C1 : THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
CLASSICAL REALISM AND NEOREALISM
REALISM
background power politics 1930s (waves of peace and war)
= realism as a reaction against utopian liberalism after WWI
> focus on power, conflict and war
> morality and law only as a result of power
> world of states : peace of Westphalia (1648) + nation-states (19th C)
comeback after 9/11
= liberal optimism 1990s deflated : war returns as regular feature + security competition
ontology anarchy
< no monopoly of authority (⟷ domestic)
< competition (zero-sum)
< self help (acting out of self interest)
state as central actor (ontological assumption)
< unitary : billiard ball-model
< rational : acting out of self interest
!! survival of the state (paramount !)
power (currency IP)
= realists believe that power is the currency of international politics
< based on the material capabilities that a state controls
!! competition for power and to shift BOP in their favor (due to human nature / system)
criticism - power as goal or as consequence?
- forms of power : military, economical and ideological power...?
- static theory : conservative rather than emancipatory
- macro-theory : little explanatory power to understand decision making at microlevel
- less applicable to smaller states
- liberalism : role of domestic politics and interest groups ?
- institutionalism : cooperation and IOs ? info or common interests can cancel out the
security dilemma
- Marxism : not states, but the capitalist class steers war and peace
- constructivism : anarchy is what states make of it
,CLASSICAL REALISM – Morgenthau
basic condition human nature (animus dominandi)
= humans are political animals and pursue power, but this leads to conflict
> defense of states interests (⟷ idealism)
means / context = power politics + political power + political circumstances + political skills
goals and values + power ethics (prudence)
+ human necessities (security)
+ national interest
+ balance of power
NEOREALISM – Waltz
basic condition anarchy (systemical theory)
= international system : competition and self help to guarantee own security
> division of power based on capabilities : population + territory + NR + ec. or mil. power
structure < international anarchy
< states as like units
< unequal state capability
< Great Power relations
effects > BOP + international conflict
forms of power unipolar hegemonical stability (peacefull with transitional wars)
equilibrium bipolar conflicts periphery + status quo + assess each other's strengths + more
cooperation, more rules in engaging with each other + faster adaptation
multipolar many, but not so intensive wars
small states balancing searching for BOP
bandwagoning searching for protection
types defensive striving for status quo and balance of power by medium powers (Waltz)
offensive power maximization (resulting in security dilemma!)
MAIN DIFFERENCES
classical realism Morgenthau neo / structural realism Waltz
human nature at the root of the desire for power international system driven by anarchy
defense of state interests power distribution
importance of justice importance of justice
< key to influence = foundation of community and order
< basis on which actors construct their interests
,LIBERALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM
FIRST MAJOR DEBAT IN IR
utopian liberalism (idealism) realist response (realism)
1920s 1930s – 1950s
focus : IL + IO + dependence + cooperation + peace focus : power + security + aggression + conflict war
LIBERALISM – KANT
precursers idealism (believe new world order)
= seek to apply liberal thinking in domestic politics to IR (institutionalize the rule of law)
< leaders, intellectuals, and public opinion had to believe that progress was possible
< IO had to be created to facilitate change, disarmament, arbitration, and enforcement
≈ League of Nations founded in 1920 (failed to prevent WWII)
ontology similar with realism
< anarchy : absence of central authority at the international level
< states are central and rational actors (other actors also exist)
≠ system creates opportunities for conflict and cooperation (actors must take advantage)
key dynamics + reduction in conflict
+ decline in autocracies, rise in democracies
+ rise in economic interdependence
+ increase in membership of intergovernmental organizations
logics of peace constraints on war (Kant)
(feedback loops) < democracies will refrain from using force against other democracies
(Kantian triangle) + force of norms shared by actors
+ democratic institutions constrain leaders
< economically important trade creates incentives for maintaining peaceful relations
< IOs can constrain decisionmakers by positively promoting peace EU
≠ realism : power imbalances and alliances
solution possibility to overcome security dilemma
= confederation like-minded, sovereign, democratic and ec. interdependent states
sustaining stable peace (Kantian peace)
= strengthening peaceful relations and extending their scope in the world.
< promoting democracy
< deepening international trade linkages
< extending multilateral organizational networks
, NEOLIBERALISM
emergence < pluralism-literature : non-state actors breaking barriers between domestic and IR
< neoliberal texts : challenging realist pessimism + assumption self-interested actors
< neo-neo debates (1980s and 1990s)
ontology similar with liberalism (e.i. realism)
< anarchy : absence of central authority at the international level
< states are central and rational actors (other actors also exist)
!! neorealism prioritizes international system ⟷ neoliberalism international institutions
underlining historical development (⟷ liberalism)
< increasing interdependence in various areas (modern and technological advances)
< hegemonic stability (US dominance after 1945) (=> not part of ‘LIBERALISM’)
!! made realism an inaccurate description of contemporary global politic
absolute gains
= more concern as to how a state benefits overall : policy makers will consider absolute
gains to be made from an agreement, including potential longer-term gains
≠ liberalism : relative gains (misguided due to interdependence hindering exploitation)
institutionalists
= optimistic view on cooperation : great faith in institutions (unlike neorealists)
< cooperation facilitated by n facilitated by development institutions and regimes.
functions facilitate co-operation (importance design)
institutions < bargaining (how it is facilitated)
< defection (how it is mitigated)
< autonomy (of institutions from their constituent members)
assumptions < state-centric perspective : states as unitary, rational and utility-maximizing actors
< liberal assumptions : possibility of cumulative progress in human affairs
game theory - barriers to co-operation : prisoner's dilemma + free-riding
critique - state-centrism
- unitary actor assumption
- rational actor assumption
CLASSICAL REALISM AND NEOREALISM
REALISM
background power politics 1930s (waves of peace and war)
= realism as a reaction against utopian liberalism after WWI
> focus on power, conflict and war
> morality and law only as a result of power
> world of states : peace of Westphalia (1648) + nation-states (19th C)
comeback after 9/11
= liberal optimism 1990s deflated : war returns as regular feature + security competition
ontology anarchy
< no monopoly of authority (⟷ domestic)
< competition (zero-sum)
< self help (acting out of self interest)
state as central actor (ontological assumption)
< unitary : billiard ball-model
< rational : acting out of self interest
!! survival of the state (paramount !)
power (currency IP)
= realists believe that power is the currency of international politics
< based on the material capabilities that a state controls
!! competition for power and to shift BOP in their favor (due to human nature / system)
criticism - power as goal or as consequence?
