is‌ ‌not‌ ‌the‌ ‌main‌‌ ● Within‌ ‌NATO,‌ ‌TR‌ ‌combatting‌‌
Kurds‌ ‌and‌ ‌Arab‌ ‌forces‌ ‌fighting‌‌ reason‌‌of‌‌the‌‌conflict‌ ‌ forces‌ ‌that‌ ‌are‌ ‌helping‌ ‌to‌‌
ISIS)‌ ‌ ● More‌ ‌elaboration‌ ‌is‌ ‌possible:‌‌ overthrow‌‌Daesh‌ ‌
● Targets‌ ‌IS‌ ‌and‌ ‌other‌ ‌extremist‌‌ sociological‌ ‌aspect‌ ‌of‌ ‌the‌‌ ○ Other‌ ‌side‌ ‌of‌ ‌the‌ ‌story:‌‌
groups‌‌ ‌ division‌ ‌between‌ ‌secularism‌‌ defense‌ ‌mechanism‌ ‌not‌‌
● US‌ ‌wants‌ ‌to‌ ‌block‌ ‌Iran‌ ‌and‌‌ and‌‌islam‌ ‌ helping‌ ‌TR‌ ‌in‌ ‌combatting‌
Lebanon‌ ‌(shia‌ ‌militia‌‌ ● Want‌‌to‌‌control‌‌the‌‌Arab‌‌world‌‌ these‌‌forces‌ ‌
Hezbollah)‌ ‌→‌ ‌threatening‌ ‌US’‌‌ in‌ ‌their‌ ‌own‌ ‌way‌ ‌(hegemonic‌‌ ○ Opportunity‌ ‌for‌ ‌Putin‌ ‌→‌‌
ally‌‌Israel‌‌ ‌ world‌‌order)‌‌ ‌ weaken‌ ‌bond‌ ‌between‌ ‌TR‌‌
● Middle‌‌East‌‌has‌‌a‌‌terrorist‌‌issue‌‌ and‌ ‌the‌ ‌other‌ ‌NATO‌‌
(Sunni-Shia‌ ‌divide)‌ ‌→‌ ‌if‌ ‌the‌‌ countries‌ ‌
Gulf‌ ‌states‌ ‌gain‌ ‌control‌ ‌over‌‌ ‌
this‌ ‌area‌ ‌they‌ ‌can‌ ‌widen‌ ‌their‌‌
sphere‌‌of‌‌influence‌ ‌ ‌

‌

2‌ ‌

, International‌‌Relations‌‌Theory‌ ‌ ‌ ‌D.L.Y.‌‌ ‌

Numerous‌‌perspectives‌‌of‌‌the‌‌Syrian‌‌conflict‌ ‌

● Dimension‌‌1/core:‌‌anti-Assad‌‌rebels‌‌fight‌‌Assad‌‌regime:‌‌who‌‌are‌‌they?‌‌Jihadi‌‌elements‌‌(managed‌‌to‌‌gain‌‌more‌‌
control‌‌as‌‌the‌‌war‌‌dragged‌‌on,‌‌groups‌‌like‌‌Al‌‌Nusra‌‌gained‌‌ground‌‌in‌‌what‌‌started‌‌as‌‌the‌‌core‌‌conflict)‌ ‌
● Dimension‌‌2:‌c‌ ountry‌‌destabilised,‌‌Kurdish‌‌see‌‌an‌‌opportunity‌‌for‌‌dream‌‌of‌‌their‌‌own‌‌state‌‌ ‌
● Dimension‌ ‌3:‌ ‌emergence‌ ‌Daesh‌ ‌as‌ ‌benevolent‌ ‌for‌ ‌Assad‌ ‌(coexistence)‌ ‌→‌ ‌association‌ ‌of‌ ‌Daesh‌ ‌with‌ ‌the‌‌
rebellion,‌ ‌framed‌ ‌as‌‌problem‌‌for‌‌the‌‌whole‌‌world‌‌→‌‌effective:‌‌after‌‌terrorist‌‌attacks‌‌in‌‌Paris,‌‌priority‌‌shifted‌‌
towards‌‌combatting‌‌Daesh‌ ‌


