POL2103 IR final exam

What is IR?

study of how countries interact, make policies, and handle conflicts (UN)

Origins of IR

formal academic discipline in the 20th century

Grew after World War I to understand war and peace

Positivism

Focuses on facts and observable events (e.g study war by looking at data) scientific method (quantitative)

Post-Positivism

Questions objectivity as values determine facts (e.g how people interpret war) (qualitative)

Realism (E.H Carr)

focus on desire for states power, competition conflict inevitable and morality irrelevant in politics (what is/predictive)

Behavioralists vs. Traditionalists

Should IR be studied scientifically (data, testable) or historically (philosophy, qualitative methods)

Inter-Paradigm Debate

What’s the best way to study IR (what IR should study, how it should be studied, and what drives international politics)

Idealism

Belief that international politics should focus on moral values and cooperation to foster peace (what ought to be)

Realism

Belief that international politics is based on power and self-interest

Behavioralism

Approach that applies scientific methods to study IR.

Ontology

study of actors making up the world and what exists in IR (e.g., key actors, structures, and forces shaping IR).

Epistemology

study of how we know things in IR (how do we know what we know in IR, methods should be used to study IR)

Methodology

study of how to research IR topics (epistemology + research methods)

Classical Realism (Hans Morgenthau)

States want power based on national interest because humans want power (human nature to dominate/power as an end itself)

Neo-Realism (aka structural realism)

States want power because the international system lacks central authority (anarchy) forces states to seek power as a means to an end (security). Survival

Anarchy

No central authority in international politics

Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD)

idea that nuclear war is prevented because both sides would be destroyed.

Classical Liberalism/idealism (Immanuel Kant)

Emphasize perpetual peace via cooperation and interdependence (EU countries don’t go to war) associated with republicanism

Complex Interdependence( R Keohane, J Nye)

Power not just military but about networks, cooperation, mutual dependence. States actors among many (low politics more urgent than traditional security)

Neo-Liberalism institutionalism (Robert Keohane)

Despite anarchy institutions (e.g., the UN) help countries work together

Democratic Peace Theory

Democracies don’t go to war with each other because of values, institutional constraints, re-election risk (e.g U.S. and Canada never fought war)

English School IR (Hugo Grotius)

mix of realist (liberal) constructivist recognizing power, diplomacy, law. State form international society with shared norms. International law is evidence of reason applied to global politics

International Society

Even though there’s no world government, states follow common rules (e.g diplomats respect each other’s embassies)

Marxism in IR

economic structures shape international politics, capitalism generates both development and deep inequality (e.g rich countries=core, exploit poor countries=periphery for resources)

Neo-Marxism (Gramsci)

Power is cultural and ideological domination; elites maintain power through shaping ideas (hegemony)

Feminist IR

Gender roles/expectations = social construct (not bio) justify inequality, maintain division between public (politics) vs private (home) life at detriment of women); male-dominated perspectives in international relations (e.g war studied from male perspective ignores women)

Liberal Feminism(Cynthia Enloe)

IR ignores women focuses on legal equality as key to women's emancipation in politics. Critiques; too foucsed on inclusion, doesn’t challenge systemic oppression

Radical Feminism

Challenges patriarchy

Post-Colonial Feminism (Alexander & Talpade)

Global south women’s voices considers race, class, history, culture and gender (intersectionality) critique of western feminism

Emancipatory Knowledge

Knowledge that seeks to challenge oppression

Status quo states

countries that are satisfied with the current international system and seek to maintain or defend it.

Revisionist states

countries that challenge the existing global order and want to change the distribution of power or international rules

Defensive Neo-Realism (Kenneth Waltz)

States seek enough power to ensure their security more power than others (preponderance of power) (gradual power to avoid overextension)

Offensive Neo-Realism (John Mearsheimer)

States always seek more power whenever possible, power ultimate goal to result in security

Gideon Rose

coined term neo-classical realism in a 1998

argues how a country reacts to external threats depends on its internal politics

Neo-classical realism (Gideon Rose/Randall Schweller)

Gideon: coined term neo-classical realism in a 1998

mix of classical and neorealism

country’s foreign policy shaped by international structures (power balance) and domestic factors (leaders, institutions, perceptions)

Randall Schweller

some status quo states (defend the system), while others are revisionist states

state's behavior depends on its domestic leadership, political culture, and national ambitions, not just the balance of power.

