International Relations Grand Debates

1
International Relations Grand Debates

• University of Helsinki, Department of Political
  Science, Fall 2003
• Christer Pursiainen
• For downloading the Power Point presentation, go
  to
• www.kolumbus.fi/christer.pursiainen
• ? teaching

2
Contents

• Development of the Discipline
• Idealism vs. Realism
• Traditionalism vs. Scientism
• Realism vs. Liberalism vs. Marxism
• Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs. Constructivism

3
1. Development of the Discipline

• Economics Strategy History
  Philosophy International Law
• Thucydides Aquinas
• 16th
• 17th Machiavelli Grotius
  
• 18th Smith
• 19th Marx Clausewitz
  Rousseau Kant
• 20th Imperialism theories History
  of Diplomacy
• Geography Geopolitics
• WWI The birth of the discipline
• 1920-30s IDEALISM
• WWII REALISM Traditionalism
  First Debate
• 1950s Functionalism
• Natural sciences SCIENTISM
  (Behavioralism, FPA)
  Second Debate
• 1960s Peace research
  Realism revisited Third
  Debate
• 1970s Dependency (Marxism) NEOREALISM LIBERALISM
  
• 1980s Critical theory
  Rationalism
  INSTITUTIONALISM
• Humanities Feminism Fourth debate
• 1990s Postmodernism CONSTRUCTIVISM
• 2000s Postructuralism Developed Game theory
  Fifth Debate?
  

4
2. Idealism vs. Realism

• IDEALISM
• WWI ? How to avoid major wars
• peaceful changes instead of changes through war
• international law
• League of Nations

5
2. Idealism vs. Realism

• REALISM
• international relations should not be studied on
  the basis how they should be but how they are
• politics is governed by objective laws
• the roots of those laws lie in the human nature
• the laws are objective because human nature does
  not change in the course of times

6
2. Idealism vs. Realism

• REALISM
• we can distinguish between the economic person,
  the religious person, the moral person, the
  political person etc.
• in order to understand politics, we must study
  only the political person
• we should study the political actions of a
  statesman (as a synonym of a state)

7
2. Idealism vs. Realism

• REALISM
• the theory of political realism is based on the
  idea of a rational actor
• we should compare the real events to this ideal,
  normative picture

8
2. Idealism vs. Realism

• REALISM
• the behaviour of a political person in social
  context is based on power
• maintenance of power strengthening of power
  demonstration of power

9
2. Idealism vs. Realism

• REALISM
• power does not mean only physical or military
  power, but refers to all kind of control over the
  minds and actions of other individuals
• power is important, because whatever interests or
  goals we have, in order to achieve them in
  politics this brings the desire to control the
  actions of others

10
3. Traditionalism vs. Scientism

• TRADITIONALISM
• Realism, historical approaches etc.
• understanding politics requires historically
  based wisdom rather than data-based models or
  mechanistic theories

11
3. Traditionalism vs. Scientism

• SCIENTISM (Behavioralism)
• Scientific Study of international relations
• no a priori theories
• hypotheses?observable data? regularities/correlati
  ons? theory/model
• graphic or mathematic models
• Foreign Policy Analysis (foreign policy models)

12
4. Realism vs. Liberalism vs. Marxism

• REALISM slightly revisited
• more scientific methods, models,
  classifications
• state as an actor, less focus on human nature
• realism as a theory of balance of power

13
4. Realism vs. Liberalism vs. Marxism

• LIBERALISM
• complex interdependece
• a) societies are connected not only by interstate
  relations but transgovernmental and transnational
  relations as well

14
4. Realism vs. Liberalism vs. Marxism

• LIBERALISM
• b) there is no hierarchy between issue areas,
  i.e., military security does not dominate other
  issues
• c) where complex interdependence prevails,
  military power is ineffective and irrelevant to
  resolve disagreements
• d) international organisations important in
  setting the agenda and inducing coalition
  formation

15
4. Realism vs. Liberalism vs. Marxism

• MARXISM
• theories of imperialism
• dependency theories
• world system theories centre-periphery

