Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis

1983 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. G. Ruggie
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Recent Book ◽  
Structural Explanation ◽  
World Polity ◽  
Constructive Criticism ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
International Systems

Kenneth Waltz's recent book, Theory of International Politics, is one of the most important contributions to international relations theory since his Man, the State and War. It picks up where the earlier work left off: with the structure of the international system serving as the basis for explaining a variety of international outcomes. The most profound and perhaps the most perplexing outcome Waltz attempts to explain is the lack of fundamental change in the international polity. The author argues that Waltz does not fully succeed in this endeavor for three reasons. First, his definition of structure fails to capture so momentous a change as that from the medieval to the modern international systems. Second, his application of the structuralist method leads him to ask questions in such a way that the answers systematically understate the degree of potential change in the contemporary international system. Third, his model of structural explanation turns out to allow only for a reproductive logic but not for a transformational logic. With the epistemological underpinnings of his theory thus biased against the possibility of change, it is not surprising that Waltz finds the likelihood of future continuity compelling. In the spirit of constructive criticism, this review article tries to amend and augment the theory in a manner that is not incompatible with its basic realist precepts.

scholarly journals Agencia e Estrutura em Sistemas Internacionais: a ontologia do Realismo Científico e suas implicações para uma agenda de pesquisa | Agency and Structure in International Systems: the ontology of Scientific Realism and its implications for a research agenda

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Brancher
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Scientific Realism ◽  
Social Research ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Suggested Approach ◽  
Structure Problem ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
International Systems ◽  
Agent Structure ◽  
Agency And Structure

O artigo se insere no debate acerca do problema agente-estrutura nas Relações Internacionais.Na primeira seção, analisa-se as controvérsias e as lacunas teóricas de três repostas para o problema agente-estrutura que influenciaram o debate teórico nas RI: individualismo, estruturalismo e estruturação. A segunda seção discute a perspectiva ontológica proposta pelo Realismo Científico. Argumenta-se que ela constitui uma heurística profícua para o desenvolvimento de um programa de pesquisa que conceba agentes e estruturas como entidades autônomas e inter-relacionadas temporalmente. Por fim, nas considerações finais, sintetiza-se os argumentos desenvolvidos, aponta-se implicações teóricas da abordagem sugerida e indica-se alternativas para a continuidade da agenda de pesquisa.ABSTRACTThe article is part of the debate on the agent-structure problem in International Relations. It is considered that any social research must develop or incorporate ontological presuppositions about this question, since it logically precedes epistemological and methodological definitions. Specifically to the field of International Relations, the agent-structure problem refers to the definition of the components and the dynamics of operation of International Systems (IS). Thus, in the first section, we analyze the controversies and theoretical gaps of three responses to the agent-structure problem that influenced the theoretical debate in IR: individualism, structuralism and structuring. The second section discusses the ontological perspective proposed by Scientific Realism. It is argued that it constitutes a useful heuristic for the development of a research program that devises agents and structures as autonomous and temporally interrelated entities. Finally, in the final considerations, the arguments developed are summarized, theoretical implications of the suggested approach are indicated, and alternatives are indicated for the continuity of the research agenda.Palavras-chave: Teoria de Relações Internacionais; Agente-Estrutura; Realismo CientíficoKeywords: International Relations Theory; Agent-Structure; Scientific Realism 

Sovereignty at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonard V. Smith
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Great Power ◽  
World War ◽  
Treaty Of Versailles ◽  
The World ◽  
Paris Peace Conference

We have long known that the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 “failed” in the sense that it did not prevent the outbreak of World War II. This book investigates not whether the conference succeeded or failed, but the historically specific international system it created. It explores the rules under which that system operated, and the kinds of states and empires that inhabited it. Deepening the dialogue between history and international relations theory makes it possible to think about sovereignty at the conference in new ways. Sovereignty in 1919 was about remaking “the world”—not just determining of answers demarcating the international system, but also the questions. Most histories of the Paris Peace Conference stop with the signing of the Treaty of Versailles with Germany on June 28, 1919. This book considers all five treaties produced by the conference as well as the Treaty of Lausanne with Turkey in 1923. It is organized not chronologically or geographically, but according to specific problems of sovereignty. A peace based on “justice” produced a criminalized Great Power in Germany, and a template problematically applied in the other treaties. The conference as sovereign sought to “unmix” lands and peoples in the defeated multinational empires by drawing boundaries and defining ethnicities. It sought less to oppose revolution than to instrumentalize it. The League of Nations, so often taken as the supreme symbol of the conference’s failure, is better considered as a continuation of the laboratory of sovereignty established in Paris.

