2 critical debates evolution of international relations...

1

Zhongqi Pan 1

Critical Debates: Evolution of International

Relations Theory

Chapter 2

Zhongqi Pan 2

The Birth of IR Discipline

Ø IR as a subject is both old and young. p IR thoughts can trace back to ancient

Greece. p The IR discipline was born roughly in the

aftermath of the First World War.

Ø Why?

Zhongqi Pan 3


p First, there was no imperative demand for IR studies before World War I.

•  IR studies were usually impelled by disasters of international wars.

•  E. H. Carr, “International relations took its rise from a great and disastrous war; and the overwhelming purpose which dominated and inspired the pioneers of the new science was to obviate a recurrence of this disease of the international body politic.”

Zhongqi Pan 4


p Second, there was no effective supply of IR studies at the turn of centuries.

• Norman Angell, The Great Illusion. •  Edward H. Carr, The Twenty-Years’

Crisis, 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations.

• Hans Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace.

Zhongqi Pan 5


p Third, some strong prejudices and biases impeded the emergence of IR theory.

• Human nature was regarded as unchangeable, the state of state relations as a state of nature was seen as a given.

• Diplomacy was taken as patent of politicians and ambassadors.

• Woodrow Wilson, “Fourteen Points”.

Zhongqi Pan 6

The First Debate: Idealism vs. Realism

Ø The Emergence of Idealism in the Aftermath of WWI p Woodrow Wilson • Open diplomacy • Disarmaments •  Free trade •  The League of Nations

2

Zhongqi Pan 7


Ø The Emergence of Idealism in the Aftermath of WWI p Norman Angell • Misperceptions of leaders • Unprofitability of wars • Modernization •  Interdependence

Zhongqi Pan 8


Ø Major arguments of idealism p Human nature and behaviors are shaped

by environment; human nature can be improved by changing environment.

p National self-determination would lead to democracy; democracy would lead to peaceful behavior of state; international relations should be based on a harmony of interests between countries and people.

Zhongqi Pan 9


Ø Major arguments of idealism p Conflicts and wars are not inevitable;

international laws, international organizations, economic interdependence, and world public opinion can promote peaceful cooperation among states and build peace in the world; international peace should rely on not the system of balance-of-power, but on the system of collective security.

Zhongqi Pan 10


Ø The Challenges of Realism in the Interwar Years and After p Edward H. Carr •  There are profound conflicts of interests between countries.

•  Idealism overlooked importance of power in international politics.

•  Collective security cannot preserve world peace.

Zhongqi Pan 11


Ø The Challenges of Realism in the Interwar Years and After p Hans Morgenthau • Human nature is plain bad. •  International politics is a struggle for power.

•  There is no World Government, states are sovereign and armed, provide national defense.

Zhongqi Pan 12


Ø Major arguments of realism p International politics is governed by

objective laws; the roots of those laws lie in human nature; and human nature is pure bad and does not change in the course of time.

3

Zhongqi Pan 13


Ø Major arguments of realism p States are major actors of international

politics; there are profound conflicts of interests between countries; national interests and security are primary needs of the state; to protect national interest and security, states need to develop military force; foreign policy of states put emphasis on maintenance, strengthening, and demonstration of power.

Zhongqi Pan 14


Ø Major arguments of realism p Conflicts and wars are nature state of

international relations; states live in a state of anarchy; there is no world government; international organization cannot bring security to the world; the most effective way to preserve international peace is to rely on the balance of power.

Zhongqi Pan 15


Ø The Foci of the First Debate p Human nature p Power and interest p War and peace p Methodology

Subjects of the First Debate (1920s-1950s) Idealism/Utopianism Realism

Human Nature

shaped by environment; perfectible

pure bad; does not change over time

State Behavior

self-determination – democracy – peace; harmony of interests

military – national security – peace; conflicts of interests

International Arrangement

international institutions and collective security promote peace

international peace relies on balance of power

Approach ought to be ideal – reality

be reality – ideal

Zhongqi Pan 16

Zhongqi Pan 17

The Second Debate: Behavioralism vs. Traditionalism

Ø The Behavioral Revolution p The behavioral revolution proposed to use

scientific methods to study social sciences. p Behavioralism differs from behaviorism,

which is a theory of psychology on human behavior.

p The behavioral revolution was triggered by both development of sciences and need for scientific studies of social sciences.

