W2 - IR theories (from IL pov) & IL from IR pov | Quizlet

4 main theories

• Realism 

• Liberal internationalism 

• Historical materialism/Marxism 

• Social constructivism

realism

• THE Dominant tradition in study of IR

• Contemporary realists are commonly portrayed as relying on an older, classical tradition of thought, such as Thucydides, Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Rousseau

• This tradition informs the ‘statesman what he must do to preserve the health and strength of the State’—the very raison d’état (reason of state) = the reason of state is always security

• 3Ss: statism, survival, self-help

• Focus on (balance of) power

• Centres on sovereignty

raison d'état (reason of the state)

• The group/some form of collective, rather than the individual, is the fundamental unit of analysis—units have changed from polis to sovereign state

= Thus, the state is the main actor in international relations

• Its ultimate goal is to ensure its own survival

• Outside its own borders, the state operates in a state of anarchy (absence of higher authority)

• Given that states inhabit this perilous place, they must, and do, pursue power

• ethics and ideas of universal morality can actively hinder state leaders from making sure that the state will survive.

- Instead, realists advocate a pursuit of states’ selfinterests.

(e.g. why realists are skeptical on granting aid)

realism three Ss

statism, survival, and self-help

- Self-help may lead to a security dilemma as all react to others’ quests for more power

- Have no choice to build up your army if your neighbor is doing so

critiques of the three Ss

• Statism: flawed on empirical grounds (the state faces challenges) and normative grounds

(the state cannot respond to collective global problems on its own)  E.g. climate change 

• Survival: question of whether there are limits to the actions a state can take in the name of necessity - How far can offensive realism be taken?

• Self-help: not an inevitable consequence of anarchy, but rather a logic that states have selected. Other options are possible, such as collective security systems

- Consequence of the realist perspective 

- E.g. NATO is possible

power (realism)

power = survival

• Power will not be ‘granted’—each state must independently try to gain it

• Power is relational: it is never exercised in a vacuum, but always in relation to another entity (typically a state)

• Power is relative to the capabilities of others (amount of power you can project depends on your size, resources…)

• A balance of power will check the power dominance of a (coalition of) hegemonic state(s) —and so should actively be sought

- To a realist there should only be one state with power

newer views of realism

– It is not human nature but the anarchical system itself fostering fear and insecurity

- The source is the system and interdependence on each other

– The distribution of power is the key variable when trying to understand matters of war and peace, alliance politics, etc.

– Anarchy promotes or provokes self-help, meaning that states will try to maximize their security and relative power positions

defensive realism

refers to states’ maximisation of security. Here, a bipolar world is the most stable system.

- Example under international law: the UN Security Council - defensive realism explains the architecture of the SC

- Merger of liberal internationalism and defensive realism

offensive realism

refers to states’ maximisation of power. It identifies a situation in which a global hegemon dominates the international system as the ideal.

realism case study

• Successive American administrations have taken the view that stability in the Middle East is more likely to be achieved by propping up Egyptian dictatorships.

- idea is that it is better to maintain a moderate friendly autocrat, than to risk an unfriendly revolutionary regime (even if this would be an expression of democracy and FRs)

- From the realist US perspective this was seen as successful 

- In the Egyptian case, the policy proved mutually beneficial until the time of the Arab Spring.

liberal internationalism

 power politics is itself the product of ideas, and ideas can change

• Focus on (protecting) individuals rather than groups

• Focus on building and maintaining institutions and law

• In combination these constrain the selfinterest of states

• Democratic peace thesis

• Peace is not natural, but to be constructed; so peace through law & institutions

liberal internationalism founding ideas

historically a response to realism

• The natural order has been corrupted by outdated policies such as the balance of power --> Not accepting the world as anarchy, build rules and institutions to push back

• The problem of war can be solved through the development of a body of international rules and laws constraining the self-interest of states

• Trade and other cross-border flows will facilitate more peaceful international relations --> Not only relating to security

Democratic Peace Thesis (liberal internationalism)

Modern extension of liberal internationalism:

- claim that liberal states are pacific in their international relations with other liberal states

- The notion that there is an intrinsic link between peace and democracy, in particular that democratic states do not go to war with one another...