- forms of power : military, economical and ideological power...?
- static theory : conservative rather than emancipatory
- macro-theory : little explanatory power to understand decision making at microlevel
- less applicable to smaller states
- liberalism : role of domestic politics and interest groups ?
- institutionalism : cooperation and IOs ? info or common interests can cancel out the
security dilemma
- Marxism : not states, but the capitalist class steers war and peace
- constructivism : anarchy is what states make of it
,CLASSICAL REALISM – Morgenthau
basic condition human nature (animus dominandi)
= humans are political animals and pursue power, but this leads to conflict
> defense of states interests (⟷ idealism)
means / context = power politics + political power + political circumstances + political skills
goals and values + power ethics (prudence)
+ human necessities (security)
+ national interest
+ balance of power
NEOREALISM – Waltz
basic condition anarchy (systemical theory)
= international system : competition and self help to guarantee own security
> division of power based on capabilities : population + territory + NR + ec. or mil. power
structure < international anarchy
< states as like units
< unequal state capability
< Great Power relations
effects > BOP + international conflict
forms of power unipolar hegemonical stability (peacefull with transitional wars)
equilibrium bipolar conflicts periphery + status quo + assess each other's strengths + more
cooperation, more rules in engaging with each other + faster adaptation
multipolar many, but not so intensive wars
small states balancing searching for BOP
bandwagoning searching for protection
types defensive striving for status quo and balance of power by medium powers (Waltz)
offensive power maximization (resulting in security dilemma!)
MAIN DIFFERENCES
classical realism Morgenthau neo / structural realism Waltz
human nature at the root of the desire for power international system driven by anarchy
defense of state interests power distribution
importance of justice importance of justice
< key to influence = foundation of community and order
< basis on which actors construct their interests
,LIBERALISM AND NEOLIBERALISM
FIRST MAJOR DEBAT IN IR
utopian liberalism (idealism) realist response (realism)
1920s 1930s – 1950s
focus : IL + IO + dependence + cooperation + peace focus : power + security + aggression + conflict war
LIBERALISM – KANT
precursers idealism (believe new world order)
= seek to apply liberal thinking in domestic politics to IR (institutionalize the rule of law)
< leaders, intellectuals, and public opinion had to believe that progress was possible
< IO had to be created to facilitate change, disarmament, arbitration, and enforcement
≈ League of Nations founded in 1920 (failed to prevent WWII)
ontology similar with realism
< anarchy : absence of central authority at the international level
< states are central and rational actors (other actors also exist)
≠ system creates opportunities for conflict and cooperation (actors must take advantage)
key dynamics + reduction in conflict
+ decline in autocracies, rise in democracies
+ rise in economic interdependence
+ increase in membership of intergovernmental organizations
logics of peace constraints on war (Kant)
(feedback loops) < democracies will refrain from using force against other democracies
(Kantian triangle) + force of norms shared by actors
+ democratic institutions constrain leaders
< economically important trade creates incentives for maintaining peaceful relations
< IOs can constrain decisionmakers by positively promoting peace EU
≠ realism : power imbalances and alliances
solution possibility to overcome security dilemma
= confederation like-minded, sovereign, democratic and ec. interdependent states
sustaining stable peace (Kantian peace)
= strengthening peaceful relations and extending their scope in the world.
< promoting democracy
< deepening international trade linkages
< extending multilateral organizational networks
, NEOLIBERALISM
emergence < pluralism-literature : non-state actors breaking barriers between domestic and IR
< neoliberal texts : challenging realist pessimism + assumption self-interested actors
< neo-neo debates (1980s and 1990s)
ontology similar with liberalism (e.i. realism)
< anarchy : absence of central authority at the international level
< states are central and rational actors (other actors also exist)
!! neorealism prioritizes international system ⟷ neoliberalism international institutions
underlining historical development (⟷ liberalism)
< increasing interdependence in various areas (modern and technological advances)
< hegemonic stability (US dominance after 1945) (=> not part of ‘LIBERALISM’)
!! made realism an inaccurate description of contemporary global politic
absolute gains
= more concern as to how a state benefits overall : policy makers will consider absolute
gains to be made from an agreement, including potential longer-term gains
≠ liberalism : relative gains (misguided due to interdependence hindering exploitation)
institutionalists
= optimistic view on cooperation : great faith in institutions (unlike neorealists)
< cooperation facilitated by n facilitated by development institutions and regimes.
functions facilitate co-operation (importance design)
institutions < bargaining (how it is facilitated)
< defection (how it is mitigated)
< autonomy (of institutions from their constituent members)
assumptions < state-centric perspective : states as unitary, rational and utility-maximizing actors
< liberal assumptions : possibility of cumulative progress in human affairs
game theory - barriers to co-operation : prisoner's dilemma + free-riding
critique - state-centrism
- unitary actor assumption
- rational actor assumption
