International Relations Profirency Exam Study Notes PDF

Preview

Summary

INTERNATİONAL RELATİONS THEORİESTheory: theories are generalizable accounts of how world works that go beyond thespecific details of one unique case. Purpose of theories in international relations: Positivism: Explain and predict by reducing the complexity of reality. (Ex.: neo-realism, institution...

Description

INTERNATİONAL RELATİONS THEORİES Theory: theories are generalizable accounts of how world works that go beyond the specific details of one unique case. Purpose of theories in international relations:  Positivism: Explain and predict by reducing the complexity of reality. (Ex.: neorealism, institutionalism)  Normativism: Challenge reality with reference to normative standpoints / values and develop strategies of fundamental global change. (E.g.: Marxism and class struggle) REALISM Early thinker of realism: Thucydides Realism emphasis the role of state, national interest, and military power r in the world politics. Realism claim to offer that state behavior and balance of power issue determinants of the policy process. Realism considered with human nature and its influence over state foreign policies. Human nature is egoistic and always desire more power, ın this sense states have egoistic structure and they try to maximize their power. Realism revolves around six central propositions: 1- States are the central actors in international politics rather than individuals or international organizations. Other actors, like NGOs or IGOs have limited power. 2- The international political system is anarchic; there is no supranational authority that can enforce rules over the states. 3- The actors in the international political system are rational as their actions maximize their own self-interest. 4- All states desire power so that they can ensure their own self-help. 5- Decision makers are rational actors in the sense that rational decision-making leads to the pursuit of the national interest. 6- Order in the world can only base on balance of power between states. Thomas Hobbes: Human nature as egoistic (not necessarily selfish) and conflictual unless there exist conditions under which humans may coexist. Nicola Machiavelli: Focused on how the basic human characteristic influences the security of the state. A key concept under realism is the international distribution of power referred to as system polarity. Polarity refers to the number of blocks of states that exist power in an international system. Realist theory claims that security is more important than economies, and economy is more important than human rights. Survival is the principal goal of every state. Hans Morgenthau has classified nations and their foreign policies into three types:  Status quotes states

 Revisionist States: The state which aims to revise the world order in its favors because it has gained new power credentials, like a China.  Imperialist States: Some states may go for openly aggressive policies. Ex: Germany under rule of Hitler. For realist change of the power is through war. Offensive Realism: (Structural Theory) States seek to maximize their power relative to others never be safe. Hegemony is the best strategy for a state to pursue, if it can. = Mersheimer). All states strive to maximize their power relative to other states because only most powerful states can guarantee their survival. States under anarchy face the ever present threat that other states will use force to harm or conquer them. Mersheimer’s three additional explicit assumptions are as follow:  State always possess on offensive capability, which enables them to hurt and potentially destroy one another.  İnternational relations take place in the existential condition of uncertainty assessments regarding others’ intentions with absolute certainty impossible.  States are rational actors. Offensive realism holds that anarchy – the absence of a worldwide government or universal sovereign – provides strong incentives for expansion. All states strive to maximize their power relative than other states because only most powerful states can guarantee their own survival. Defensive Realism: Unwise strategy for state survival. They noted that seeking hegemony may bring a state into dangerous conflict with other. Instead, defensive realist emphasizes the stability of balance of power system. Under anarchy, many of the means a states uses to increase its security decrease the security of other states. This security dilemma causes states to worry about one another’s future intentions and relative power. Defensive realism suggest that under certain conditions, pairs of non-democratic states can avoid war, states can engage in mutually beneficial cooperation without the assistance of international institutions and norms proscribing the development and use of weapons of mass destruction are largely epiphenomenal. Waltz’s defensive realism is a state centric systemic theory of international politics based on the anarchic structure of the international system. Anarchy: absence of central authority. Focus on states and their relations in relation with power. (Military and political power) Realist focus on the political communities. In these relations, power plays a decisive role. In Waltz’s view a bipolar world is more stable than a multipolar world. Morgenthau: If we want to understand how international politics work, we should study the relations between states.

states

emergence of new system

anarchy/scarcity

competition/security dilemma

breakdown of system/war

different rates of growth

empire/hegemony/ balance of power

Realist argues that the domestic regimes of states are not relevant to their international relations. Realist believes that international law is weak. This is because existing international law reflects the interest of the most powerful states in the system. Also, if a state is powerful, it can simply ignore international law if it chooses to. Realism explains international relations in terms of power. Short term power capabilities depend on long term resources, both tangible and intangible. Realist considers military force the most important power. Security Dilemma: An effort by one state to increase its security decreases to security of other states. The other states responded by building military force maximize their relative power than attacker states. This power maximization process continuous when a state lost his economic and military capability against other side. If a state increase their military power another state feels unsecure and increases her own power. Security dilemma fundamentally related with feeling of insecurity. Balance Of Power: States act to preserve a balance of power in the system. Any of these countries dominate other states for catch equilibrium in the system. For their purpose state doing those things:  

Increasing their own power Alliances

States can work to maintain the balance of power. Describes a situation in which states are continuously making choices to increase their own capabilities while undermining the capabilities of others. Balance of power system is one of the reasons why international relations are anarchic. If a state increases its own power and attack to other states, other states would create alliances to reach more power than attacker states.