- Empirical evidence seems to support the democratic peace thesis

but...

-  in reality even democratic states go to war (in a legal or not legal manner?)

• Others recognise that liberal states are just as aggressive as any other kind of state in their relations with authoritarian regimes and stateless people

the end of history (liberal internationalism)

Modern extension of liberal internationalism:

In '_______' (1989), Fukuyama celebrated the triumph of liberalism over all other ideologies

- Claimed after fall of berlin wall liberal internationalism only remaining theory

- But in reality even democratic states go to war (in a legal or not legal manner?)

peace through law (liberal internationalism)

Peace is NOT a natural condition but must be constructed / actively pursued 

- origin:  WWI challenged the idea of a natural harmony of interests in international political and economic relations because countries went to war, despite their high degree of economic interdependence

• Liberal thinking shifted toward a recognition that peace is not a natural condition but is one that must be constructed (e.g. through institutions and with the help of laws)

current challenges to liberal internationalism

• The diminishing relative power of the US, which reduces its capacity to deal with global risks

- Premise that all starts are equal not reality 

• Rising powers’ [i.e. China, LA, African states’] demands for a greater share of authority

- Drives actions of the US

• Europe’s inability to serve as a second superpower that could promote internationalist rules and values

- Biggest economy in the world but unable to project uniform power?

• A return to a form of state sovereignty that rejects intervention on internationalist grounds

critiques of liberal internationalism

• structural patterns of hierarchy persist

• These patterns are actively reproduced by security and development doctrines and policies

• In other words: current IL and international organisations are part of the problem

e.g. Lack of flexibility, harder to adapt to new challenges, cementing a power imbalance in the current structure, Reorganisation needed

the liberal international order remains conveniently favourable to the most powerful states in the system

example of clash between realism/liberal internationalism

• ICC ruling on jurisdiction over Palestinian territory v. reaction Germany

• Views on causes of Russian military aggression against Ukraine

historial materialism/marxism

• Post-cold war, many thought ________ was outdated. Yet provides a useful way to address many problems evident in capitalism today (Financial crises, Sustainability of patterns of production and consumption, Ethical concerns, Inequality & racism, Climate change)

- applied to IL: Language in treaties pays lip service to the fact that there are inequalities

focuses on:

- (reproduction of, and reparation of) historical injustice(s)

- Class conflict and emancipation

- Unfairness in distribution and difference in power

what is historical materialism

Processes of historical change are a reflection of the economic development of society—specifically of tensions between the means of production and relations of production

• Therefore, international events are structurally informed by global capitalism

HMM and world politics

applies a holistic analysis to world politics/IR: the social world should be analyzed as a totality

HMM key elements

• Class conflict is a key determinant in historical developments

- Between rich and poor countries (or within societies), powerful vs suppressed individuals

- Analysts should not be detached and neutral, but have a moral obligation to try to make things better

Pursue emancipation to make things more just and equal

HMM case study

Greece and the disciplining power of capitalism

• Greece particularly badly hit by 2008 financial crisis

• Greek government faced pressure from EU and IMF to impose austerity measures in exchange for their continued financing of the country

Financial interests of german banks manifested by EU policy 

• Crisis led to rise of the ‘far left’ Syriza party in 2015 on an anti-austerity mandate

• Anti-austerity referendum passed in July 2015, but Syriza government consented to austerity measures anyway

• Demonstrates practical difficulty of challenging prevailing order

social construcitvism

focuses on the agency of individual actors (politicians, scholars etc) in bringing about change in int. Politics

- about human agency in bringing about change (e.g. being a norm entrepreneurship)

 - There are no fixed preferences, but the (possibility of) constant transformation (Not necessarily progressive transformation though (e.g. MAGA))

origin:

• Key challenger to 2 dominant IR theories: (neo)realism and (neo)liberal internationalism

• In 1980s, scholars began drawing from sociological & critical theories to argue for importance of norms, ideas, identity & rules

