Zusammenfassung der Ressource
Principles of IR: Theories
- Realism and Structural Realism
- Classical realism founded between WW1 & WW2 -
founding fathers = Edward Carr, Hans Morgenthau
- core assumptions: Humans are selfish, egoist. If left in state of
nature people will act like animals
- egoism is restrained within states by
hierarchical political rules, but with no govt.
at international level, anarchy prevails
- Hence, IR is power politics: Survival, Security, Power Maximisation
- Bellum omnium contra omnes
- Thomas Hobbes: The Leviathan: 1.
Men are equal, 2. Men interact in
anarchy, 3. Men are motivated by
competition, diffidence and glory
- men agree to
give up some of
their freedom as
to not live in
anarchy
- n.b. IR models
schematize
complexity and allow
generalisations
- When self
interested states
interact in
anarchy, violent
conflicts can be
predicted
- Realist's view: NATO
intervened in Libya because it
was in the interest of the
international states, not to
help civilians
- Structural Realism (neo):1970-80s, Waltz, Mearsheimer.
- selfish states don't trust each other,
they must be self sufficient in order to
protect themselves
- states think in terms of relative
gains, not absolute gains - zero sum
game, if other states increase their
power, i lose power (thus security)
- so, losing a war exhausted
is fine, as long as the other
states are 'more' exhausted
(USA & WW1)
- Weaker states
fear for security,
stronger states
compete for
hegemony
- logic of balancing within the
system: developing one's
own power & coalition
building
- don't take into account norms,
humanitarianism, religion
- don't see how values, norms,
beliefs form national interest/FP
- Structures
- Bipolar - stable b/c power equally
distributed, certainty within the system - Cold
War is the Long Peace (J. Gaddis)
- Multipolar - less stable b/c unequal distribution of
powers, uncertainty of others, arms race (C19th)
- Unipolar - unstable b/c huge inequalities in power,
resentment against hegemon (anti americanism) -
greater incentive to stand against hegemon
- terrorism
- hegemon more likely
to intervene
worldwide
- Liberalism and Institutional Liberalism
- human beings are perfectible
- enlightenment philosophy
- transcendence - inevitability of human progress
- modernity thesis - economic growth = development
- liberalism favours: 1. individual rights
(C.L), 2. Constitutionalism &
Democracy, 3. Limitation of role of
state (only to maintain order)
- Arguments:
- 1. FREE TRADE: rather than autarky, it favours
peace, market capitalism promotes welfare, free trade
removes barriers = war less likely
- 2. DEMOCRACY: rather than dictatorship =
peaceful world, war useful for elites, not the
citizens feeling the brunt (KANT)
- Liberalism has an inside out approach -
Endogenous (domestic) factors determines
exogenous (international) factors
- inside: Free
Market
Parliamentary
Debate
Liberal
Democracy
Protect C.R
- outside:
globalised
world,
international
institutions,
peaceful
international
system,
protect of H.R
- Interdependence =
anarchy does prevail at
the international level,
but political coop is
possible - it's in
economic interests &
NGOs/TNCs
- Free trade/economic liberalism =
political coop = peace and
interdependence = reduce war threat -
SPILL OVER EFFECTS
- E.G.EEC (technical and
economic cooperation in
50s, then military and
political coop by 70s)
- Institutional Liberalism: cooperation is organised and
formalised in institutions, anarchy is mitigated by
institutional coop
- institutions encourage coop habits by facilitating technical
arrangements (showing benefits), monitoring compliance,
sanctioning cheaters
- world no zero sum
game - collective gains
- The Liberal Democratic Peace Thesis:
No war between lib dem states since
1945
- why? citizens dislike it - accountability
- free trade engenders peace
- no ground to contest each others
legitimacy
- share common
values - no
ideological reason
for war
- but democracy has a loose definition
- Germany before WW1:
democratically elected dictator
- definition of war - coups/intervention
- lib states fight non lib states b/c: of national security, to spread HR and democratic intervention in regimes
- Marxism
- challenge realism - class exploitation/economic inequalities.
Challenge liberalism - free trade and capitalism isn't best
- Marxist focus:
economic inequalities,
forms of domination,
N-S relations,
economic determinism
- dependence theory: criticism of development politics
- economic factors determinant, class exploitation, IR
is a global system of dominance (N dominates S)
- Core: North/West financial power. Periphery is the South
with raw materials & workforce, Core exploits Periphery,
elites of core & elites of p. coop
- Post structuralism:
- doesn't emphasise material forces or
power, or distribution of power, emphasis
on production of K
- how are political processes
interpreted and represented,
how is reality constructed
through representation
- Representation of reality is an act of power
- emphasises/promotes one vision over another
- we know who we are because we
know who we're not; binary identities
- men/women, good/bad, N/S.
- self constructed as superior, other inferior
- POWERS CONSTRUCT KNOWLEDGE AND REALITY
- EITHER YOU'RE WITH US OR YOU'RE WITH THE TERRORISTS
- construction of enemy, solution is war
- power to define greater than material power
- THE NORTH SOUTH DIVIDE
- North helps South: development and aid (more than $1000 billion since 1950s)
- North uses South: Geopolitical interests, resources etc,
- South threatens the North: immigration, terrorism
- Realist vision for aid
- aid form of buying political influence
- geostrategic
considerations,
securing alliances,
influencing
decisions
- Aid as a form of securing economic advvantages:
- buying clients, tied aid
- states give because it's in their interests
- Liberalist vision for aid
- product of humanitarian values
- responsibility, liberal value
- economic lib
- promote peace
- stablity
- strengthen market capitalism
- absolute gains
- Marxist vision for giving aid
- contributes to exploitation of S
- conditional aid
- Post structural vision:
- questions very concept of development
- deconstructs representation of S
- one truth - development is the
norm to follow
- underdevelopment is the problem - solution is economic growth
- negation of South's agency