 Internal Balancing: States grew their military capabilities.  External Balancing: States enter into alliances to check their power of more powerful states or alliances. Buck-passing: States can let another state pay the cost of balancing. Passing the buck in international relations theory involves the tendency of nation states refuse to confront a growing threat in the hopes that another state will. Bandwagoning: States can join with the most powerful states to avoid the cost of balancing them. It is a strategy employed by states that find themselves in a weak position. The logic stipulates that an outgunned, weaker state should align itself with a stronger adversary because the latter can take what it wants by force anyway. Bandwagoning occurs when weaker states decide that the cost of opposing a stronger power exceeds the benefits. Realism predicts that states will bandwagon only when there is no possibility of building a balancing coalition or their geography makes balancing difficult. Power Transition Theory: It central claims are that the international system is usually hierarchically ordered with a dominant power at the top that creates and sustains the international order; that because of uneven growth rates, new power regularly rising. The interaction between the US and the USSR was based on mutual fear because they could not agree on common policy to advance the status quo. When Reagan met Gorbachev to negotiate arms reduction, he famously verified, “Trust, but verify”. Power transition theory can help us understand why democracies live at peace with each other. Polarity: - Unipolar: One great power: after cold war -

Multi-polar : More than two great power: before cold war Bi-polar : Two great power ( i.e. Cold War times)

Bi-polarity more peaceful than multi-polarity. Because, when world have been owned multi-polar system, world war occurred.

Structural Realism Associated in particular with the Kenneth Waltz. Waltz argued that international relations and actions of great powers could be explained with anarchical structure and structure of the international system. According to Waltz:   

States’ decisions and actions being based on human nature; they are arrived at via a simple formula All states are constrained by existing in international anarchic system. Any course of action they pursue is based on their relative power, when measured against other states.

Realism talks frequently about the importance of flexible alliances as a way of ensuring survival. The Theory of International Politics: Kenneth Waltz Highest goal of states is survival.

For neo-realist, cooperation through international organization is on the second place. States are always concerned about the relative and not the absolute gains. This means that the states will choose not to cooperate when there is a possibility for another state to obtain more in relative terms, as this could hurt their own security. Structural realist focus on the quality of diplomacy and rational incentives for cooperation and calculation of interest. Why states want power? -

-

For classical realist, like Morgenthau, the answer is human nature. Everyone is born with a will to power hardwired into them, which effectively means that great powers are led by individuals who are bent on having their state dominate its rivals. For structural realist, human nature has little effect to do with why states want power. The structure or architecture of the international system that forces states to pursue power.

Structural realist treat states as if were black boxes: they are assumed to be alike, save for the fact that some states are more or less powerful than others. Five assumptions of structural realism: 1. Great powers are the main actors in world politics and they operate in an anarchical system. 2. All states possess some offensive military capability. Each state has the power to influence some of his neighbours. 3. The main goal of states is survival. States seek to maintain their territorial integrity and the autonomy of their domestic political order. 4. States are rational actors, which is to say they are capable of coming up with sound strategies that maximize their prospect for survival. Structural realism is assumed that in anarchy states, “balance” rather than “bandwagon”. Structural realist understanding does not analyses domestic policy of states. Because nobody knows that who manage the state, or what kind of policy using for internal policy. Prisoners Dilemma: Each actor is a rational actor; they are doing what they believe is best for them. Story: Two individuals are both arrested for a crime. But authority do not have enough evidence for arrest them for a long time mostly preferred because lack of communication. Now, the two individuals are separated from one another, so they are unable to communicate with one another. Each of the prisoners has two options; they can admit to committing the crime, or they can deny committing a crime.

Liberalism Liberal assumption argued that, international system is state centric and structurally anarchic, but liberals find realm for cooperation. For liberals, world politics is not a zero-sum game; the benefit of one is not necessarily the loss of others. Trade and commerce are mutually beneficial activities that create an incentive for cooperation and coexistence.

