CSS IR-I: Theories and Approaches of IR

Topics Covered:

Classical Approaches 

•     Realism
•     Idealism 

The Scientific Revolution

•     Behavioralism
•     System Approach 

Liberalism and Neo-Liberalism 

Post-Modernism 

•     Critical Theory 
•     Feminism 
•     Constructivism

Classical Approaches of IR

Classical Approaches to IR

Realism is first and main school of thought in security studies which takes nation states as primary units in IR. Realism’s roots can be traced back to ancient Greece and Thucydides (460 BC-395 BC). Realist holds a state centric view that the state is an autonomous and most important actor of international politics. States are rational unitary actors-each moving towards/seek their own national interest as it guarantees national survival.  The state behaves morally and in accordance with its population’s values. Realism is most concerned with power, and says power is rational concept and power is a relative concept. “The first way to win a state is to be skilled in the art of war” (Machiavelli-Realist) He also distinguished between morality of individual and morality of state. Realist: No! Human rights concerns have no place in foreign policy, unless they happen to coincide with national interest. International politics is “a war of all against all” (Thomas Hobbes-Realist) “God did not help any nation and that every nation had to take actions intelligently and pragmatically” (Hans J. Morgenthau-Realist). Hennery Kissinger is famous realist.

Neorealism: Father of modern realism or neorealism is Kenneth Waltz. Neorealist argue: International politics and state behavior are structured by “anarchy” and the roots of international conflict and war are owing to the anarchic international system. According to Neorealist: “Powerful states should do more than less powerful states”. “Anarchy does not imply the presence of chaos and disorder. It is simply referring to the absence of world government” (Kenneth Waltz). Neorealist says: Capability is state is determined by its: natural recourses endowment, demographic, economic, military, and technology capacity. 

Idealism opposes the war and advocates the reforms of international community through dependence upon moral values and the development of international institutions and international law. Woodrow Willison was an idealist so he created league of nation. Idealist suggests: what unites mankind is more important than what divides it. “States internal values and norms should determine their foreign policy and the pattern of their international relations” (Woodrow Willison).

According to them: military power is not the only form of power. Exercising economic power has proven more effective than exercising military power.  Prime goal of all politics is improvement of human condition. Idealist put lot of faith International law and IGOs to solve problems on International level. Immanuel Kant, Richard Cobden, Rousseau, John Hobson, Norman Angell, Alfred Zimmer and Hugo Grotius were also Idealist.

Scientific Approaches to IR 

The Scientific Revolution in IR

Scientific approach challenges traditional or classical approach. IR is the wide, broad and separate field of study it uses scientific methods to solve issues. Such as, use historic facts with current development to reach conclusion.

Behavioralism proposes that individuals act in patterned ways that can be studied by empirically testing hypotheses about those patterns. It simply tells, why certain events have taken place, what is their impact or will be, and why they might occur again.

International Politics involve, people; hence it can be explained by the behavior of people. It is not a prominent theory of International relations. Its focus is on quantifiable aspects of international relations.

System Approach: focus on the structure of the international system.  International system is made up of units’ “states”, which collectively constitute a system of states. A nation’s behavior influences and in influenced by the system in which they exist. Each nation acts and reacts in the international environment and its behavior is characterized by regularities.

Liberalism and Neo Liberalism

Liberalism and Neo-Liberalism

Liberalism: State enjoys sovereignty and autonomy; it has to operate in cooperation. It deals with how peace and cooperation is possible? Immanuel Kant answered: 1) states should develop the organizations and rules to facilitate cooperation 2) peace depends on the internal character of governments 3) trade promotes the peace because it brings wealth so government would not disrupt this. There should be balance between interests of individual and society. States can forgo their short-term individual interest against long term community interests.

Neoliberalism: States fairly achieve cooperation often because it is in their interest to do so.

Even the states are unitary actors rationally perusing their self interest they cooperate most of the times.  Absolute gains through cooperation, interdependence and globalization unlike neorealism’s relative gains through power and war. 

Post-modernism in IR

Postmodernist: Feminism as theory of IR (Critical Theory)

According tot it: realism cannot justify claim; states are central and unitary actors in IR with objective interests. For example: Soviet Union had ignored ‘Unitary state’ concept as it constituted republics, ethnic group and individuals. Realist surprised, when soviet split into 15 units.  

Realist omit women and gender, omit the role of individuals, domestic politics, economic classes, MNCs and other non-state actors. States have no tangible reality; they are ‘fictions’

Critical Theory: Developed by small group of German scholars, many of whom were living in exile in the USA. They were known collectively as ‘the Frankfurt School’. CIRT is not a single theory or approach rather a diverse school of thought that have criticized existing approaches that tried to explain IR.

Marxism, Neo-Marxism, Feminism, constructivism these all are critical theories known as post-positivist against positivist – realism and liberalism.  

Feminism: IR Involves looking at how international politics affects and is affected by both men and women? Theorist such as realist and others do not consider IR as gendered in nature. One list of “fifty key thinkers” in IR includes four women. Survey in 2014 listed the 20 most influential IR scholars, only three were women. First atomic bombs had male gender “Fat Man” and “Little Boy”. The success of hydrogen bomb was communicated to W-DC as “It’s a boy” .

Feminists argue: why only male participants are assumed when discussing foreign policy, sovereignty, and use of force. Majority of heads of state, diplomates, and soldiers are male. In 1985, UN general assembly constituted by 80% male and heads were 97% male. 

So, feminism as a critical theorist in IR has tried to deconstruct language of realism in IR. They have embarked to deal gender imbalance nature of IR.

Constructivism: Conflict is not in nature of human as realist claim; rather war and violence are learned behaviors. These behaviors are learned from culture and norms, social practices and procedures. According to constructivism: state interest or national interests are neither inherent nor unproblematic, actually, domestic factors in response to international norms and ideas have shaped the state interests and affect the state behavior.

Leading constructivist theorist are: Peter Katzenstein, Friedrich Kratochwil, Nicholas Onuf, and Alexander Wendt.