Constructivism and foreign policy

1
Constructivism and foreign policy

• January 16, 2014

2
Overview

• Rational vs Reflective theories
• Why Constructivism?
• Applied constructivism
• The key aspects of constructivism
• Constructivism meets foreign policy

3
Rational theories

• Liberalism and realism
• The two dominate theories
• Much of the debate in traditional international
  politics has been between these two groups
• Both sides make much of the differences between
  the two
• Critical scholars argue that actually there isnt
  much differences between them - really a very
  narrow debate

4
The neo-neo debate
Neorealism Neoliberalism
Primary actor State State (NGOs, MNCs)
Global system anarchy anarchy
Role of institutions Skeptical - cant mitigate anarchy Can help foster cooperation
Cooperation Skeptical - relative gains Possible - absolute gains
Key focus Security Economy
5
Rational theories

• These theories all share some key points
• Problem-solving - take the world as it is and try
  to explain it and make run as best as possible
• Positivist - use scientific approach, to
  discover the truth, make strong distinction
  between facts and values

6
Reflective theories

• Diverse collection of theoretical approaches,
  which include
• Normative theory
• Critical theory
• Post-modernism
• Feminist theory
• United more by what they reject of rational
  approaches than what they have in common

7
Reflective theories

• Constitutive - the way we think about and
  approach the world helps create the world, so
  cant just observe the world in a neutral way
• E.g. the belief that states are naturally
  aggressive helps create that reality - become
  self-confirming (constitutive)

8
Reflective theories

• Challenge distinction rational approaches make
  between facts and values
• Limits the study of politics - only how things
  work, but not asking why they are that way
• Naturalizes the current system - no alternative
• All theories reflect certain values, none are
  value neutral, by trying to make a distinction
  between facts and values, rational theories are
  putting the values embedded in them beyond
  discussion - hidden

9
Constructivism

• Constructivism as an attempt to bridge the two
  camps
• Attempt to take some of ideas of reflective
  approaches and apply them to more rational
  theories
• So get Wendt making the argument that anarchy is
  what states make of it

10
Why constructivism?

• Failure of mainstream theories to predict end of
  Cold War and changing nature of global system
  creates space for new approaches to become more
  mainstream
• Constructivism appealing because not that far
  from mainstream approaches

11

• Constructivism does not directly challenge either
  realism or liberalism,
• Instead offer alternative understanding to some
  of the most central themes in international
  relations.
• Can see the idea of trying to bridge between
  rational and reflective

12
Three cultures of anarchy

• Wendt - not just one way of looking at anarchy
• Conflictual - based on self-help of realists
• Competitive - based on rivalry of some liberal
  perspectives
• Friendly - based on cooperation
• See Box 4.1 p.82, Ego Alter on a desert island,
  as illustration

13

• Key point - both anarchy and culture can change
• Changing culture isnt easy because the system is
  self-reinforcing
• E.g. if many see anarchy as a conflictual they
  will act in a way that makes it hard to see
  alternatives

14
Using constructivism

• Can help shed light on how old practices of
  rivalry and war-making may be changed through the
  institutionalization, of new identities,
  interests and practices, e.g. (European security).

15

• According to constructivists, the only reason why
  we might be in a self-help system is because
  practice made it that way.
• So this means that practice could also un-make
  a conflictual culture.
• NATO and the EU could play important roles in
  these un-makings.

16

• Need to understand how agents shared knowledge,
  identities and interests are inter-linked and may
  contribute to changing deeply embedded practices
  and structural conditions.
• But, to do this we need a fundamental break with
  some of the realist and liberal assumptions about
  how the world works.

17
The essence of constructivism

• The four key constructivist propositions
• a belief in the social construction of reality
  and the importance of social facts
• a focus on ideational as well as material
  structures and the importance of norms and rules

18
The essence of constructivism

• a focus on the role of identity in shaping
  political action and the importance of logics of
  action
• a belief in the mutual constitutiveness of
  agents and structure, and a focus on practice and
  action

19
Social construction of reality

• Facts can have different shared meanings
• E.g. French nuclear warhead vs North Korean
  nuclear warhead
• Some facts arent really facts at all, instead
  are social facts - only appear as facts through
  common agreement, reinforced through social
  practice
• E.g. money

20
Social construction of reality

• Argue that many of the most important concepts
  and understandings of international relations are
  social facts
• Over time social facts become reified through
  practice and routine, so appear objective and
  independent from those that constructed them.
• Thus, change is difficult

21
Ideational and material structures

• Ideas matter
• Ideas language, rules, symbols etc all shape how
  we interpret the material world and the actions
  of others
• Structures are codified in rules and norms
• Structural change is possible by changing norms

22
Identity, interests and logics of action

• Identity is important because it is tied to
  particular interests and preferences.
• This means the social, cultural, historical and
  political contexts in which agents operate
  becomes important
• Logics of action
• Logic of consequence and logic of appropriateness

23
Agents, structure and practice

• Agents and structures are mutually constituted
• Agents are influenced by structures (e.g. states
  influenced by anarchy)
• But agents also influence the structure through
  their practices
• So
• Change is possible but difficult

24
Constructivism meets foreign policy

• NATOs post-Cold War roles could be defined as
• still keeping member states safe from threats
• Shift from protecting territory to security
• still maintaining a common identity, shared
  knowledge and shared understandings among all
  NATOs members
• Socialization of new members

25

• still engaging in transforming relationships and
  practices between NATO members and former
  adversaries

26
Conclusion

• Constructivism can be seen as an attempt bridge
  between rational and reflective theories
• Looks at the role of things like identity,
  interests, norms and how they shape actions and
  understanding of the world
• Provide important alternative perspectives for
  analyzing foreign policy