Video 1.2 Realism
Prof. Dr. Madeleine Hosli
Professor of International Relations
Theories of International Relations
Key questions:
How do international relations change?
What is the role of states?
Do international institutions matter?
Is cooperation between states possible and sustainable?
REALISM
One of the oldest and most well known theories of international relations.
Individuals are rational actors
Are Assumed to aim to maximize power.
It is a world of all against all.
Without a central authority that regulates their interaction.
In practical realism in which Hans Morgenthau is one of the famous authors stresses that human nature that is seen as driving conflict.
In Realism, groups can be the focus or units of analysis. but in classical realism, it is States as unit of analysis.
The States calculate their interest in terms of power. and as Morgenthau stated, political leaders “think and act in terms of interest defined as power.” This is a quote from his book Politics Among Nations, 1948.
Realism in international relations theory is based on three core assumptions:
- States are the “units of analysis”
- States aim to increase their power
- States behave in a rational way.
In the international system, States aim to increase or maximize their power notably in military terms. If another State becomes more powerful than they are themselves, this can pose a SECURITY THREAT in the future. That’s why States are concerned about RELATIVE GAINS. Not what is obtained in absolute terms but in relative ones. If another State is more powerful or has more arms than your own state does, you fear that you can be defeated in the future.
NEOREALISM:
Human nature is not necessarily the driving force for conflict.
The structure of the international system and the units are seen as interacting.
It is the structure that encourages certain actions and discourages other actions by states.
IN NEOREALISM, GREATER IMPORTANCE IS ASCRIBED TO THE ROLE OF THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM.
Neorealism is based on three core assumptions:
- The international system is anarchical, meaning that there is no central authority
- The international system is characterized by interaction between its units, the states
- Within the structure of the international system, the distribution of capabilities - that is, power - among states can vary over time. it can vary between states
In contrast to Realism, Neorealism states that the Structure of international system determines state behavior. Rational calculation about their own position in the system determines state interest and their strategy.
States define their interest in terms of power and position. Political leaders respond to the incentives and the constraints that the system provides, and to the distribution of capabilities within it. So variations in state behavior are due to variations in the characteristics of the international system.
According to neorealism, cooperation is unlikely to happen.
Formation of alliances: The States may aim to FORM COALITIONS OR ALLIANCES in an attempt to BALANCE THE POWER of the other entities in the system.
The formation of an alliance may cause the formation of a counter alliance.
In the global system, on a regular basis, balances of power will form.
Security dilemma & Arms Race: States or coalitions of states may also face a security dilemma. For example, they might prefer to disarm, but the fear that the other side gets stronger than they are, and that fact that there is no higher level of authority controlling the system, forces them to continue the armaments pursuit. A prominent example could be the situation of the Cold War where the United States and the Soviet Union formed the two poles of a bipolar international system. they balanced each other’s power and were caught in a security dilemma.
In neorealist thinking, changes in the distribution of capabilities will also cause changes in the relationships between states.
Hegemonic power: The world system may at times be dominated by a hegemonic power. It is a power that has geopolitical and maybe cultural dominance. The States also fear the rise of hegemonic power and they form coalitions to balance against the rise of such potential hegemon.
States may also lose power in the global system allowing for challenging powers to rise.
Regional integration: Regional integration can also be seen as an attempt to balance the power of a major state or coalitions of states in the international system. For example, cooperation among the states of the EU will be seen as unlikely to happen, but European integration makes more sense if it is seen as an attempt to increase Europe’s power and standing in the global system. the formation of regional integration schemes around the world including those focused predominantly on economic integration could be seen as deliberate attempt of its members states to INCREASE THEIR COLLECTIVE POWER AND INFLUENCE on the global level. NATO is another example of alliance in the global system.
Currently the rise of major powers such as China challenges the existing global power balance may also lead to new global powers and new regional integration schemes.
COOPERATION:
According to the theory of international relations, cooperation among states is not likely to happen, neither is the establishment of international institutions because they can constrain their own actions.
States will be willing to create international rules and institutions if they are consistent with their interests.
International institutions reflect the preferences and powers of the most influential states. They will not be able to act independently of these powers.
The “false promise of international institutions” article in 1994. It is a reaction to another article that presumes international institutions can be quite influential.
Since the global political system is presumed to be anarchical, there is no formal central authority, it largely constitutes a self help system.
According to neorealists, states mainly act to ensure their survival. this approach is also called DEFENSIVE REALISM.
States maximize their power to dominate the international system. This is called OFFENSIVE REALISM.
sometimes, neorealists are seen as pessimists. Neorealists are often concerned with the maintenance of global peace and stability. They do not describe the world as conflictual because that is how it should be. They try to understand states in order to prevent violence and war.
