What Is International Relations (IR) Theory?

Prepared for Junior Int'l Politics class at NENU, Fall 2015

IR Theory

Simplifies the world, makes assumptions and statements about the “reality” of the world

Makes predictions based on these assumptions Defines interests (may be “normative” or not) Tells us what to focus on (levels & units of

analysis) Often divided into subfields of Security &

International Political Economy (IPE) Is based on empirical observations Gives our opinions more weight and structure

DISTINCTION: IR Theory versus Ideology

Ideologies include: market fundamentalism, communism, socialism, capitalism, individialism, collectivism, Social Darwinism etc.

Major IR Theories include: realism, liberalism, constructivism, feminism

Both end in “-ism” but they are not the same! All ideologies are normative! Some IR Theory

only claims to make factual statements about the world.

What are IR Theory's goals?

World peace? Justice? Understand world politics? Rule/Dominate/Conquer the world?

DISTINCTION: IR Theory versus Current Events

Leaders & diplomats need to know both! Both affect foreign policy

CURRENT EVENTS IR THEORY

= “the news” Includes current and past IR and history

Specific, changing over time General, stable over time

Journalists' focus Political scientists study it (a “subfield” of the discipline of political science)

Used as evidence to support IR Theory Draws empirical support from current events

Why study IR Theory and not just current events?

There may be patterns underlying IR, similar to the natural sciences.

News about IR often fails to consider these patterns and history, focusing mostly on leaders' choices.

IR Theory helps us talk about geographic regions and historical eras we are less familiar with.

U.S. university classes on international politics or world politics focus heavily on IR Theory

Grounding our opinions in IR Theory makes us sound smarter/more professional/more convincing.

Where does IR Theory begin?

We either ACCEPT or REJECT theoretical assumptions.

Major ASSUMPTIONS about the world: Structure versus Agency Anarchy is the prevailing structure? States are the primary agents (actors) of IR?

?Agency > Structure?

State leaders can do whatever they want? There are always many options for leaders to choose IR can be reduced to interpersonal conflict between

state leaders and nations (groups of people)? Leads to a “Great Man” narrative of history

?Structure > Agency?

Most outcomes are inevitable (Actors are severely constrained, have few or no options and alternatives)

Anarchic world structure → Imperatives of “self-help”

Change is difficult or impossible

There is only one reality, and studying IR will reveal everything about this reality.

States as a bridge between structure & agency

Most IR theory assumes: The structure of the world is a system of nation-states Nation-states are the primary, most powerful and

therefore most important actors within this system What is a nation-state and why does IR focus on it?

A bounded territorial entity with a government and a population with a shared national identity.

Max Weber's definition: a state has a monopoly on the “legitimate use of force” within its territory.

States have more economic and military (hard) power than any other kind of entity in the world.

What is power?

Hard (force) Soft (persuasion, attractiveness) Authority Meta-power Agenda-setting Defining terms & assigning values

How do we measure & compare power?

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (per capita?) UN HDI (Human Development Index) Size of military Level of military technology Outcomes of interstate war (IMPRACTICAL!) Size of foreign reserves Moral Authority Size of territory, population

PROBLEM: Measuring power as in the previous slide neglects non-state

actors Powerful non-state actors (Goldstein-Pevehouse,

Ch.1) IGOs INGOs & NGOs Multi-national Corporations (MNCs) Influential individuals Terrorist organizations Religious & ethnic organizations

Alternative World Concepts

North-South divide, First-/Second-/Third-/Fourth-World countries (Developed & Developing)

“The West versus the Rest” (Eurocentric), 天下 (Sinocentric)

Regionalism Cold War Perspective (Clash of Ideologies)

Liberal Capitalism VS. Communist Bloc, Non-Aligned Movement

World-Systems Theory (Wallerstein) Core, Semi-Periphery, Periphery

Clash of Civilizations (Huntington)

Huntington's Clash of Civilizations

What is a civilization? Can civilizations be units of analysis? Can civilizations change fundamentally, be joined or

left? Any problems with Huntington's division of regional

civilizations? What are the dangers of thinking only in

Huntington's terms?

Globalization

The opposite of a “clash of civilizations”? Global economic integration, security cooperation,

cultural convergence Mainly in the subfield of IPE rather than security?