Realism and Liberalism:

Realism: Origins

• Dominant IR theory

• Also one of the oldest– Dates back to Ancient Greece

• But there is more than one “realism”– Classical realism– Structural/neo-realism

• Some similarities (assumptions made)• Very different methodologically.

Thucydides• History of the Peloponnesian War

– Melian Dialogue: Debate between Melos and Athenians

• Melians want to be neutral, Athenians argue they cannot allow this. – Makes Athens look weak

• Melians refuse: want independence, appeal to ideas of justice and morality.– Others will come to their aid for the sake of

justice and honour

Thucydides

1) Don’t care about looking bad so long as they look strong, especially to our own people.

2) Hope blinds people to their situation

3) Honor and principle don’t count for much when it comes to interest.

• No one is going to come to their aid even though they may be right.

Thucydides

“the powerful do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

Machiavelli

• The Prince (1513, published 1532)– Guidebook on how to

rule

• Discourses on Livy– Applying lessons of

Rome to “modern” statecraft.

Machiavelli“because I want to write what will be useful to anyone who

understands, it seems to me better to concentrate on what really happens rather than on theories or speculations. For many have imagined republics and principalities that have never been seen or known to exist. However, how men live is different from how they should live that a ruler who does not do what is generally done, but persists in doing what ought to be done, will undermine his power rather than maintain it. If a ruler who wants always to act honourably is surrounded by many unscrupulous men his downfall is inevitable. Therefore, a ruler who wishes to maintain his power must be prepared to act immorally when this becomes necessary.”

- The Prince

Machiavelli• “men should either be caressed or

crushed; because they can avenge slight injuries, but not those that are very severe. Hence, any injury done to a man must be such that there is no need to fear his revenge.” (The Prince)

• “it is a sound maxim that reprehensible actions may be justified by their effects, and that when the effect is good,… it always justifies the action.” Discourses

Realist Lessons• Learning from the past

– Both look at the actions of leaders– Machiavelli is interested in drawing

conclusions

• Human nature: both take men as they are, not as they “should” or “might” be.– Unlike other Greeks, Thucydides does not

attribute actions to the gods. – Machiavelli takes human nature to be “bad”;

greedy and self interested.

Key Realist Principles

• Anarchy• Self-Help• Survival• Security Dilemma• Dismissal of idealism• Pragmatism• Statism• Responsibility to nation-state

Realism in the 20th Century

• Realism developed in the interwar period (1919-1939)

• Rejection of utopian thought post-WWI– Attempts to foster peace through “rational”

schemes; international law

• E. H. Carr, Twenty Year’s Crisis (1939)

• Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations (1948)

Realism in the 20th Century• States, leaders motivated by power; will

always act to strengthen position or maximize power

• If act out of idealism, will be attacked, defeated and/or destroyed

• Best way to understand politics is through the concept of interests, defined by power

• “Objective laws that have their roots in human nature” govern IR– States must recognize this & adopt policies – Effects of anarchy might be mitigated

Liberalism

Liberalism Today

• There isn’t “one” liberalism

• Several responses to realism

• All adhere to core principles of liberalism– Different emphasis on the principles

– Idea of progress

Modern Liberalism: History

• 19th Century Origins– world court, international law, restraints on warfare. – First international organizations.

• Post- WWI– League of Nations– New ideas:

• self-determination of peoples • democracies more stable than dictatorships.

• Post-WWII– United Nations and new liberal institutions– EU based on liberal ideas

Kant’s Perpetual Peace

• Starts with realist assumption: anarchical system - increases the likeliness of war

• Perpetuates injustice withinstates (cannot be secure)

• Therefore an obligation to work for a cosmopolitansociety

Kant’s Perpetual Peace

• Can’t be done through a world state– Practical difficulties– May lead to despotism

• Turns to “republicanism”– Essentially characteristics of a liberal state– Has issues with direct democracy

• Republics will form a federation.– Will protect other states from outside the

union.

Kant’s Perpetual Peace

• States consult each other regarding their relations

• Disputes settled without war.

• Matters decided on principles of justice.

• Federation/Union members do not fight each other – may fight outsiders.

• Example will inspire people in other states– More republics, federation will grow.

Kant and Liberalism

• No world government, but not a war of all against all.

• Rather there is potential for cooperation: – Benefits of peace, trade and exchange

• People prefer peace to war

Kant and Liberalism

Central liberal ideas:

• role of republican democracy• role of institutions• ideas about progress• Ideas about the potential for

cooperation

Democratic Peace Theory

• Idea that democracies do not fight one another

• Why?– Costs (blood and treasure)– People don’t like war– Share similar ideas – willing to resolve

disputes in other ways. – Similar norms, morality

Sociological Liberalism/Pluralism

• Looks beyond the state

• Emphasis on groups/relations that go across boundaries (transnational groups)– Better at fostering relations between

states

• World as a series of networks (rather than billiard balls!)

Sociological Liberalism/Pluralism

• Karl Deutch

• Security community: a group of people which have become “integrated”.

• Integration: – sense of community has been achieved– agreement that conflicts and problems can

be resolved peacefully

• i.e.: North Atlantic countries

Interdependence• interdependence = mutual dependence. • states are not self-contained units.

– affected by what goes on in other states.

• Increased by:– International division of labour– trade, etc.

• decreases the chance of conflict • Different forms: fuctionalism, complex-

interdependence

InterdependenceFunctionalism• David Mitrany• Transnational ties between countries to

foster peace• Cooperation via technical expertise

– Leave politicians out of it

• Hope that cooperation will “spill-over” into other areas.

• Will bind states ever closer together• Philosophy behind the EU

Interdependence

Complex Interdependence:

• Keohane and Nye Power and Interdependence (1977)

• Post-War interdependence different– Previously military was always an option– Relations no longer just between leaders– Concern for “low” issues: economics

• Power is relative to an issue– Japan: not military power, but economic one

Interdependence

Complex Interdependence

• Realist assumptions still important

• Military issues still most important

• But:– Not every issue is “life and death”– Issues: (i.e.: trade) may be negotiated– States don’t always resort to force.

Institutional Liberalism• Institutions promote cooperation

– Increase trust, eliminate fear

• Institutions– Formal organization of states: UN, EU– Regime: set of rules which govern state

behaviour and activity. • Trade regime (NAFTA)

– “Fundamental objects” of international system• International law, diplomacy

Institutional LiberalismTends to be “empirical”• Measures

– “scope”: number of issue areas where institutions– “depth”: how meaningful

• Research– Collect information on how institutions function– What are the best conditions to form institutions?– Why do institutions persist?– Can institutions persist if circumstances change?

A high level of institutions makes a multipolar anarchy more stable.

Liberalism(s)

• Democratic Peace Theory

• Sociological Liberalism/Pluralism

• Interdependence– Functionalism (Mitrany)

– Complex Interdependence (Nye and Keohane)

• Institutional Liberalism