international relations theory and latin america

International Relations Theory and Latin America Alejandres Gannon

Video of the Day

Level of AnalysisSection Uno (One)

A) What is a state

Unit of political organization1) Territorial boundaries2) Sovereignty3) Monopoly on the legitimate use of

force

B) Origins of the state

1648 Treaty of Westphalia Church lost control of territories

C) Problems with this definition Failed states States as actors vs actors within

states State vs nation vs country

Nation shares history, culture, language, and religion

States that aren’t nation-states States not recognized as such

C) Problem with this definition

TheorySection Dos (Tw0)

A) What is a theory?

Lens to explain, predict, and prescribe something about an event by selecting information

Patterns A theory doesn’t need to explain all

the facts, every theory is suited to explain some facts but not others

B) What is a good theory? Quality of a theory is determined by

Cost – how complicated it is to collect the necessary data, use the theory, or understand what it means

Benefit – how much and how well does this theory explain or predict

Bang for the buck How much data do I need in order to operate the

theoryvs How much new data can the theory explain or

predict

C) Parsimony

A parsimonious theory is a theory that explains or predicts a great deal using relatively little data

C) Parsimony

Example Based on the number of times someone

has sneezed in their lifetime, one can predict their debate win-loss record with 90% accuracy

Based on someone’s height, one can predict their debate win-loss record with 80% accuracy

Based on someone’s weight, age, and place of birth, one can predict their debate win-loss record with 70% accuracy

D) Theories and Maps

D) Theories and Maps

Theories should not try to explain everything, if they do then they cease to be theories

A good theory tries to explain a specific occurrence or event in the world and isolates that factor

RealismSection Tres (Three)

A) Background

Dominant during the Cold War “is” vs “ought to be”

B) Thucydides

Peloponnesian War (431BC-404BC) Balance of power

Power is central and conflict is inevitable Only power can stop power and ignoring

that principle causes messier politics and more bloodshed

C) Machiavelli Human nature and the thirst for power

Politics is run according to the way people are No super-state can tell states how to run, the

international system is anarchic Self-Interest

States must pursue survival and they do that through power

Morality States are absolved of any moral duties States that pursue moral rather than political

ends cause worse situations for their people

D) Morgenthau and Waltz Reaction to idealism and Wilsonian

Internationalism Idealists emphasized international

law, morality, international organization, etc

D) Morgenthau and Waltz The distribution of

power between states explains all important events in international relations

Kenneth Waltz (1924-May 13, 2013)

E) Tenets of Neorealism

1) States are inevitable States are the primary actors in

international politics and will be for the foreseeable future

The practice of great power politics is inevitable

E) Tenets of Neorealism

2. International system is anarchy There is no hierarchy and no

overriding authority Anytime there is a conflict of interest

it can be resolved through the use of force

E) Tenets of Neorealism

3. Security and survival States pursue one primary goal of

security and survival Because of this, all states behave in

similar ways despite having different cultures and economic systems

E) Tenets of Neorealism

4. Unitary and Rational Unitary – states are single cohesive

entities that pursue the goal of survival

Rationality – states are goal-directed which makes their behaviour relatively predictable

E) Tenets of Neorealism

5. Power Power is the most important factor in

determining how states can behave States enhance security by

accumulating power and it takes power to enhance security

Relative power

F) Implications

1) Pursuit of power All states seek to survive in anarchy, a

self-help system States must strive for power in order to

succeed States constantly compare their power in

relation to others States worry about relative gains

F) Implications

2) Absolute vs Relative Gains An interest in relative gains makes

cooperation between states very difficult because states will only cooperate if they think that they will gain more from the cooperation than their partners

F) Implications

3) Arming, bandwagoning, and balancing

States arm when they can afford to do so

States balance with (bandwagon with) a great power when they have little power of their own (free riding)

States balance against a great power when they have power of their own

F) Implications

4) Security Dilemma Arming/balancing + Relative gains =

Security dilemma When a state balances/arms

successfully, it increases its own security. At the same time, it decreases the security of others

If other states respond by also arming/balancing, a cycle of arming occurs (arms race) and alliances shift constantly

G) Weaknesses of Neorealism States are the only actors States are only interested in power,

usually military power States are only interested in relative

gains Bias towards interaction between,

not within, states Bias towards explaining war

(Neo)liberalismSection Cuatro (Four)