For liberals the key assumption is that peace and cooperation among states can produce “absolute gains” for all. The liberal focus on absolute gains clearly more conductive to international cooperation than is the realist focus on “relative gains” Cooperation is the dominant theme in liberalism. According to liberal view, states depend on economy and war affected badly to states economy. For that state’s want to avoid to war. International organization have more important role in liberal theory. Most of the international organization includes almost all the state, such as UN, and these types of organizations have effective role to improve human rights and state cooperation for world peace. Liberalism is based on the moral argument that ensuring right of an individual person to life, liberty and property is the highest goal of government. İnternational relations designed by the international organizations or institutions. Liberalism is not a “domestic politics” theory that ignores the “international system”. İt is a “systemic theory” According to liberal theory, international system is anarchic, states are rational, social pressures defining state preferences, interdependence among preferences dictates state behavior are thin. In these sense liberalism focus on the creation of a peaceful world by integration. Liberalism has also argued for individual competition in civil society and claimed that market capitalism best promotes to welfare of all by most efficiency allocating scarce resources within societies.  Liberal Institutionalism: On this view law, regimes and international organizations mitigate anarchy and facilitate international cooperation. This Kantian ideal was at least imperfectly reflected in the creation of both the UN and its predecessor League of Nations. The goal of all these institution-building is providing an opportunity for actors in the global system to escape from the Hobbesian state of nature that realist take as a given.  Liberal Commercialism: Suggest that commerce among states leads to a mutual economic interdependence that raises the cost and reduces the likelihood of war. War is bad for business in capitalist market economy.  Liberal Internationalism: İdea that democracies tend not to fight wars against one another and that the spread of democratic government can be antidote to war in international system.  Kantian Triangle: International institutions, economic interdependence and democracy mutually reinforce to global tendency toward international cooperation and peace.  Democratic Peace Theory: According to Immanuel Kant, democratic countries should be much peaceful than anti-democratic countries. Because, democratic countries have self- control mechanism and sometimes states’ citizen want to change their government if they would be like their policies. In this sense, democratic countries do not fight other democratic countries, but they could attack hybrid or anti-democratic countries.  Hegemonic Stability Theory: The international system more likely to remain stable when a single nation state is the dominant world power or hegemon. The fall of existing hegemon or the state of no hegemon diminishes the stability of the international system. In an anarchic system, where states are assumed the pursue self-interest; the situation may give rise to Bandwagoning.

 Democracy Promotion: Locke saw himself confronted with the task of promoting “liberalism” in a non-liberal environment. Locke’s solution to this problem was faithful to the fundamental promises of his theory and in particular to the linkage between freedom and private property. If private property was the basis of individual freedom, Locke argued, property owners would demand that government protect private property and have their freedom. The terrorist attack of 11 September 2001 was on the US catapulted democracy promotion onto the center of US policy in the Middle East. Determiners of hegemony: - Military capability: to be hegemon in international system, China uses economic power; the US uses military power rather than economy. - Soft Power: - Economic Power - Cultural Ties with powerful states According to hegemonic stability theory the role played by a hegemonic power is very important in creating stability in international politics and economy.

Constructivism (Alexander Wendt) Started with end of the cold war. It is often argued that constructivism is an approach rather than a theory. Because, constructivism offers no solution to specific problems in IR nor his prescribe any particular policy directions. Constructivist thought argued that social world is our making. The impact of ideas, identities, norms and culture in word politics. Constructivism focuses on capacity and will of people to take deliberate attitude towards the world and to end it significance. Socially character of international relations, constructivism focus on ideas. System: Constructivism = agent structure ( Agency and structure are mutually constitied) Mutual effect each other

Three types of anarchy: 1. Kantian anarchy: States are friend and work together (cooperation, friendship) States perceive one another’s as friends. Violence and wars are outlawed. Global cosmopolitan society. 2. Lockian anarchy: (Rivalary) States perceive one another as rivals. They recognise one another’s existence because they recognize the right to sovereignty. Violence and war break out periodically. International society of states. 3. Hobessian anarchy: (enemy, entity) State perceive one anothers as enemies. They deny one another’s existence. Violence and war are omnipresent. States have no self-conrol and selfrestraint. No international society of states. According to this view, the fundamental structures of international politics are social rather than strictly material. This leads to social constructivist to argue that changes in the nature of social interaction between states can bring a fundamental shift towards international security.

Wendtian constructivism: His theory is originally “cultural theory” of international politics explained by different “cultures of anarchy” constructed by states themselves. Main claims of constructivism: -

States are principal units of analysis for international political theory, The key structures in the states system are intersubjective rather than material, States identities and interest are important constructed by true social structures, also given exogenously to the system by human nature or domestic politics.

Constructivist argues that the nuclear arsenals of the United Kingdom and China though comparably destructive, have very different meanings to the United States that translate into very different patterns of interaction. Constructivist accepts that states are self-interested rational actors; they would stress varying identities and beliefs. Alexander Wendt: 500 hundred British nuclear missiles less threatening to the US than 5 North Korean missiles. (British are friend, but North Korean is not) Three kinds of norms: -

Regulative Norms: order and constrain behaviors Constitutive Norms: Create new actor, interest or categories of action Prescriptive Norms: Prescribe certain norms mainly there are no bad norms from the perspective of those who promote them.

According to constructivism social world is our making. Actors (usually powerful ones, likes leaders, and influential citizens) continually shapes the very nature of international relations through their actions and interactions. Constructivists argue that “anarchy is what states make of it” (actions, interactions and perceptions shape reality) Sovereignty is an important organizing force in international relations.

The English School (He...