1/22

THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES ST. AUGUSTINE

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

GOVT 2060 International Relations:

Theories and Approaches Fall 2017

Topic 4 Neorealism The end of the seventies saw a revised and modified version of classical realism which came to be known as neo-realism and more popularly, as Kenneth Waltz’s structural realism. Structural realism would later be critiqued leading to the emergence of post-classical realism as scholars grappled with the role of the state and foreign policy in the international system. This new version of realism and the contending debates between structural and post-classical realists would constitute the topics of this session.

2/22

ab1234.yolasite.com

3/22

Course content • The History and Evolution of the International System • Levels of Analysis and Foreign Policy

POSITIVIST THEORIES MAINSTREAM APPROACHES

• Liberalism • Realism • Neorealism • Neoliberalism

STRUCTURALIST APPROACHES

• Classical Marxism • Dependency Theory • Structural Imperialism • Worlds System Theory

• International Society Theory (The English School)

POST-POSITIVIST THEORIES • Constructivism • Postmodernism • Critical Theory • Feminism

4/22

Readings: 1. Mansbach, Richard W. “Neo-this and neo-that: Or, `Play it Sam' (again and again).” International Studies Quarterly, Apr 96 Supplement 1, Vol. 40 Issue 1, p 90 – Ebsco Host (6p) 2. Bhansali, Krish. “Neorealism and its Critics” (Book Review). Journal of Politics, May 87, Vol. 49 Issue 2, p 631 – Ebsco Host (3p) 3. Powell, Robert. “Anarchy in international relations theory: the neorealist-neoliberal debate”. International Organization, Spring 94, Vol. 48 Issue 2, p. 313-344–Ebsco Host (32p) 4.Brooks, Stephen G. “Dueling Realism”. International Organization, Summer 97, Vol. 51, Issue 3. Business Source Premier- Ebsco Host. (33p)

At the Caspian Sea University: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B1_Z5ACd6MBPNGJDSUJLX2t4ZG8?usp=sharing Robert Jackson and Georg Sørensen, Introduction to International Relations. Theories and Approaches, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2013 (5th edition), 'The Voice of Behaviouralism in IR' (from Ch.2, pp.43-46) John Baylis, Steve Smith and Patricia Owens, The Globalization of World Politics: an Introduction to International Relations. N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2008 (4th edition), Ch. 7 Neo-Realism and Neo-Liberalism. P. Viotti and M. Kauppi, International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism, and Beyond (see Topic 3 Realism).

5/22

First IR Great Debate: Realism - Liberalism

Utopian (Marxism-Leninism)

Utopian liberalism 1920s Focus:

• International law • International organizations • Interdependence • Cooperation • Peace

Realist response 1930s-1950s Focus:

• Power politics • Security • Aggression • Conflict • War

6/22

Second IR Great Debate: Traditionalism - Behaviouralism

late 1950s-1960s

7/22

A methodological debate Traditional Approaches

Focus: Understanding

• Norms and values • Judgement • Historical knowledge

Theorists inside subject

Behaviouralist Reponse Focus:

Explaining • Hypothesis • Collection of data • Scientific knowledge

Theorists outside subject

Robert Jackson, Georg Sørensen, Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999, p.48

8/22

An extreme example: a behaviouralist text of international relations

9/22

The Intra-Paradigm Debate (Neorealism vs. Neoliberalism, based on the same

paradigm; not a Great Debate) or

The Inter-Paradigm Debate (Neorealism vs. Neoliberalism vs. Radical Theories=Neo-Marxism,

based on different paradigms; a Great Debate) known as

The Third IR Great Debate or

The first stage of the Third Great Debate 1970s the general neoclassical theories: neorealism and neoliberalism - realist and liberal ideas +

- elements of economy, psychology, mathematics, game theory (rational choice)

10/22

11/22

Realism (see the previous lecture) Taxonomy of Realisms (Baylis and Smith, Table 5.1, p.96)

Author Work Cause of insecurity

Thucydides The Peloponnesian War (includes 'The Melian Dialogue')

IV c. BC

Machiavelli The Prince 1532

E. H. Carr The Twenty Years Crisis: 1919-1939

1939

Classical realism

Hans Morgenthau

Politics among Nations 1948

Human nature

12/22

Neorealism

Rousseau The State of War 1750

Kenneth Waltz

Theory of Int. Politics 'Defensive realism' states=security maximizers Goal: status quo

1979 Structural realism

(Neorealism)

John Mearsheimer

Tragedy of Great Power politics 'Offensive realism' states=power maximizers Goal: hegemony

2001

Anarchical system

Fareed Zakaria Neoclassical realism

From Wealth to Power Systemic, cognitive and domestic factors

1998

How power is perceived

How leadership is exercised

Neoclassical / post-classical

realism (Neorealism) Stephen Brooks

Post-classical realism

'Dueling Realisms', IO An alternative to structural realism

1997

13/22

Structural realism Kenneth Waltz (Theory of International Politics, 1979) - microeconomic approach (RATIONAL CHOICE): State = rational actor ↔ economic agent (maximize benefits, minimize losses)

- systemic theory: int. system imposes the behaviour of states (as market imposes the behaviour of companies)

Anarchy Power

• int. system = anarchic ≠ chaotic • states = offensive military capability • states = mistrustful ↓ self-help system ↑ fundamental goal = survival

main actors = great powers Power ← economic and technological resources Balance of power The international system never changes. Only the distribution of power can change.