A) Key Tenants

Humans seek survival, but also happiness and freedom

Anarchy is not lethal, it is state authority that is dangerous

Rulers have a duty to maximize the freedom and happiness of citizens

Relations between states are about power, cooperation, and mutual gain

History shows that progress is possible

B) Free Trade

Economic growth rather than military conquest

Not zero sum Absolute vs relative gains

C) Democracy

Democratic systems are more peaceful than autocracies

States less likely to go to war when consent of the citizens is necessary

Reciprocal recognition of common principles

States should join confederations to ensure they don’t fight

D) Collective Security

States cooperate when in their interest

International regimes can set rules for how states should operate

E) Role of the State

State might no longer be primary actor Assumes frequent wars Transboundary issues Interdependence Information flows to citizens Rise of democracy

F) Comparing Neorealism and NeoliberalismREALIST ASSUMPTIONS

1. States are the only actors.2. States are only interested in power, usually military power.3. States are only interested in relative gains.4. Bias towards interactions between, not within, states.5. Bias towards explaining war.6. Materialist bias.7. International system

anarchic

NEOLIBERAL ASSUMPTIONS

1. States are not the only important actors in IR.2. States interested in power, military or economic.3. States are often interested in absolute gains.4. Bias towards interactions between, not within, states.5. Explain cooperation, as well as conflict.6. Materialist bias.7. Order within anarchy

ConstructivismSection Cinco (Five)

A) Origins

Cold War unexplainable Where do states interests come

from?

B) What is it?

Application of sociology to IR Ideas, norms, taboos, and cultures

held by interactional actors produce the goals and preferences of those actors

What states want is a function of who they are

C) Intersubjectivity

Constructivists are interested in intersubjective ideas

Ideas not located in the thoughts of a single subject, but “between” the thoughts of several subjects

Ideas held by a group

D) Social Constructivism (Wendt) “If states find themselves in a self-help

system, this is because their practices made it that way. Changing the practice will change the intersubjective knowledge that constitutes the system.” (Wendt, p 189) Anarchy does not force self-help Interaction of states creates a social structure

that shapes their behaviour because states create the social structure and once that exists it then affects states

E) Norms and Taboos (Finnemore) Standards of appropriate and

legitimate behaviour are intersubjectively shared

Norm – accepted behaviour Humanitarian intervention

Taboo – prohibited behaviour Taboos don’t have to be written, or

enforced, law Compliance occurs due to fear of social

disapproval

ComparisonsSection Seis (Six)

Nuclear Weapons

Why hasn’t the most powerful weapon in the world been used even once in the past 60 years?

A) Realist Answer

Security and survival are best guaranteed by non-use Deterrence Damage is too devastating Alternatives are available Using nuclear weapons is irrational

B) Liberalist Answer

Interest in freedom and cooperation causes non-use Economic interdependence Alliance ties and treaties Democratic constraints on use

C) Constructivist Answer

The international community of states shares a taboo against nuclear weapons States choose weapons based not only

on cost and effectiveness States act as a community, with shared

ideas These ideas (values, norms, taboos)

actually affect how states act

Latin AmericaSection Siete (Seven)

A) Things to explain, predict, prescribe Lack of political and economic

development Presence of international peace but

absence of domestic peace Lack of power projection Marginalization in shaping major

world events Relevance of regional international

relations

B) Strengths of Explanation Absence of inter-state

war since 1883 Realist – satisfied with

territorial squo Liberal – spread of

democracy and economic interdependence

Constructivist – cultural framework that prefers peaceful resolution over war

C) Limits of Current Explanations Realist

Security dilemma vs insecurity dilemma Liberal

Democratic peace theory Constructivist

Is there a different “Latin American” identity?

D) Realism

US relationship characterized by self-interest

Search for autonomy from the US

E) Liberalism

Poverty remains the primary socio-economic problem

Failure to take advantage of globalization Effects of global capitalism Weakness of political institutions Role of the state

F) Constructivism

Latin American “diplomatic culture” established international law to regulate behaviour (Holsti, 1993) Principle of nonintervention Consensus-seeking uti possidetis (recognition of former

colonial borders) Equality of states