Theories Review

Realism Splits into Classical and Structural

Three Images: Human Nature, State Level, System Level

Human Nature: Brutish and Short

State Level: Not sufficient to avoid war
System Level: Anarchic

Hierarchy of Ideas: Fear (Security)-> Interests (Wealth) -> Honor (Prestige)

Classical Realism
Relevant Authors: Morgenthau, Machiavelli, Thucydides, Hobbes, Carr
Morgenthau
6 Principles:
1. Objective
laws of
politics can
be found in
human
nature
(MOST
IMPORTANT
LEVEL)
2. States
pursue
interests
defined in
terms of
power
3. Constant
State
Interest
but specific
interests
change
4. States
should be
prudent
5. No
universally
valid
morality
6. Moral/Legal
approach
insufficient
, anything
that
excludes
power falls
short

Machiavelli
To have peace,
you must
prepare for
war military
capacity is
pivotal

Thucydides
Strong do
what they can,
weak suffer
what they
must

Hobbes
Three reasons
states fight:
Competition,
Glory,
Diffidence

Carr
Critiques
liberalism:
Harmony of
Interest is
false

Lack of central
govt creates
anarchy

Structural Realism - Splits into Offensive and Defensive(Neorealism)

Offensive Structural Realism

Relevant Authors: Mearsheimer

States try to amass MAXIMUM (M&M) power (differs from neorealism which
focuses on balance of power)
o No way of knowing how much power will be sufficient
o Rewards being a regional hegemony with few competitors
China/Russia/US

Defensive Structural Realism (Neorealism)

Relevant Authors: Kenneth Waltz, Layne

Focuses on structure defined in three parts:

o Principle of Order
Domestic System is Ordered (Hierarchical)
International System is Anarchic
o Units have specific functions in the domestic system, unlike in
international system
o Distribution of Power and capabilities
Polarity
Bipolar System more stable because it creates rigid
alliances and flexible strategies the enemy is known, the
friends have little relevance
o Ex: Cold War Era
o Challenge: Overreaction overfocused on the
actions of one rival, get involved with periphery
when not necessary
Ex: Vietnam War
Multipolarity creates flexible alliances and rigid strategies
o Ex: Leading up to WW1
Lack of bipolarity made countries vulnerable,
had to get involved when they didnt want to
in order to maintain stability
o Challenge: Miscalculation too many actors, too
hard to predict all actions
Ex: WW1 was predicted to be a short, easy
war
Balance of Power (Two people to Waltz! Two states)
No benefit to maximizing power because other states will
try to counterbalance your power if you get too strong
Instead you want sufficient power to maintain security
Challenges to Cooperation
Cheating, Relative Gains, Vulnerability
Hegemonic Decline (Gilpin)

Liberalism -> Classical Liberalism (inspired by classical economics and rationalism)

>Split into Democratic Peace Theory, Institutionalism, Interdependence
Classical Liberalism
Political philosophy stemming from the age of enlightenment, rejecting autocracy in
favor of autonomy and consent of the governed

Relevant Authors: Kant, Locke

Kant/Neo-kantian Liberalism

Three Principles (Doyle)

o Republics will be peaceful
Led to dem. Peace theory
People wont want to go to war, sep. of leg and exe
creates more responsive govt
o Federations of Free States will form
Non-aggression pacts
o Universal Hospitality (Free movement of people)
Makes intl trade possible

Democratic Peace Theory

Democracies less likely to wage war

o Historically untrue (except in preventative war)
o Owen: argues institutions and ideology is more important
Have foreign policy that is substantially different from non-democracies
o Criticism from 30s and 40s realists (Morgenthau, Kennan)
Democratic Foreign Policy corrupted by special interests or
moral/ethical obligations
However, this conflicts, cant simultaneously treat the state like
a black box and argue that democracies are particularly weak?
o as well as Tocqueville (19th century liberal)
Democracies are too volatile/reactive in both peace and wartime
o Examples of anti-DPT evidence: Latin America (peaceful through 20th
century)

Liberal Institutionalism Set of expectations and rules that develop and regulate
the behaviour of states (GATT/WTO). These regimes promote cooperation to
overcome some of the discord of anarchy.

Relevant Authors: Keohane, Ikenberry, Bentham and Mill

Keohane
Challenges Realist
Theory, relaxes
assumptions that
states act
coherently or are
the only actors in
the international
system
Created complex
interdependence
theory which
argues that
increasingly
complex network of
actors appears,
which causes a lack
of hierarchy in
priorities and often
changing agendas,
and war and
military conquest
decline

Ikenberry
Countries with
disproportionate
power can embed
themselves within
the institutions
they create, to
guarantee stability
of power in the
future through
minor sacrifices
All countries will
have to join the
system in order to
modernize
Tried to use realist
theory to
construct a
framework for
relationships
between the
international and
domestic variables

New system
requires
cooperation/encour
ages cooperation
When international
institutions are
formed, its helpful
that the state
forming the
institutions has
hegemonic power
(possible examples:
league of nations
versus UN)
Interdependence

Relevant Authors: Keohane

Bentham
Founder of
utilitarianism
Maximise utility
greatest
happiness for
greatest number
of states
War should always
be avoided
1. Tribunal of
peace
2. Enlightened
reasoning
Colonies are costly

Mill
Similar thoughts
to Bentham with
the exception that
he believes that
war isnt always
bad/wrong, can be
the best option

Angell

The idea that the military is the key to all security and success (Machiavelli) is
the great optical illusion

Organization of the State Collective Variables and Foreign Policy Outcomes

Why do states overextend? State Behavior Theory (Builds off of defensive realism
Snyder)