Kenneth Waltz who made very important contributions to neorealist thinking. Waltz aims to understand what drives state behavior, why states may feel insecure in the system. How situations like war can be prevented?
Poll results:
Do you think cooperation between states is very difficult to achieve because states worry about relative gains (i.e., they fear others might gain more and with this, get stronger than they are in the global system)? Do states indeed seek to increase their power
Yes 79%
No 21%
562 responses
States are not be the main and only actors. Other factors may codetermine the actions apart from the aim to increase power. Such as the existence of institutions, norms and identities.
What have we learned?
Realism is one of the oldest theories of international relations.
It has been extended to account for the dynamics of international systems called NEOREALISM.
Neorealists assume the world is anarchical and conflictual in nature. States aim to become more powerful due to fears that other states might become more powerful than they are themselves, and with this their security could be threatened.
We have to keep in kind that Realism and Neorealism are not prescriptions as to how individuals and states should behave. They simply aim to understand what drives behavior and with this how patterns can be established to prevent states from going to war with each other.
Video 1.3 LIBERALISM
https://class.coursera.org/globalorder-001/lecture/17
Prof. Dr. Madeleine Hosli
Professor of International Relations
Liberalism has a rich tradition.
Political version:
It is focused on aspects and values such as individual liberty, political freedom, equality.
In what is considered Republican Liberalism, democracies are supposed to be more peaceful than non-democracies.
In the Democratic Peace Theory, two democracies are not supposed to fight each other.
Sociological liberalism emphasizes that transnational compact and coalition affect national attitudes, interests and behavior.
Aspects of liberalism can also be found in the principles of Neo-classical economics where the unit of analysis or focus tends to be the firm or individual. In neo classical economics, there is a sense that the market must be as free as possible from political interference. Markets should operate on their own and INVISIBLE HAND will generally lead to welfare gains for all.
There are just a few areas where action would fail and government interference would be needed. This would be ONLY IN THE CASE OF MARKET FAILURES. TO CORRECT MARKET FAILURES.
In the economic version of liberalism, special emphasis is placed on Comparative Advantage. This means that the country focuses on the production of goods and services that they can produce best and cheapest.
When states do this and exchange through TRADE, this is beneficial to all.
Economic liberalism was largely a response to approaches that emphasized the importance of government interference in markets such as MERCANTILISM.
Inn the framework of what is termed economic liberalism, economic interdependence is believed to allow further development of peaceful relations between states.
Economic or commercial liberalism has been influential in most parts of the world in the last decade. concerns have been expressed on the effects of economic liberalism especially in the aftermath of the global crisis.
In International Relations Theory, an adaptation of liberalism has been labelled Neoliberalism or Neoliberal Institutionalism.
Shares some of the core principles of Realism or Neorealism including the assumption that the Sates are the most important actors and that they are rational.
Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye, authors of book POWER,M 1989. In their perspective, next to State, there are many other actors that influence world politics. Transnational linkages and the various patterns of interdependence between states crucially influence the ways in which states behave, in conducting foreign policy. And in NeoLiberalism, like in NoeRealism, the global system is believed to be anarchic, but states are not seen as units of analysis acting as cohesive entities but rather as constituted by a range of different actors, domestic politics and international institutions shape the priorities of governments and determine their behavior. In addition to this, actors can cooperate across state borders (CROSS BORDER COOPERATION). Multinational corporations and transnational interest groups for example are seen as playing a crucial role in terms of shaping the incentives for states to act. International institutions sets rules and principles that govern and affect state behavior.
IN LIBERALISM, STATES ARE NOT SEEN AS COHESIVE UNITS.
Wrong: In liberalism, states are not seen as the units of analysis.
Stephen Krasner has defined international regimes as being “implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules and decision-making procedures around which actors’ expectations converge in a given area of international relations.”
NEOLIBERALISM
In Neoliberalism, international institutions are seen as much more important than they are in realism.
Captured in article by Keohane and Robert Milner: “The promise of institutionalist theory”
In essence , according to NEOLIBERAL INSTITUTIONALISM, institutions influence how states define self-interest. Cooperation between states is then possible actually because of the existence of institutions and what we call regimes. Although states may be tempted to break the rules of cooperation, Institutions can exercise important functions that allow for cooperation. Institutions can monitor the behavior of actors, provide information, allow for repeated interaction for reduction of transaction cost, can sanction actors if they display non-cooperative behavior, and create the foundations for long term stable pattern cooperative interaction. In this perspective , cooperation and sustainable peace are possible. Neoliberal institutionalists often draw on tools such as game theory to explain patterns of interaction between states.
Poll:
Do you think cooperation between states is possible, also without international institutions?
Yes 70%
No 30%
377 responses
Institutions can help create systems and frameworks that increase the prospects for state to engage in cooperative behavior.