Thucydides (c. 460 BC – c. 400 BC)

History of the Peloponnesian War

Power determines political outcomes( not morality/justice)

Conflict is inevitable because states seek power

Stronger states dominate weaker ones

Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406)

The Muqaddimah

Humans and states are driven by self-interest and survival

History shows a cycle of conquest and decline

Leaders must act differently from individuals (morality stave vs person)

Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527)

The Prince

Leaders should do whatever is necessary to maintain power

ruler must sometimes be cruel for the greater good

leader must use power strategically (survival)

Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679)

Leviathan

Without a strong government, life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Without world government, states exist in constant competition

Power is the only way to ensure security

Statism

state is the primary and most important actor in IR

Structure-Centred Liberalism

IR shaped by domestic structures (political institutions, economic systems, social hierarchies) (e.g even if president seeks aggression, Congress can block it through domestic constraints)

Actor-Centred Liberalism

Focuses on individual actors (leaders, businesses, political groups) and their responses to international constraints (e.g Apple/Tesla pressure U.S. government to keep trade relations w/China due to their reliance on Chinese supply chains)

Rationalism liberal theory

States and actors make decisions logically and strategically based on costs and benefits (e.g countries join EU offers economic and security benefits)

Constructivism in liberal theory

IR shaped by ideas, norms, and interactions between actors. Concepts created and change over time, poer in meaning-making. Context important for IR. Separates ontology + epistemology (meanings create structures). Structures influence states vice versa

What neo-liberals and neo-realists agree on

Anarchy exists

States are key actors

States rational pursuing national interests

What neo-liberals and neo-realists disagree on

Neo-Realists: institutions are weak; Neo-Liberals: institutions matter

Neo-Realists: security = Military Power; Neo-Liberals: security = economic and diplomatic cooperation.

Rationalist (democratic peace theory)

Democracies have institutional checks that make declaring war difficult.

held accountable by voters, who often oppose war.

Decision-making is divided among multiple branches of government (impulsive military action less likely)

Constructivist (democratic peace theory)

Democracies view other democracies positively

Democracies engage in cooperation,reducing misunderstandings.

Shared norms and identity

Criticisms of Liberal IR Theory

struggles to explain global shifts like war or nationalism

no clear definition of power

Rationality is subjective

Western bias (democracy/free trade universal)

States don’t always have full/accurate information

Pluralist (liberals)

politics is shaped by multiple actors; institutions, NGOs (not just governments)

Solidarist Approaches (ES)

focus on individuals rights, moral obligations and shared humanity. IR protect people not just states. Justice necessary for order, solve moral problems (genocide, poverty) via cooperation and humanitarian intervention

Critiques of English School

Too vague, lacks clear methods, blends too many theories

Lacks predictive power (what ought to be vs what is)

Eurocentric

uncertainties of anarchical systems understated

unclear how states persuade others to form institutions

ignores the role of corporations, NGOs…

doesn’t explain institutional decline

Can’t reconcile state sovereignty with human rights (order vs justice)

Historical Materialism (Marxism)

conflict between classes over control of production, patterns of exploitation, resistance and transformation

Base & superstructure (Marxism)

Economic foundation (mode & relations of production). Superstructure (institutions built on base; law, politics, media). Base shapes superstructure and vice-versa

Historical Analysis

Society evolves through class struggles and economic transformation

Superstructure

Institutions (laws, media, education) that support the base.

Dialectics

history changes through contradictions and conflicts (thesis → antithesis → synthesis)

Class struggle

The ongoing conflict between the bourgeoisie (owners) and proletariat (workers)

Commodification

Turning everything (labor, goods, services, even human relations) into something that can be bought or sold (human value = economic productivity)

Surplus value

extra value created by workers that is kept as profit by capitalists, leading to exploitation.

Alienation

Workers feel disconnected from their labor, products, and society under capitalism

Capitalism

economic system where private owners control production for profit, leading to innovation but also inequality.

Socialism

system where production is controlled by the workers or the state, aiming to eliminate class exploitation.

Lenin’s Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (1917)

argues that imperialism is the final stage of capitalism, driven by monopolies and the need for expansion (mintain profits, suppress class revolt) (core vs periphery). Capitalists offer concessions (higher wages) buys social peace

Capitalist States/urgeColonialism

Advanced capitalist nations expand overseas to control resources, labor, and markets, ensuring continued profits

Monopoly Capital, Cartels, New Markets

Large corporations (monopolies and cartels) dominate economies and seek global expansion to avoid economic crises.