Waltz, Durkheim, and International Relations: The International System as an Abnormal Form

1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (3) ◽  
pp. 669-680 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Barkdull
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Division Of Labor ◽  
International System ◽  
Moral Basis ◽  
Abnormal Form ◽  
International Systems

Drawing on Emile Durkheim's Division of Labor in Society, I offer a typology of international systems. Previous uses of Durkheim to describe international systems suffer a number of conceptual errors and therefore are at variance with the spirit and intention of Durkheim's work. A deeper reading of Durkheim usefully draws attention to the moral basis for society and thus the problems with defining international systems solely in terms of power distributions. Further, rereading Durkheim offers a much richer typology than the simple distinction between mechanical and organized societies, affording in turn fresh insights into change in the international system. The abnormal forms of the division of labor offer the best description of the contemporary international system.

The assumption of anarchy in international relations theory: a critique

1991 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Milner
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Politics ◽  
International System ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Fundamental Assumption ◽  
Ambiguous Words

‘Anarchy is one of the most vague and ambiguous words in language.’ George Coreewall Lewis, 1832.In much current theorizing, anarchy has once again been declared to be the fundamental assumption about international politics. Over the last decade, numerous scholars, especially those in the neo-realist tradition, have posited anarchy as the single most important characteristic underlying international relations. This article explores implications of such an assumption. In doing so, it reopens older debates about the nature of international politics. First, I examine various concepts of ‘anarchy’ employed in the international relations literature. Second, I probe the sharp dichotomy between domestic and international politics that is associated with this assumption. As others have, I question the validity and utility of such a dichotomy. Finally, this article suggests that a more fruitful way to understand the international system is one that combines anarchy and interdependence.

scholarly journals Acordos de Sokovia e os Limites do Poder: Capitão América e Reflexões Sobre o Papel da Superpotência no Sistema Internacional

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 434-456
Author(s):  
Liliane Klein Garcia
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Civil War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
American People ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Captain America ◽  
The Cold War

Ao observar o sistema unipolar que emergiu do final da Guerra Fria, é marcante o sentimento de insegurança geopolítica gerada pela existência de apenas uma superpotência global e as dúvidas da atuação do Estado soberano nessa conjuntura. Nesse paradigma, Capitão América: Guerra Civil é lançado com uma simbologia contestadora do papel do hegemon no sistema internacional. Com isso, inicialmente é exposto o enredo do filme, seguido das teorias liberal e realista das Relações Internacionais e da semiótica greimasiana. Com isso em vista, é feita a análise dos símbolos do longa-metragem e, por fim, se conclui que os autores do texto tinham como objetivo disseminar uma mensagem de união política entre os americanos.     Abstract: Observing the unipolar system emerging from the closure of the Cold War, is remarkable the sentiment of geopolitical insecurity generated by the existence of only one global superpower and the doubts about the role of the sovereign State in such system. In this paradigm, Captain America: Civil War is released with a contesting symbology about the role of the hegemon in the international system. Therefore, first it is exposed the movie plot, followed by the liberal and realist theories of international relations and the French semiotics. With this in mind, the symbols in the feature are analised and, in conclusion, it is stated that the authors wish to convey a message in bipartisan union amongst the American people. Keywords: International Relations Theory, Semiotics, Captain America.     Recebido em: setembro/2019. Aprovado em: maio/2020.

Introduction

After Lavinia ◽  
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Watkins
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
International System ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
English School ◽  
Power Struggles ◽  
National Sovereignty ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
Public Theaters

This book examines the role of marriage in the formation, maintenance, and disintegration of a premodern European diplomatic society. The argument develops in dialogue with the so-called English school of international relations theory, with its emphasis on the contemporary international system as a society of states sharing certain values, norms, and common interests rather than as an anarchy driven solely by power struggles. In studying the place of marriage diplomacy in questions of monarchical and national sovereignty, the book draws on interdisciplinary methodologies that have long characterized academic studies of queenship and, more recently, European diplomatic culture. It begins with Virgil, whose epic tells the story of Aeneas's marriage to Lavinia—the paradigmatic interdynastic marriage. It also considers the inseparability of marriage diplomacy from literary production. Finally, it discusses the factors that precipitated the disintegration of marriage diplomacy, including new technologies of print and the large public theaters for promoting diplomatic literacy.

Beware of gurus: structure and action In International relations

1991 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 393-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Hollis ◽  
Steve Smith
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Critical Points ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Recent Book ◽  
Structure Problem ◽  
Agent Structure

The agent-structure problem is not settled by deciding what proportions to put in the blender. Agents and structures do not blend easily in any proportions, and solutions to the problem tend to be unstable. Alexander Wendt's thoughtful review article makes this clear, identifies some of the difficulties, and boldly sketches a possible resolution of them. Since his relections are addressed in part to our recent book Explaining and Understanding International Relations, we welcome the chance to pursue them further. Greatly encouraged by his many friendly comments, we shall concentrate on those suggestive or critical points which have prompted us to think afresh.