Neoliberal institutionalists sometimes mention European integration as an example of such pattern
International institutions and cooperation
The work of Neoliberal institutionalists can be seen as a reaction to Realism and Neorealism which they believe are too pessimistic in explaining the behavior of states.and notably the likelihood that cooperation between states can occur.
Koehane calls himself a Rational Institutionalist because he also believes that some of the Realist assumptions are actually relevant and very useful. He has criticized neoRealism and sees it more as an attempt to adapt to a theory rather than reject it entirely.
According to neoliberalism, institutions do not just reflect the interests of the most powerful actors in the global system. The preferences of the actors will matter. The smaller or medium sized countries are constrained in their behavior by being embedded in institutions or regimes.
In fact international institutions are able to crucially influence the behavior of states in the global system.
Interdependence between states does not create dependence. But it adds to stability and peace over time. In fact, you can see the creation of European integration in the light of this theory. Former enemies France and Germany integrated their economies: coal and steel. the creation of the EU does not simply reflect the preferences of its most important, powerful members
Summary:
Liberalism has a rich tradition.
Political version:
It is focused on aspects and values such as individual liberty, political freedom, equality.
Neoliberalism:
Focus on a wide range of actors
Domestic and international levels.
Transnational actors
Video 1.4 CONSTRUCTIVISM
Prof. Dr. Madeleine Hosli
Professor of International Relations
CONSTRUCTIVISM
Based on many different approaches.
Can be seen as a reaction to neorealism, also neoliberalism
Criticizes the core assumptions of neorealism, also neoliberalism
Aims to offer alternative explanations.
Has many different authors and sub-schools.
According to constructivism, Social Reality is not just given but is constructed.
It is not so much material interests and power that matter. Focus on ideas, norms, identities and learning processes.
it is not so much the structure of the international system that determines how states act but how states view each other. The enemy is not the one with power but the one perceived as an enemy. Focus on PERCEPTIONS. Some states with power is seen as a friend and not a security threat.
Threat cannot be measured by military weight or power.
For constructivists, INSTITUTIONS may not only offer formal rules but may also shape actor behavior.
Socialization.
Development of shared norms and values will matter. Like the value of human rights, These may be learned and by constant interaction may be seen as valuable.
Constructivism does not see actors as utility maximizing or rational. Ideational factors are seen as more important than material interests.
it is the spread of norms, values, changing identities and patterns of socialization that will mainly affect actor behavior, including interaction between states. Images and perceptions will matter.
Important to Constructivist thinking:
Social interaction
Material interests
Identities and ideas
Not language and interpretation
Alexander Wendt: “Anarchy is What States make of it: The social construction of power politics.” Presented the elements of what he calls SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM.
He criticized some of the core and main assumptions of Neorealism and Neoliberalism.
States do not act on the basis of the constraints and opportunities that the global system offers but the ways they perceive each other and their actions. Social reality in this sense is constructed and this is also the pattern of interaction between states in international relations.
For constructivists, cooperation between states may be possible but the focus of analysis is different compared to other theories of international relations.
For example, in an entity such as the EU, constructivists are more interested in aspects such as how is the organization affected by values and norms. Focus on values and norms. Democracy. The rule of law. Rather than how material features shape the behavior of the organization.
Similarly, identities will matter like the question to which extent the entities of the EU will feel they are French, German, etc. rather than citizens of the EU. the EU in turn will affect these identities.
CONSTRUCTIVISM differs because of focus on:
Emphasis on how states perceive each other, by the importance of identities and images, by whether they treat each other as friends or enemies, focus on socialization and learning.
In CONSTRUCTIVISM, institutions matter. For most CONSTRUCTIVISts, it is not so much material forces that influence behavior but ideational factors.
The end of the cold war triggered many debates about the relevance of CONSTRUCTIVISM as a theory to explain international relations. The failure to predict the end of the cold war showed that the focus of neorealism on security and anarchy was wrong. Robert Schneider explained that it should be the terms of ideas and the so-called new thinking of Michael Gorbachev. The Cold War ended not because of strategic or military reasons but because of the change in identity and the change in thinking in the Soviet Union itself. However, as also explained by Schneider, they fail to recognize that Gorbachev was not only driven by ideas, but that his foreign policy was also an instrument for domestic purposes.
There are many different explanations of major events such as the cold war and its ending,
Poll:
Is there a certain theory you find more adequate than other ones when trying to explain International Relations:
Yes Neo Realism 12%
Yes Neoliberalism 17%
Yes, Constructivism 41%
yes, but not one of these factors 12%
No, i think they are all the same 19%
298 responses
Summary:
CONSTRUCTIVISM now one of the major theories of International Relations
Social Reality is constructed
Focus on non-material interests
No comments:
Post a Comment