Zhongqi Pan 18


Ø The basic assumptions of behavioralism p Human behaves in patterned ways. p The patterns could be used to study

human behaviors. p By using systematic and empirical data

by value-free studies, the patterns of human behaviors could be found.

4

Zhongqi Pan 19


Ø The Controversy between Behavioralism and Traditionalism p The behavioralists criticized both the

idealists and the realists as arrogant because they do not embrace scientific methodology.

p The behavioralists therefore labeled realism and idealism as traditionalism and behavioralism as scientism.

Zhongqi Pan 20


p The traditionalists insist that understanding IR requires historically based wisdom rather than data-based models.

p They remain convinced that the essence of IR is the qualitative difference and are skeptical of probability analysis and the effort to predict.

Zhongqi Pan 21


p The traditionalists criticized the behavioralists:

•  being too confident of generalizing models;

•  taking abstract models as realities; •  overlooking crucial qualitative

differences; •  placing scientific method over substantive

issues of international politics. Zhongqi Pan 22


Ø The Essence of the Second Debate p Behavioralism and traditionalism

disagree on: •  can we have formal, mathematical,

explicit theories of international political phenomena?

•  can the study of IR be quantified? •  is a scientific approach “value free” and

applicable to the study of IR?

Zhongqi Pan 23


Ø The Essence of the Second Debate p The second debate is a debate of

methodology. •  Since the first debate is over substantial

arguments, statements, conclusions on IR, it was called a real debate.

• On the contrary, since the second debate is only over how IR should be studied, it was comparatively called a pseudo debate.

Zhongqi Pan 24

The Third Debate: Neorealism vs. Neoliberalism

Ø The Advent of Neorealism p Kenneth Waltz •  Theory of International Politics •  Structure realism or neorealism •  Structure of international politics p The advent of neorealism is revolutionary

in two dimensions: methodology and theory.

5

Zhongqi Pan 25


p Methodology: • Neorealism incorporates the scientific

method into its classical approaches. • One aim of neorealism is to construct a

scientific theory on international politics. • According to neorealism, both qualitative

and quantitative analyses are indispensable.

Zhongqi Pan 26


p Theory: (differences from traditional realism)

•  First, neorealism contributes the new concept of structure and defines the international politics as a system. → Defining factors of structure are ordering

principle, characters and functions of units, and distribution of capabilities across the units.

Zhongqi Pan 27



•  Second, neorealism pays close attention to level of system, while realism usually to levels of individual and state. → Neorealism holds, only by distinguishing

the structure level from the unit level, can causal relations in international politics been scientifically explained.

Zhongqi Pan 28



•  Third, realism considers power as the ultimate goal of state and insists that power seeking is rooted in human nature, but neorealism does not think power itself is the objective. → Neorealism argues that the ultimate goal

of state is security, not power.

Zhongqi Pan 29



•  Fourth, neorealism stresses the impacts of structure on actors in shaping policies, in contrast with realism’s emphasis on the impacts of actors on structure. → Neorealism regards interactions among

states as result of international structure.

Zhongqi Pan 30


Ø Opponents’ Criticism and the Advent of Neoliberalism p Neoliberalism drives from the criticism of

neorealism. • Keohane, Neorealism and Its Critics • Nye, “Neorealism and Neoliberalism” •  Baldwin, Neorealism and Neoliberalism

6

Zhongqi Pan 31


p Neoliberalism’s criticism of neorealism: • Neorealism ignores non-state actors and

overlooks differences among state actors. • Neorealism fails to take the process of

system and interactions of actors into consideration.

• Neorealism spares and sacrifices the interpretive richness of classical realism.

Zhongqi Pan 32


p Major Differences between Neorealism and Neoliberalism

•  First, the nature and consequences of anarchy.

•  Second, international cooperation. •  Third, relative versus absolute gains. •  Fourth, priority of state goals. •  Fifth, intentions versus capabilities. •  Sixth, institutions and regimes.

Major Differences between Neorealism and Neoliberalism Neorealism Neoliberalism

Anarchy Does not matter much and better than world government.

A big problem and can be reformed by international institutions.

International cooperation

Cooperation is possible but difficult to sustain.

Cooperation is possible and can be expected.

