Wendt - Anarchy is what states make of it

What is the main argument?

• anarchy does not automatically lead to self-help and competitive “power politics”

• anarchy is what states make of it

• the competitive or cooperative nature of the international system is not determined by the structure of anarchy, but by process - the history of interaction and the collective ideas (“intersubjective knowledge”) shared by states

• “self-help” is an institution, not an essential feature of anarchy. It is a system built by states’ practices, not imposed by nature.

What is constructivism?

• a social theory that emphasizes how shared ideas, norms, and social interactions shape the international system and state behavior, rather than viewing it as purely driven by material factors like power

What does exogenous social interaction mean?

• states are assumed to be self-interested egoists focused on survival

What does endogenous social interaction mean?

• states define their interests and identities (like friend or foe) only through history and collective meanings

What are Wendt’s 3 type of security systems?

Hobbsian - competitive

• relative gains

Lockean - individualistic

• absolute gains

• indifferent to others

Kantian - cooperative

• security of each is responsibility of all

How do these different systems emerge through social interaction?

• The “looking-glass self” - conceptions of self and interest tend to mirror the practices of others

  • if two states encounter each other for the first time neither is an enemy

  • Their actions create expectations, and repeated interactions build stable concepts of self and other

  • if A treats B as a threat, b will begin to define itself as self-reliant and competitive in response

• Predation and Intersubjective structure - if a predator emerges it forces other states to engage in self-help

  • if the victims respond individually or form a collective security structure depends on the pre-existing structure of identities and interests in the system (its maturity)

What are three ways we can move away from a Hobbesian model?

• the institution of sovereignty - sovereignty is a powerful social norm of mutual recognition of territorial rights

  • this recognition of this norm moves the system from a war of all against all (Hobbesian) to a world of mutually recognized states (Lockean)

• evolution of cooperation - through repeated, positive interactions, states focused originally on absolute gains develop habits of cooperation. Thus they internalize new identities and interests, transforming their relationship from mere coordination to one built on shared commitments

• intentional change - states can intentionally try to change the system through “altercasting”, where a state acts as if the other state already has a new cooperative identity, forcing alter to respond in kind or bear the burden of rejecting new role

What do realist do wrong?

• they “reify” the structure and forget that the competitive system is a product of human (state activity), making it seem like a natural, external force beyond control 

• state identities and interests are variables that can be transformed by interactions, norms, and identities