International Relations Theory and Latin America Alejandres Gannon
Video of the Day
Level of AnalysisSection Uno (One)
A) What is a state
Unit of political organization1) Territorial boundaries2) Sovereignty3) Monopoly on the legitimate use of
force
B) Origins of the state
1648 Treaty of Westphalia Church lost control of territories
C) Problems with this definition Failed states States as actors vs actors within
states State vs nation vs country
Nation shares history, culture, language, and religion
States that aren’t nation-states States not recognized as such
C) Problem with this definition
TheorySection Dos (Tw0)
A) What is a theory?
Lens to explain, predict, and prescribe something about an event by selecting information
Patterns A theory doesn’t need to explain all
the facts, every theory is suited to explain some facts but not others
B) What is a good theory? Quality of a theory is determined by
Cost – how complicated it is to collect the necessary data, use the theory, or understand what it means
Benefit – how much and how well does this theory explain or predict
Bang for the buck How much data do I need in order to operate the
theoryvs How much new data can the theory explain or
predict
C) Parsimony
A parsimonious theory is a theory that explains or predicts a great deal using relatively little data
C) Parsimony
Example Based on the number of times someone
has sneezed in their lifetime, one can predict their debate win-loss record with 90% accuracy
Based on someone’s height, one can predict their debate win-loss record with 80% accuracy
Based on someone’s weight, age, and place of birth, one can predict their debate win-loss record with 70% accuracy
D) Theories and Maps
D) Theories and Maps
Theories should not try to explain everything, if they do then they cease to be theories
A good theory tries to explain a specific occurrence or event in the world and isolates that factor
RealismSection Tres (Three)
A) Background
Dominant during the Cold War “is” vs “ought to be”
B) Thucydides
Peloponnesian War (431BC-404BC) Balance of power
Power is central and conflict is inevitable Only power can stop power and ignoring
that principle causes messier politics and more bloodshed
C) Machiavelli Human nature and the thirst for power
Politics is run according to the way people are No super-state can tell states how to run, the
international system is anarchic Self-Interest
States must pursue survival and they do that through power
Morality States are absolved of any moral duties States that pursue moral rather than political
ends cause worse situations for their people
D) Morgenthau and Waltz Reaction to idealism and Wilsonian
Internationalism Idealists emphasized international
law, morality, international organization, etc
D) Morgenthau and Waltz The distribution of
power between states explains all important events in international relations
Kenneth Waltz (1924-May 13, 2013)
E) Tenets of Neorealism
1) States are inevitable States are the primary actors in
international politics and will be for the foreseeable future
The practice of great power politics is inevitable
E) Tenets of Neorealism
2. International system is anarchy There is no hierarchy and no
overriding authority Anytime there is a conflict of interest
it can be resolved through the use of force
E) Tenets of Neorealism
3. Security and survival States pursue one primary goal of
security and survival Because of this, all states behave in
similar ways despite having different cultures and economic systems
E) Tenets of Neorealism
4. Unitary and Rational Unitary – states are single cohesive
entities that pursue the goal of survival
Rationality – states are goal-directed which makes their behaviour relatively predictable
E) Tenets of Neorealism
5. Power Power is the most important factor in
determining how states can behave States enhance security by
accumulating power and it takes power to enhance security
Relative power
F) Implications
1) Pursuit of power All states seek to survive in anarchy, a
self-help system States must strive for power in order to
succeed States constantly compare their power in
relation to others States worry about relative gains
F) Implications
2) Absolute vs Relative Gains An interest in relative gains makes
cooperation between states very difficult because states will only cooperate if they think that they will gain more from the cooperation than their partners
F) Implications
3) Arming, bandwagoning, and balancing
States arm when they can afford to do so
States balance with (bandwagon with) a great power when they have little power of their own (free riding)
States balance against a great power when they have power of their own
F) Implications
4) Security Dilemma Arming/balancing + Relative gains =
Security dilemma When a state balances/arms
successfully, it increases its own security. At the same time, it decreases the security of others
If other states respond by also arming/balancing, a cycle of arming occurs (arms race) and alliances shift constantly
G) Weaknesses of Neorealism States are the only actors States are only interested in power,