Relative gain vs. absolute gain

Relative gain is the major concern of states, who ask not “will both of us gain?” but “who will gain more?”

States are mainly concerned with absolute gains, which make cooperate more likely.

Zhongqi Pan 33

Major Differences between Neorealism and Neoliberalism Neorealism Neoliberalism

Priority of goals

National security National economic prosperity

Intentions vs. capabilities

The distribution of states’ capabilities is the primary determinant of their behavior and international outcomes.

Intentions, interests, information, and ideals of states are more influential than is the distribution of capabilities.

Institutions and regimes

Organizations are arenas where states carry out traditional competition and political rivalry.

Institutions create norms that are binding and that change patterns of international politics. Zhongqi Pan 34

Zhongqi Pan 35

The Fourth Debate: Debate among Paradigms

Ø Widening and Deepening of the Debate p The debate changed from bilateral to

multilateral, not only among paradigms, but also within the realist paradigm.

• With the end of the cold war, many new theories or variants emerged.

• Neoliberalism, radicalism, critical theory. • Offensive, defensive, and neoclassical

realisms. Zhongqi Pan 36


Ø Realist Paradigm and Its Rivals p The realist paradigm is the major and

common critical target of others. p The fourth debate is mainly conducted •  Between realism and liberalism

(neoliberal institutionalism) •  Between realism and radicalism •  Between realism and critical theory

7

Zhongqi Pan 37


p Realism vs. neoliberal institutionalism •  Institution becomes the most eminent

focus of their debate. • On whether institutions affect prospects

for international stability, realists say no, neoliberal institutionalists say yes.

•  Realists see institution as intervening variable, institutionalists see it as independent variable.

Zhongqi Pan 38


p Realism vs. radicalism • Different perspectives on international

system are the most important divergence. •  The realists argue that international

system is anarchical and determined by the distribution of states’ capabilities. To radicalism, the structure of international system is hierarchical, stratified, and dominated by capitalist system.

Zhongqi Pan 39


p Realism vs. radicalism • While realism regards state as the major

actor of international politics, radicalism argues that class is the major actor.

•  Realists attempt to explain state behavior by both international structure and state interest defined as power. Radicals assume that economics is the primacy determining factor of state behavior.

Zhongqi Pan 40


p Realism vs. critical theory •  The role of idea and identity is the key

issue dividing critical theory and realism. • While realism emphasizes power and

interests, critical theory stresses ideas and identities.

•  Realists define the structure of system as the distribution of power. Constructivists see it as the distribution of idea.

Zhongqi Pan 41


p Realism vs. critical theory •  The constructivists argue that anarchy is

not a given but what states make of it. •  The postmodernists seek to deconstruct

basic concepts such as the state and sovereignty.

•  Feminist theory criticizes realism ignoring the importance of gender.

Zhongqi Pan 42


p Offensive, defensive, and neoclassical realisms

• Offensive realists assume all states are power maximizers.

• Defensive realists assume all states are security maximizers.

• Neoclassical realists argue that some are power maximizers and some security maximizers.

8

Zhongqi Pan 43


Ø Implications of the Forth Debate p The forth debate as an ongoing debate is

very comprehensive and diffusive. p The debate of realist and liberal

paradigms is still the core and mainstay. p There is no winner or loser in the debate

and all theoretical paradigms get progresses.

p IR theory really becomes pluralistic.

Critical Debates of IR Theory Frame 1st debate 2nd debate 3rd debate 4th debate Time 1920s-50s 1960s-70s 1980s 1990s- Paradigm Idealism /

Utopianism vs. Realism

Behavioral-ism vs. Traditional-ism

Neorealism vs. Neoliberalism

Among Realism, Liberalism, Radicalism, Critical Theory

Style bilateral bilateral bilateral multilateral Subject Human

nature, state behavior, international arrangement.

Method-ology.

Anarchy, cooperation, gains, goals, intentions, institutions, etc.

Actors, ideas, institutions, anarchy, system, etc.

Zhongqi Pan 44

Zhongqi Pan 45

In Sum: Developing and Learning Theories through Debates

p While IR theory is a theoretical reflection of international politics, its development also follows its own logic.

p The progress of IR theory was primarily driven by theoretical debates.

p Debating is the way of theory development and the way of learning international politics theoretically as well.

2 critical debates evolution of international relations...

Documents