Theories of International Relations: Neorealism vs. Neoliberalism
Neorealism in International Relations
Application of a positivist mindset to International Relations (IR):
- Parsimonious: Focus only on a few variables. Development of few assumptions and elimination of all the others (e.g., states are assumed to be rational utility maximizers and to have few interests that are similar for all).
- Scientific: Based on observable data. Focus only on objects and variables that can be measured.
Neorealism is the attempt to develop a more rigorous theory of IR and come up with general, testable, and causal conclusions. Power is the main object of analysis.
A New Type of Realism
- Classic Realism: The main driving force of international politics is the struggle for power.
- Neorealism: The driving force is the structure of the international system (anarchy).
Anarchy makes states behave similarly (worry about survival). No authority exists to enforce rules and guarantee protection. The necessity to survive means the need for power (struggle for power).
Foundations of Neorealist Theory
- Materialism: The aspects that mostly affect international behavior are the physical characteristics of each state and its indicators of material power (distribution of power).
- Rationalism: States are rational utility maximizers able to calculate the costs and benefits of action and pursuing interests that are fundamentally similar.
The Meaning of Anarchy
States follow the principle of self-help. States might sometimes decide to enter into alliances (NATO, Warsaw Pact, etc.), but the only entity they can really rely on is themselves. Necessity to have a sufficient amount of power to survive.
Neoliberalism in International Relations
Need to refine the liberal tradition after so many confutations. Attempt to devise a theory able to integrate Neorealism without rejecting it. Focus on the most problematic aspects of Neorealism without necessarily refusing it as a whole. Neorealism is convinced that international economic cooperation was possible only if there is a hegemon able to manage the entire system and solve conflicts (Theory of Hegemonic Stability). International institutions exist only as long as powerful states (mostly the U.S.) want them.
The main focus of Neoliberalism is the study of regimes: any set of principles, rules, norms, and decision-making procedures that regulate relations among states.
Starting Assumptions:
- States are rational utility maximizers.
- Anarchy is the main condition of international politics.
For Neoliberals, power and its distribution are not the only important variables. States are embedded in a large number of rules, norms, and institutions that provide constraints and incentives to action, which favors international cooperation.
Theories Belonging to the Neoliberal Tradition
- Interdependence Theory (Richard Rosencrance, 1986): The era of independent and self-help states dedicated to territorial conquest is over. Now, states are embedded in a complex web of relations and rules that limit their aggressiveness by creating common interests. Free trade and foreign investments improve your economics (no sense to wage war). From military to trading state (economic integration reduces the possibility of conflict).
- Functionalism (Theory of Regional Integration, David Mitrany, Ernst Haas): States start cooperating in technical and less political areas (coal and steel). If successful, cooperation will soon spread to new areas where states find mutual advantages (spillover). Example: The European Union started as an organization to administer coal and steel. It later spilled into other areas. No war for many decades.
- International Institutionalism (Joseph Nye, Robert Keohane)
Triumph and Decline of Neoliberalism
- Triumph: End of Cold War. The collapse of the USSR and international communism made many believe that liberal democracy had won as the only political model. No more competitors to liberal capitalism, that is seen as the only legitimate way to organize relations among states. Decline of the state and rise of IOs as most important actors. Interdependence and globalization.
- Decline: September 11. History comes back. The challenge of international terrorism.
The European Union: A Case Study
An interesting case from a theoretical and practical point of view. An example of how anarchy can be limited by creating areas of cooperation and authority. Complex nature:
- Supranational: A union where member states transcend national boundaries or interests to share the decision-making process and vote on issues that have an effect on all member states (majority voting).
- Intergovernmental: A union, usually a confederation, in which states are still the primary actors. Decisions are taken by consensus (unanimity) and affect all members only if all members agree on that.
The European Community for Coal and Steel (1951)
Cooperation on strategic resources to avoid tensions. Bringing these resources together by creating a supranational institution (independent of governments), not just an intergovernmental one. In order to avoid French and German hostility, they put the production of German coal and steel under a common authority. Aim to make war between them unthinkable.
Founding members:
- Italy: Need for political stability and reconstruction.
- Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg: Vulnerable, small, and in need of protection.
- UK: Its interests are mostly outside Europe (special relationship with the U.S. and Commonwealth) and no interests in coal and steel.
- Spain and Portugal: Still out because of dictatorships.
- Austria, Denmark, Sweden, Finland: Stay neutral.