Interest groups hold three advantages

o Organizational, information and closeness with govt

Tries to build new theory using classical realism by integrating domestic attributes
(specifically interest groups)

Three types of states:

o Cartelized (special interests dominate)
Militarized special interests create demand for expansion and
support eachothers demands
Ex: 19th Century Japan
o Democratic (special interests influence)
o Unitary (no special interests)
Expansion happens if the leaders want expansion
Collective leadership often discourages over-expansion
Ex: Soviet Union, Cuba
What determines how states react?
o Threat Assessment
o Strategic Adjustment
o Policy Implementation
International goals achieved through intl policy (Ikenberry) Methods
o Mobilization
o Extraction
Domestic goals achieved through international policy Variables Methods
o External Legitimacy
o Extraction

soft states with limited capabilities (third world) will seek

external validity because they cant mobilize at home
soft states with excellent capabilities (the US) will extract
resources externally because they can mobilize
Hard/strong states do whatever they want
States will change their strategy depending on changes in
strength
Allison Analysis of the Cuban Missile Crisis
o Summer of 62 US finds missiles in Cuba
Blockades Cuba as a crisis response (calls it a quarantine)
Calls to decrease tension USSR should leave Cuba
Several minor military events no escalation
Soviet agrees so long as US does not retaliate against
Castro
o Makes a second demand to remove missiles from
Turkey
US agrees to first demand, ignores second
o But resolves the second demand through
diplomatic means
o Three methods of analysis
Rational Actor Model
States are unitary actors (black box)
Cost/Benefit Analysis Rationality rules
o Benefits:
Bargaining chip for missiles in turkey
Protect Cuba
Establish strategic victory
USSR had more IRMs than ICMs
Challenges: Things dont add up
o Missiles lacked protection
o Loaded for two missiles.. would never have
reloaded in time
o Why?
Organizational Model
State is a conglomerate of organizations, not unitary
Organizations operate according to Standard Operating
Procedures (SOPs)
o Limits the range of options
o Resists Change
o Induce irrationality in state behavior because many
actors
Explanations for problems in Rational Actor model
o Two different organizational priorities
Army
Rocket Forces
o Different operators

KGB brought the missiles to Cuba SOP of

secrecy
Rocket Forces took over once in Cuba SOP
not there
o American side
Methods used were the ones available
SOP available for blockades, not airstrikes
Made blockade the better option
High levels of irrationality in actors
Criticism: doesnt explain consistently
o Nothing systematic can be determined from this
theory
o Assumptions not necessarily valid
Bureaucratic Model
Where you stand depends on where you sit
o Minimally the second best solution
Political compromise to generate outcomes
Criticism: Doesnt explain much about the US
o Preferences dont necessarily correspond with your
position
Only the rational actor model gives a why, however three
options might be complementary

Human Actors and Foreign Policy Outcomes Psychology of International Relations

Human Psychology brought back in during the 50s and 60s

Relies on reasoning of why humans make certain decisions (rational
interests? Stimuli?
o Deterrence Model
Power must be met with power, otherwise it could be interpreted
as weakness and be taken advantage of
Ex: Outbreak of WW2
o Spiral Model
Coercion might be counterproductive
Unintentional Consequences
o Security Dilemma
Ex: Outbreak of WW1
o Often miscommunications create bad decisions
Unmotivated biases
Humans be humans
motivated biases
group-think
o Rationally acquired benefits for behaving in a
certain irrational way

Consequences: not thinking objectively,

might increase risky outcomes
Weaknesses of group-thinking (Janis)
Limited outcomes
Failure to rethink chosen outcomes
Failure to rethink possible outcomes
Tendency to rely on own sources, not
seek external knowledge
Selective bias in the way groups
interpret info
No back-up plans

Gorbachevs new thinking

Defensive Defense
Avoid accidental war
Drawing Analogies
Using past behavior to draw conclusions about predicting
behavior
China was involved in Korea, so they will intervene in
Vietnam
Framing Policy
How to view losses and gains
Tendency to attempt to salvage everything after a loss by
taking less risky behavior (both groups are willing to
cooperate as they see it as maintaining status quo)

Constructivism
Relevant Authors: Wendt

Explaining versus Understanding

o Constructivism seeks to understand, rather than explain
o Reaction to the idea that social science can/should be understood like
the natural sciences
o Norms define identities which define interests and the way theyre
pursued
Wendt Article Key Points
o 1. People act according to their means
Distribution of power and anarchy insufficient to distinguish
friend from foe
Depends on their social constructed relationships and
expectations
o 2. Actors acquire identities through social participation
Interests are not fixed, but socially constructed
Security exists, but what security means can change

o
o
o

3. Partitions the definition of anarchy

Lockeian, Hobbesian and Kantian anarchy
If state finds itself in a self-help system, then its practices are
what kept it there
Hobbesian to Kantian has occurred, but it took hundreds
of years
History Matters
Distribution of resources not sufficient to determine any
outcomes/behavior
Criticism
No systemic conclusions, only describes, struggles to create
universally applicable theory
Several issues in making logical jumps
Anarchic system that supposedly can be transformed but
hasnt been
o Simultaneous homogeneity of values and
heterogeneity
Post Cold War

Waltz Neorealism still useful

Balance of power will emerge

o Wohlforth US Military gap simply too big to fill, wont be filled

Mearsheimer Offensive structural realism still useful

Ikenberry Institutionalism/Neoconservatism

Neoconservatism The US has an obligation to spread liberal and democratic

values abroad, even through active intervention when necessary Fukuyama,
Cohen and Wolfowitz at SAIS

Fukuyama / Huntington new theories