• Failure of existing theories to explain end of the cold war create space for a new approach

• rise since 1990s

social constructivism key elements

• Constructivism is about human consciousness and the construction of reality

- important to take seriously the role of ideas in world politics, but particularly the actors who can construct, reproduce, and transform structures

• Constructivism is concerned with the interplay between structure and agency (by actors)

- distinguishes itself from rational choice theories (realism, liberalism, HMM) which assume fixed preferences among global actors

- assumes that individuals and states are produced and created by their cultural environments

- Knowledge may appear to be objective reality, but actually represents ‘social facts’ that can be changed 

constructivism and global change

• constructivists criticise realists, liberal internationalists & marxists for failing to explain contemporary global transformations --> Theorize how change then comes about 

• Westphalian norms, which take sovereignty and states as starting-point (and at the centre of power), do not appear as robust or timeless as has been suggested

• Changing understandings of what constitutes a legitimate international order is a more reasonable explanation

how change comes about (5 steps)

(social constructivism)

change takes place through the same pattern:

diffusion, socialization, norm emergence, cascade, internalisation

diffusion and socialisation

according to constructivists:

(1) Diffusion --> asks how particular models, practices, norms, strategies, or beliefs spread within a population

• Diffusion occurs via coercion, strategic competition, pressures to secure resources, mimicking of successful models, the symbolic standing of certain models, and professional associations and expert Communities

(2) Socialisation

explains:

– How states change so that they come to identify with the identities, interests, and manners of the existing members of the club

– How states, accordingly, change their behavior so that it is consistent with that of the group

the life cycle of norms (3)

Norms evolve through different stages (social constructivism):

1. Norm emergence is often pushed by norm entrepreneurs, who frame issues in ways that promote their ideas , e.g.:

- Lobbying

- NGOs

- Strategic litigation

- Anyone with a platform really

.... Norms then start to diffuse , people want to be associated 

2. A norm cascade occurs as the norm diffuses, often because of pressure for conformity, desire for international legitimacy, or leaders’ quests for enhanced self-esteem

3. Norm internalisation means that the norm is taken for granted and is no longer contested

IL as an international institution

(IL from the perspective of IR)

• International institutions are not the same as international organisations

• They do not have to have staff, head offices etc., but may have some organisational dimensions (e.g. the WTO)

international institution

complexes of norms, rules, & practices that ‘prescribe behavioural roles, constrain activity, and shape expectations’

multilateral legislation

(IL from the perspective of IR)

• Legislation in the international domain (i.e. production if international law) occurs both informally (e.g. possible evolution of new norms like R2P) and formally (e.g. via multilateralism)

• Since 19th cent, multilateral legislation has been the preferred mode of international legislation

• Legal arrangements based on reciprocally binding rules of conduct represent a mark of true Multilateralism

consent and legal obligation

(IL from the perspective of IR)

• Consent today treated as the primary source of international legal obligation

• state practice of a norm and opinio juris can be used as indicators of tacit consent (CIL)

• [Article 38 Statute ICJ]

language and practice of justification

(IL from the perspective of IR)

• International legal arguments are rhetorical in character and subject to interpretation

• They are also analogical. International actors reason with analogies in three different ways:

1. They use them to interpret a given rule

2. They draw similarities between one class of action and another

3. They establish the status of one rule with reference to other rules

discourse of institutional autonomy

(IL from the perspective of IR)

 • The international institution of IL is characterised by its strong discourse of institutional autonomy

• This is a perceived distinction between a legal realm and a political realm, which adhere to different logics

• Distinguishing between these two realms is a modern phenomenon

• Such a distinction contributes to international order, and is thus politically functional for states

from international to supranational law

• States remain central, but individuals, groups, and organisations are increasingly becoming recognised subjects of international law

• Non-state actors are becoming important agents in international legal processes

• International law is increasingly concerned with global, not merely international, regulation

• International law is no longer confined to maintaining international order, narrowly defined

• Issues of global justice are permeating the international legal order