Choosing anarchy: institutional alternatives and the global order

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moonhawk Kim ◽  
Scott Wolford
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
International System ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Global Order ◽  
Political Units ◽  
Self Enforcement ◽  
Interaction Density

The international system may be anarchic, but anarchy is neither fixed nor inevitable. We analyze collective choices between anarchy, a system of inefficient self-enforcement, and external enforcement, where punishment is delegated to a third party at some upfront cost. In equilibrium, external enforcement (establishing governments) prevails when interaction density is high, the costs of integration are low, and violations are difficult to predict, but anarchy (drawing borders) prevails when at least one of these conditions fail. We explore the implications of this theory for the causal role of anarchy in international relations theory, the integration and disintegration of political units, and the limits and possibilities of cooperation through international institutions.

Hierarchies in International Relations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Lake ◽  
Feng Liu
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
Hierarchical Systems ◽  
International Diplomacy ◽  
Primary Determinant ◽  
Dominant State ◽  
Common Concept ◽  
The Right ◽  
International Systems

In international relations, hierarchy is understood in two related ways. In the most general usage, hierarchy refers to any ranked ordering, most commonly conceptualized in international relations as status rankings. In a more narrow usage, hierarchy refers to relations of authority in which a dominant state sets rules for or possesses more or less authority over one or more subordinate states. So defined, hierarchy in international relations is the antonym to the more common concept of anarchy. This bibliography focuses on the second, more narrow conception of hierarchy. The broader usage is examined in the Oxford Bibligraphies article Status in International Relations by Jonathan Renshon. There have been, of course, historical international systems structured by hierarchy, including the Roman Empire and China, examined by scholars of international relations for their own dynamics or as a contrast to the present international system. We address these historical systems in Hierarchical Systems. Since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, however, the European international system and, through the diffusion of norms and practices, the global system have been understood as characterized by anarchy, or the absence of any authority higher than the nation-state. While not disputing that the current international system as a whole is anarchic, contemporary scholars of international hierarchy claim it is a fallacy of composition to assume that what is true of the system must also be true of its parts. Rather, this emerging literature allows for relations of authority between states at the level of dyads or sometimes regions. Hierarchy is a form of power but differs from power-as-coercion as understood in theories of international politics. Many studies of international relations place power at the center of their analyses, seeing it as the primary determinant of international diplomacy and bargaining outcomes. Authority, however, implies more than just the ability to coerce or even create incentives for states to alter their behavior. Rather, authority implies a “right to rule” in which subordinates accept that the dominant state can regulate legitimately certain limited actions, that they have an obligation to comply when possible with those regulations, and that the dominant state has the right to enforce its regulations in the event of non-compliance. In this way, authority constitutes a social relationship in which limited duties and obligations are recognized by both dominant and subordinate states. A now substantial literature has emerged that aims to explain when and how hierarchy between states will arise, how it functions, and with what consequences. After outlining works that contribute to this unfolding of hierarchy, we turn to historic international systems that were more clearly organized hierarchically.

How Japan affects the international system

1990 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 553-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henrik Schmiegelow ◽  
Michèle Schmiegelow
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
International System ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Paradigm Change ◽  
Incremental Change ◽  
International Environment ◽  
Global Welfare ◽  
Philosophical Pragmatism ◽  
Fiscal Conservatism

To cope with more than incremental change in the international system, the neorealist concept of structure and the neoliberal concept of process must be complemented by a third analytically distinguished element: the concept of action. All three concepts can be used on the systemic level of analysis of international relations theory. Their obvious differentiation is the degree of systemic consolidation, with structure at the highest, action at the lowest, and process at unstable intermediate degrees. Without analyzing prevailing models of action of important units of the international system, it is impossible to predict the possible range of outcomes of processes and structural changes in the international system.This article offers Japan's “strategic pragmatism” as a model of action. The model, representing a functional cut across contending economic doctrines, combines relative fiscal conservatism with “progressive” provision of credit, dynamic capitalism with public policy activism, and critical rationalism with philosophical pragmatism. Japan's strategic pragmatism has not only enabled its government and enterprises to cope with uncertainty and change in their domestic and international environment but has also increased global welfare and changed the balance of strategic components of power in the international system. The spread of this model of action both within and beyond Japan's control points to a paradigm change in economic and international relations theory—that is, to the most pervasive form of systemic consolidation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document