The English School of International Relations Notes

The English School - Context

  • Historical Background:

    • Established by the British Committee on the Theory of International Politics (1959-1980s).

    • Comprised scholars who were often former practitioners of international politics and historians.

  • Key Focus Areas:

    • Norms and ‘soft’ institutions play a significant role in international relations.

    • Importance of diplomacy and historicism.

  • Relation to IR Theory Debates:

    • Part of the ‘second great debate’ regarding whether IR theory should be a science, reflecting the divide between 'scientists' and 'traditionalists'.

    • The Kaplan-Bull debate (1966) exemplifies this discourse.

Key Ideas of the English School

  • Disputing the Domestic Analogy:

    • Contrasts with realism; states are not like individuals in a state of nature (Hobbes).

    • States have resilience that allows them to respond measuredly to hostilities, leading to the development of reciprocal norms.

  • Distinction Between International System and International Society:

    • International System: Interaction of states where they affect each other systematically.

    • International Society: States recognize common interests and adhere to shared norms, creating a structured order out of anarchy.

  • Understanding Order despite Anarchy:

    • Analyzed under Bull's definition of international society: common values and rules among states.

    • International society promotes cooperation and reduces the brutish nature of anarchy.

  • Types of International Society:

    • Pluralist: Focuses on state sovereignty and cooperation for mutual advantage.

    • Solidarist: Acknowledges the potential for universal ethical standards and enforcement of human rights.

Balance of Power

  • Comparison to Realism:

    • Similar to realists in recognizing balance of power reflects international anarchy, yet highlights the deliberate management role of great powers.

    • Power balancing involves states' conscious efforts, not just self-interest-driven behavior.

  • Trade-offs:

    • Emphasis on maintaining peace and order as the norm, yet acknowledging exceptional circumstances where war can occur.

War as a Function of Order

  • Perspective on War:

    • Recognized as a feature of international relations but moderated by international law and morality.

    • Viewed as a mechanism for enforcing social order rather than chaos, existing due to a lack of a world government.

Comparison with Realism

  • Similarities:

    • Anarchy is an enduring concept in both.

    • State sovereignty is critical for maintaining order.

    • States are primarily self-interested and there are limits to cooperation.

  • Differences:

    • English School sees potential for high cooperation and improved international politics.

    • States can pursue a broader self-interest that values international order and norms, which mediate state behavior.

Comparison with Liberalism

  • Alignments with Liberalism:

    • Optimism about the potential for improvement in international relations and cooperation.

    • Recognition of shared interests beyond war, focusing on institutions and communication.

  • Differences:

    • Pluralist perspective prioritizes state power politics compared to the liberal focus on cooperation across regime types.

    • Pluralist scholars caution against superficial solidarist interventions due to the complexities of power dynamics.

Conclusion

  • The English School blends aspects of realism and liberalism, offering a moderate stance that emphasizes the importance of norms, institutions, and the complex nature of international society, focusing on how states can and do cooperate despite the inherent nature of anarchy in international relations.