usually military power States are only interested in relative
gains Bias towards interaction between,
not within, states Bias towards explaining war
(Neo)liberalismSection Cuatro (Four)
A) Key Tenants
Humans seek survival, but also happiness and freedom
Anarchy is not lethal, it is state authority that is dangerous
Rulers have a duty to maximize the freedom and happiness of citizens
Relations between states are about power, cooperation, and mutual gain
History shows that progress is possible
B) Free Trade
Economic growth rather than military conquest
Not zero sum Absolute vs relative gains
C) Democracy
Democratic systems are more peaceful than autocracies
States less likely to go to war when consent of the citizens is necessary
Reciprocal recognition of common principles
States should join confederations to ensure they don’t fight
D) Collective Security
States cooperate when in their interest
International regimes can set rules for how states should operate
E) Role of the State
State might no longer be primary actor Assumes frequent wars Transboundary issues Interdependence Information flows to citizens Rise of democracy
F) Comparing Neorealism and NeoliberalismREALIST ASSUMPTIONS
1. States are the only actors.2. States are only interested in power, usually military power.3. States are only interested in relative gains.4. Bias towards interactions between, not within, states.5. Bias towards explaining war.6. Materialist bias.7. International system
anarchic
NEOLIBERAL ASSUMPTIONS
1. States are not the only important actors in IR.2. States interested in power, military or economic.3. States are often interested in absolute gains.4. Bias towards interactions between, not within, states.5. Explain cooperation, as well as conflict.6. Materialist bias.7. Order within anarchy
ConstructivismSection Cinco (Five)
A) Origins
Cold War unexplainable Where do states interests come
from?
B) What is it?
Application of sociology to IR Ideas, norms, taboos, and cultures
held by interactional actors produce the goals and preferences of those actors
What states want is a function of who they are
C) Intersubjectivity
Constructivists are interested in intersubjective ideas
Ideas not located in the thoughts of a single subject, but “between” the thoughts of several subjects
Ideas held by a group
D) Social Constructivism (Wendt) “If states find themselves in a self-help
system, this is because their practices made it that way. Changing the practice will change the intersubjective knowledge that constitutes the system.” (Wendt, p 189) Anarchy does not force self-help Interaction of states creates a social structure
that shapes their behaviour because states create the social structure and once that exists it then affects states
E) Norms and Taboos (Finnemore) Standards of appropriate and
legitimate behaviour are intersubjectively shared
Norm – accepted behaviour Humanitarian intervention
Taboo – prohibited behaviour Taboos don’t have to be written, or
enforced, law Compliance occurs due to fear of social
disapproval
ComparisonsSection Seis (Six)
Nuclear Weapons
Why hasn’t the most powerful weapon in the world been used even once in the past 60 years?
A) Realist Answer
Security and survival are best guaranteed by non-use Deterrence Damage is too devastating Alternatives are available Using nuclear weapons is irrational
B) Liberalist Answer
Interest in freedom and cooperation causes non-use Economic interdependence Alliance ties and treaties Democratic constraints on use
C) Constructivist Answer
The international community of states shares a taboo against nuclear weapons States choose weapons based not only
on cost and effectiveness States act as a community, with shared
ideas These ideas (values, norms, taboos)
actually affect how states act
Latin AmericaSection Siete (Seven)
A) Things to explain, predict, prescribe Lack of political and economic
development Presence of international peace but
absence of domestic peace Lack of power projection Marginalization in shaping major
world events Relevance of regional international
relations
B) Strengths of Explanation Absence of inter-state
war since 1883 Realist – satisfied with
territorial squo Liberal – spread of
democracy and economic interdependence
Constructivist – cultural framework that prefers peaceful resolution over war
C) Limits of Current Explanations Realist
Security dilemma vs insecurity dilemma Liberal
Democratic peace theory Constructivist
Is there a different “Latin American” identity?
D) Realism
US relationship characterized by self-interest
Search for autonomy from the US
E) Liberalism
Poverty remains the primary socio-economic problem
Failure to take advantage of globalization Effects of global capitalism Weakness of political institutions Role of the state
F) Constructivism
Latin American “diplomatic culture” established international law to regulate behaviour (Holsti, 1993) Principle of nonintervention Consensus-seeking uti possidetis (recognition of former
colonial borders) Equality of states