An Interview with Kenneth Waltz (circa 2011) (55min55)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9T-Bh254RJI 47m23s-52m44s Realists about Interdependence and Anarchy

14/22

Kenneth N. Waltz (1924-2013)

John Mearsheimer (b. 1947)

15/22

Defensive / offensive realism

Kenneth Waltz 'Defensive realism' states=security maximizers Goal: status quo

Theory of Int. Politics 1979

John Mearsheimer

'Offensive realism' states=power maximizers Goal: hegemony

Tragedy of Great Power Politics 2001

Conversations with History: John Mearsheimer (circa 2002) (58min28)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKFamUu6dGw 47min10-51min31 Values vs Power in IR

Cooperation?

IR=zero sum game → importance of relative gains (Joseph Grieco: a state should cooperate only if it gains more)

e.g. US cooperates economically with China without gaining more → it helps China become an effective challenger of American hegemony

Interdependence = mutual vulnerability (the EU imposition of sanctions against Russia was

difficult because of the cost for EU companies) Economic cooperation possible only if imposed by a hegemon Decline of the hegemon = destabilisation

16/22

Charles Kindleberger - the theory of hegemonic stability (the realist theory of regimes:)

C. Kindleberger (1910-2003)

The hegemon imposes cooperation

to its own benefit →

States cooperate as long as the hegemon is strong enough to force them to

do so

17/22

Three Important Characteristics of Structural Realism: 1. the ordering principle of the system = anarchy

it forces states to behave in the same way 2. the character of the units in the system self-help environment → states perform the same primary function regardless of their capacity 3. the distribution of capabilities across units (states) states = a difference of capability, not of function the distribution of power overrides internal factors (ex. ideology)

18/22

Critiques of structural realism • states can induce systemic change • states can alter the system:

o economic interdependence o Democratic Peace theory

• the international system is normatively regulated • too focused on structure/power; ignores ethnic identities, social relations

19/22

Comparison between realism and structural realism Realism

Structural realism

perspective individualist

systemic

analyzes the actions and interactions of the units (state level)

the behaviour of states from the level of the system

inspired by history (traditionalist approach)

microeconomics (behaviouralist approach)

behaviour of states conditioned by

human nature the international system

characteristics

• interests defined in terms of power

• the behaviour of statesmen

• the ordering principle • the character of the units • the distribution of the capabilities

Conversations with History: John Mearsheimer (circa 2002) (58min28)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKFamUu6dGw 11min55-16min28 Three Realisms (Morgenthau, Waltz, Mearsheimer)

20/22

Neoclassical realism • looks inside the states • statesmen, not states make foreign policy • decision-makers and state apparatus are important

Fareed Zakaria From Wealth to Power 1998 How power is perceived

How leadership is exercised + William Wohlforth etc. Types of variables Variables

systemic

distribution of power capabilities ↓ balance of power

cognitive perception and misperception of the international situation

domestic

• state institutions • elites • societal actors

affect the freedom of action of decision-makers

→ foreign policy actions

21/22

Post-classical realism = an alternative to structural realism Stephen Brooks, 'Dueling Realisms', International Organization, Vol. 51, No. 3, July 1997, pp. 445-477

Similarities between structural realism and post-classical realism • systemic focus • state-centric • int. politics = inherently competitive • emphasize material factors (not ideas and institutions) • states = egoistic actors that pursue self-help • military security = state's primary responsibility • military capacity ← state's productive base

Differences between structural realism and post-classical realism structural realism post-classical realism

states make decisions based on

the possibility of conflict; adopt a worst-case scenario

probabilities of conflict; do not adopt a worst-case scenario

Actors favor short-term military preparedness; heavily discount the future

long term security objectives

Military preparedness

always trumps economic capacity may be traded off if economic gains are greater than security losses

22/22

Realism/Neorealism Strengths

Good explanation of a pessimistic age (WWII, Cold War):

• competition ↑ • inevitability of conflict • military security ↑ • cooperation ↓ • divergence of national interest among

selfish states + Continuing large scale perception: world politics ↔ global tension

Weaknesses • Contradictions in the use of terms like

power, national interest and balance of power

• Only considers big powers • Many assumptions are not testable • Cannot explain change in the int. system

(end of Cold War, int. cooperation, globalization)

• Disregards ethical principles and social costs to military expenditure