16
5. Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs.
Constructivism

• NEOREALISM
• objective environment anarchic structure of
  international system ? competitive security
  system
• states behave rationally according to their
  national interests, since those who do not will
  not survive

17
5. Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs.
Constructivism

• NEOREALISM
• zero-sum ? states are calculating relative gaines
• self-help system cooperation
  difficult/superficial/temporary

18
5. Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs.
Constructivism

• NEOREALISM
• security dilemma is always present
• a) the unintended decrease in the security of
  others when one state increases its own security

19
5. Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs.
Constructivism

• NEOREALISM
• b) the uncertainty of present or future
  intentions of other states
• c) a state feels insecure if it does not act and
  insecure if it does

20
5. Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs.
Constructivism

• NEOREALISM
• security dilemma is regulated by balance-of-power
  politics

21
5. Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs.
Constructivism

• INSTITUTIONALISM
• Subjective environment individual security
  system
• international institutions can change states
  cost-benefit calculations
• institutions can help states to overcome some
  relative gain problems and therefore states are
  calculating also absolute gains

22
5. Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs.
Constructivism

• INSTITUTIONALISM
• though we may not completely remove the security
  dilemma, it can be mitigated by creating
  interdependence and common security regimes,
  norms and rules, creating reciprocal relations
  and positive expectations of each others
  behaviour

23
5. Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs.
Constructivism

• CONSTRUCTIVISM
• intersubjective environment cooperative security
  community possible
• agency and structure are interrelated anarchy
  is what states make of it

24
5. Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs.
Constructivism

• CONSTRUCTIVISM
• the security dilemma is often regulated and
  sometimes mitigated but it can also be resolved
  through changes in identities and threat
  perceptions

25
5. Neorealism vs. Institutionalism vs.
Constructivism

• Self-understanding of the theories

C
I
NR
-only most important things, like the law of
gravity does not explaing the path minimalistic
theory -explains of a leaf in wind

• explains the same as
• NR more

• explains the same as
• NR I more

26
1. Development of the Discipline

• Economics Strategy History
  Philosophy International Law
• Thucydides Aquinas
• 16th
• 17th Machiavelli Grotius
  
• 18th Smith
• 19th Marx Clausewitz
  Rousseau Kant
• 20th Imperialism theories History
  of Diplomacy
• Geography Geopolitics
• WWI The birth of the discipline
• 1920-30s IDEALISM
• WWII REALISM Traditionalism
  First Debate
• 1950s Functionalism
• Natural sciences SCIENTISM
  (Behavioralism, FPA)
  Second Debate
• 1960s Peace research
  Realism revisited Third
  Debate
• 1970s Dependency (Marxism) NEOREALISM LIBERALISM
  
• 1980s Critical theory
  Rationalism INSTITUTIONALISM
• Humanities Feminism Fourth debate
• 1990s Postmodernism CONSTRUCTIVISM
• 2000s Fifth Debate?
  Developed Game Theory

27
1. Development of the Discipline

• Economics Strategy History
  Philosophy International Law
• Thucydides Aquinas
• 16th
• 17th Machiavelli Grotius
  
• 18th Smith
• 19th Marx Clausewitz
  Rousseau Kant
• 20th Imperialism theories History
  of Diplomacy
• Geography Geopolitics
• WWI The birth of the discipline
• 1920-30s IDEALISM
• WWII REALISM Traditionalism
  First Debate
• 1950s Functionalism
• Natural sciences SCIENTISM
  (Behavioralism, FPA)
  Second Debate
• 1960s Peace research
  Realism revisited Third
  Debate
• 1970s Dependency (Marxism) NEOREALISM LIBERALISM
  
• 1980s Critical theory
  Rationalism
  INSTITUTIONALISM
• Humanities Feminism Fourth debate
• 1990s Postmodernism CONSTRUCTIVISM
• 2000s Postructuralism Developed Game theory
  Fifth Debate?
  

28
International Relations Grand Debates

• University of Helsinki, Department of Political
  Science, Fall 2003
• Christer Pursiainen
• For downloading the Power Point presentation, go
  to
• www.kolumbus.fi/christer.pursiainen
• ? teaching