Muting Class Revolt in the Core

Wealth from colonies helps imperialist nations "bribe" their working class with better wages, preventing revolutions

Inter-Imperialist Rivalries as the Cause of War

Competing empires fight over resources and markets, leading to global conflicts (e.g., World War I)

War’s Inherent Economic Base

Wars are driven by economic needs, as imperialist nations seek new territories and profits through military force.

Hegemony (Gramsci)

No Revolution? →ruling class maintains power through hegemony controlling culture, and institutions to secure consent from masses.

Diffusion of Hegemony

Hegemony spreads through institutions like schools, families, shaping public consciousness to accept status quo.

historic bloc

alliance of ruling class forces maintaining hegemony

counter-historic bloc

emerging coalition challenging the dominant ideology

War of position

slow struggle for cultural and ideological change within society (needed in advanced capitalist nations).

War of manoeuvre

Direct revolutionary confrontation (as in Russia 1917).

Production, Power, and World Order (1987)

Cox critiques mainstream IR by applying Gramsci’s ideas to global politics hegemonic alliances in power, ideas, institutions, IR complicit in maintaining this system

Purpose of Theory

"Theory is always for someone and for some purpose"; it serves power interests.

Knowledge Production

Knowledge reflects power structures; critical theory challenges dominant ideologies.

Pax Britannica

British-led 19th-century global order (trade & colonialism). Sea power, gold exchange, empire, free movement of people

Pax Americana

U.S.-led 20th-century order (military & capitalism), air power, floating currencies, cultural influence, leadership via global insti. (WTO, IMF, UN)

Social Forces

Power comes from both states and global actors (capitalists, corporations, NGOs)

Internationalization of the State

States serve global capitalism, not just national interests

Problem-Solving Theory

Accepts world as it is and works within existing structures.
Focuses on predicting outcomes and solving specific issues.
Treats politics as ahistorical (not considering how things developed).
Claims objectivity (neutral, fact-based analysis).

Critical Theory (Robert Cox)

theory serves someone or a purpose (whose interests are served) Questions how world came to be/challenges existing structures. system as evolving, ethical concerns, Explains historical change and power dynamics.Focuses on (what should be, rather than just what is)

Frankfurt School Values (FS)

Challenges the separation of objective facts and subjective values, arguing that all knowledge is shaped by ideology via culture, superstructures, hidden forms of domination, promote emancipation via critical awareness.

Knowledge Production (FS)

Questions how institutions and media shape beliefs and prevent revolutionary change/superstructures

Embourgeoisement of the Working Class (FS)

Workers adopt middle-class values, reducing their revolutionary potential.

Communicative Action

Jürgen Habermas’s idea that rational dialogue can lead to social transformation

Andrew Linklater’s Transformation Political Community (1998)

Examines how political communities evolve beyond national borders, promote global ethics, challenge exclusion logic of borders via dialogue, inclusion, responsibility across globe

De-Reification of States (FS-Andrew Linklater)

Challenges the idea of states as fixed, arguing they are socially constructed (human-made), open it to transformation/critique

Transcending Borders (FS)

Advocates for global responsibility and ethical obligations beyond the nation-state

Marxian IR criticism

too focused on class and economics, missing other global dynamics.

Overestimate inevitability of revolutionary change

Dismissive of nationalism and identity

Overlooks political, ideological, and security motivations for war

Androcentric Knowledge

IR has historically been shaped by male perspectives, ignoring gendered experiences.

Power/Knowledge Nexus

way IR defines power is gendered, privileging war and state security over social issues

Post-structuralism (Foucault/Derrida)

Power and language shapes what is accepted as truth; knowledge is never neutral (reinforces dominant ideas). Discourse produce subjects (threat) Reject binary oppositions (female vs male, west vs non-west). Derrida: question language of IR, deconstruction + double readings = meaning unstable, dominant narratives. challenges the assumption that only states matter

Genealogy (Foucault/Nietzsche)

Examines how historical discourses shape present ideas and institutions

Language Shapes Reality

Meaning is constructed through language, not fixed

Deconstruction

Breaks down language and concepts to reveal hidden biases and assumptions