1.4.‌‌COULD‌‌A‌‌MILITARY‌‌INTERVENTION‌‌AGAINST‌‌ASSAD‌‌EVER‌‌WORK?‌ ‌

● Looking‌‌at‌‌the‌‌physical‌‌military‌‌dimension:‌‌Hussein‌‌and‌‌Khadafi‌‌were‌‌isolated,‌‌but‌‌Assad‌‌is‌‌not‌‌ ‌
● Russia‌‌supported‌‌Assad‌‌with‌‌sophisticated‌‌arms‌‌and‌‌missiles‌‌ ‌
○ If‌‌the‌‌West‌‌would‌‌attack,‌‌their‌‌planes‌‌would‌‌be‌‌shot‌‌in‌‌the‌‌air‌‌because‌‌Russia‌‌provided‌‌Syria‌‌with‌‌the‌‌
equipment‌‌(as‌‌opposed‌‌to‌‌unequipped‌‌Iraq‌‌and‌‌Libya)‌ ‌
● Russia‌‌gained‌‌time‌‌to‌‌throw‌‌option‌‌of‌‌intervention‌‌off‌‌the‌‌table‌‌ ‌

1.5.‌‌WAS‌‌IT‌‌POSSIBLE‌‌TO‌‌PREVENT‌‌THE‌‌CONFLICT‌‌OR‌‌MAKE‌‌IT‌‌STOP‌‌EARLIER?‌‌ ‌

● Russia‌‌didn’t‌‌want‌‌Syria‌‌to‌‌be‌‌influenced‌‌by‌‌the‌‌West‌‌or‌‌destabilised‌‌ ‌
○ Perhaps‌ ‌if‌ ‌Syria‌ ‌remained‌ ‌under‌ ‌RU‌ ‌influence‌ ‌if‌ ‌RU‌ ‌prevented‌ ‌Assad‌ ‌from‌ ‌mass‌ ‌atrocities,‌ ‌there‌‌
would‌‌be‌‌an‌‌exit‌‌strategy‌‌possible‌‌for‌‌Assad‌ ‌
○ In‌‌this‌‌case,‌‌Putin‌‌would‌‌not‌‌care‌‌about‌‌Assad‌‌as‌‌a‌‌person‌‌but‌‌only‌‌about‌‌the‌‌national‌‌interest‌‌in‌‌SY‌‌ ‌
● Lacking:‌‌great‌‌power‌‌concert‌‌→‌‌1815-1850s‌‌(Crimean‌‌war):‌‌Concert‌‌of‌‌Europe‌‌(RU,‌‌Prussia,‌‌UK,‌‌FR,‌‌AT)‌‌ ‌
○ 21st‌ ‌Century:‌ ‌no‌ ‌concert‌ ‌of‌ ‌great‌ ‌powers‌ ‌with‌ ‌joint‌ ‌responsibility‌ ‌and‌ ‌understanding‌ ‌(with‌ ‌own‌‌
interests‌ ‌included)‌ ‌that‌ ‌could‌ ‌keep‌ ‌the‌ ‌world‌ ‌stable‌ ‌→‌ ‌could‌‌prevent‌‌mass‌‌atrocities‌‌s.a.‌‌in‌‌Syria,‌‌
Somalia,‌‌Sahel‌‌conflict‌‌ ‌


2.‌‌WHY‌‌INTERNATIONAL‌‌RELATIONS‌‌THEORY?‌ ‌

2.1.‌‌OVERVIEW‌‌OF‌‌MAIN‌‌CURRENTS‌ ‌

● Theories‌‌offer‌‌conceptual‌‌frameworks‌‌and‌‌explanations‌‌for‌‌events‌‌and‌‌developments‌ ‌
● Each‌‌theory‌‌adopts‌‌a‌‌specific‌‌lens,‌‌highlighting‌‌certain‌‌factors,‌‌dimensions,‌‌dynamics‌ ‌
○ Emphasis‌‌on‌‌perpetual‌‌competition‌‌between‌‌states‌‌(realism)‌ ‌
○ Emphasis‌‌on‌‌potential‌‌for‌‌cooperation‌‌(liberalism)‌ ‌
○ Emphasis‌‌on‌‌economic‌‌interests,‌‌class‌‌struggles‌‌(Marxism)‌ ‌
○ Emphasis‌‌on‌‌ideas‌‌(constructivism)‌ ‌
● Potential‌‌for‌‌eclecticism‌‌ ‌
● Relevance‌‌of‌‌theory‌‌can‌‌change‌‌over‌‌time‌‌and‌‌space‌‌ ‌

2.2.‌‌NORMATIVE‌‌ASSESSMENT‌‌AND‌‌POLICY‌‌RELEVANCE‌ ‌

● Theories‌‌provide‌‌insight‌‌in‌‌the‌‌motivations‌‌of‌‌actors‌‌(empathy,‌‌understanding)‌‌ ‌


3‌ ‌