Constructivism

Anthony Giddens

Proposes that International Relations are socially constructed and change through the interaction of agency and structure

Nina Tannenwald

• Deterrence cannot explain:

- Why nuclear weapons when there wasn’t a fear of retaliation

- Why non-nuclear states have attacked nuclear states i.e. Palestine and Israel

- Why small non-nuclear states are not panicking about nuclear states i.e. South Korea

- Argues this is instead explained by a “normative prohibition on nuclear use” i.e. Constructivism  

Alexander Wendt

Argues that anarchy is not essential to international structure, it is the processes and norms that have developed which has led to power politics and self-help – “Anarchy is what states make of it”

Amitav Acharya

Argues that constructivist norms are typically western, setting up dangerous impressions

Martha Finnemore

Argues that international norms shape state identities which in turn influence individual norms. Top-down influence

Peter Katzenstein

Argues that domestic politics can also influence a state’s international norm, rather than international politics having a trickle-down effect i.e. Japan changing from militarism to pacifism after WWII

Jason Ralph

Norms always contested, even if they appear stable, because discourse is required for norms to be created and exist

Finnenmore

• Argues that state’s interests are constantly changing, therefore social relations are always evolving i.e. Germany once enemy, now ally