GLOBALIZING WORLD: Theories and actors in
International Relations
Why should we study IR with theories ?
Reasons to use theories
1. If we have analytical theories, they help us understand what we are learning in the
first place ⇒ Reality in different lenses
2. Theories are universal, try to find patterns, commonalities according to historical
data => helps us make predictions, explain phenomena, how to increase security,
solve other problems. Focus our attention on a certain issue (e.g. power-dynamics,
strategic behaviour, anarchy system): if we only focus on power politics, we would
lose attention to specific issues. => help you explain why what happened, the actions
of the states.
Why talking about “Schools of thought” ?
- Focus on different aspects → Each theory has different actors who have different
drivers
- Theories are not unified, they have different methods and forms (e.g. offensive
realism; defensive realism;..) → subtheories
Schools of thought differ in their assumptions about: Mechanisms that govern the
international system; Main actors and their motives; The breadth of cross-border activities to
be studied
How have these theories emerged ?
Peace of Westphalia: Implicit recognition of key principles
- Equality
- Formal equality of territories, independent on size and power
- No superior claims of religious truths
- Sovereignty
- Rulers of a territory concentrate decision-making powers in their hands
- No external interference by other States
- Territoriality
- (New) States possess clear borders to the outside, sole authority by the
sovereign
- “Cuius regio, ejus religio” = Dominant religion, sometimes tolerance of
different beliefs
Birth of the Nation-state
Bottom-up ⤴️ Top-down ⤵️
- Destruction of the ideas of - Promotion of national language (e.g.
monarchy and divine rule French, Italian…)
- Print products create a common - National standing armies
, Birth of the Nation-state
discourse (conscription)
- Emerging ideas of belonging - Powerful bureaucracies
together
The Westphalian system as a European solution to a European problem
, How theories explain actors and issues in IR (1): States and
survival
Main Concepts
Additional Information
, Different forms of Realism:
Neorealism
- International sphere characterized by persistent anarchy
- Internal constitution of the state matters less than its importance in international
politics
- Equal place in the anarchical structure but different capabilities
Offensive NeoRealism Defensive NeoRealism
- offensive pursuit of power is - states should adopt moderate and
central because it is the only >< restrained policies (each state
guarantee of state survival concerned with its own survival ->
- Main defender: Mearsheimer focus on its own security)
- Main defender: Waltz
Realist explanations
Realist interpretation of IOs and international regimes
- Forum for states to discuss their conflicts, no own power of IOs
- Instruments for powerful states to realize their interests
- Reflected in the weak sanctioning power of IOs, skewed decision-making
Reason for difficulties
- IOs do not suppress the logic of anarchy and self-help
- Incentives to defect
- Relative gains problem
- Benign hegemon as an exception ?
Understanding with realism
- Deterrence during the Cold War (e.g. MAD and nuclear dissuasion)
- Arms races and preventive war
- Weakening of International organizations
Challenges to realism
- The increasing number of International Organizations and growing membership
International Relations
Why should we study IR with theories ?
Reasons to use theories
1. If we have analytical theories, they help us understand what we are learning in the
first place ⇒ Reality in different lenses
2. Theories are universal, try to find patterns, commonalities according to historical
data => helps us make predictions, explain phenomena, how to increase security,
solve other problems. Focus our attention on a certain issue (e.g. power-dynamics,
strategic behaviour, anarchy system): if we only focus on power politics, we would
lose attention to specific issues. => help you explain why what happened, the actions
of the states.
Why talking about “Schools of thought” ?
- Focus on different aspects → Each theory has different actors who have different
drivers
- Theories are not unified, they have different methods and forms (e.g. offensive
realism; defensive realism;..) → subtheories
Schools of thought differ in their assumptions about: Mechanisms that govern the
international system; Main actors and their motives; The breadth of cross-border activities to
be studied
How have these theories emerged ?
Peace of Westphalia: Implicit recognition of key principles
- Equality
- Formal equality of territories, independent on size and power
- No superior claims of religious truths
- Sovereignty
- Rulers of a territory concentrate decision-making powers in their hands
- No external interference by other States
- Territoriality
- (New) States possess clear borders to the outside, sole authority by the
sovereign
- “Cuius regio, ejus religio” = Dominant religion, sometimes tolerance of
different beliefs
Birth of the Nation-state
Bottom-up ⤴️ Top-down ⤵️
- Destruction of the ideas of - Promotion of national language (e.g.
monarchy and divine rule French, Italian…)
- Print products create a common - National standing armies
, Birth of the Nation-state
discourse (conscription)
- Emerging ideas of belonging - Powerful bureaucracies
together
The Westphalian system as a European solution to a European problem
, How theories explain actors and issues in IR (1): States and
survival
Main Concepts
Additional Information
, Different forms of Realism:
Neorealism
- International sphere characterized by persistent anarchy
- Internal constitution of the state matters less than its importance in international
politics
- Equal place in the anarchical structure but different capabilities
Offensive NeoRealism Defensive NeoRealism
- offensive pursuit of power is - states should adopt moderate and
central because it is the only >< restrained policies (each state
guarantee of state survival concerned with its own survival ->
- Main defender: Mearsheimer focus on its own security)
- Main defender: Waltz
Realist explanations
Realist interpretation of IOs and international regimes
- Forum for states to discuss their conflicts, no own power of IOs
- Instruments for powerful states to realize their interests
- Reflected in the weak sanctioning power of IOs, skewed decision-making
Reason for difficulties
- IOs do not suppress the logic of anarchy and self-help
- Incentives to defect
- Relative gains problem
- Benign hegemon as an exception ?
Understanding with realism
- Deterrence during the Cold War (e.g. MAD and nuclear dissuasion)
- Arms races and preventive war
- Weakening of International organizations
Challenges to realism
- The increasing number of International Organizations and growing membership
