1. Chapter 3
Contending Perspectives: How to Think about International Relations Theoretically

2. Theory in IR
Theory = a set of propositions and concepts that seeks to explain phenomena by specifying relationships among the concepts
Theory generates groups of testable hypotheses = specific statements positing a particular relationship between two or more variables
By testing groups of interrelated hypotheses, theory is verified and refined and new relationships are found that demand subsequent testing; ongoing process
Ultimate goal = predict phenomena
Good theory should be able to explain phenomena at particular level of analysis; better theory should offer explanations across different levels of analysis

3. Levels of Analysis Why pay attention to levels of analysis?
Orient questions
Suggests appropriate type of evidence to explore
Make logical deductions
Enables us to explore all categories of explanation
Individual level = personality, perceptions, choices, activities of individual decision makers
State level = domestic factors; characteristics of the state: type of government, economic system, interest groups, national interest
International level = characteristics of international system (anarchy?), interactions among states and international organizations (IGOs, NGOs, MNCs), distribution of power among these actors, alliances

4. Liberalism (Idealism)
Human nature is basically good; individuals are rational
People can improve moral and material conditions
Societal progress possible
Injustice/war
not inevitable, can be moderated, eliminated through institutional reform or collective action (collective security, e.g., League of Nations, UN)
product of inadequate, corrupt social institutions, misunderstandings
Through learning and education, humans can develop institutions to bring out their best characteristics
Expansion of human freedom best achieved through democracy and free-market capitalism
Trade and commerce create interdependencies between states, reducing likelihood of war
Emphasis on international institutions and international law

5. Neoliberal Institutionalism
Given anarchic international system, why do states cooperate?
Not traditional liberal view (hence, Neoliberal)
Individuals are naturally cooperative
Established institutions that permit cooperative interactions, prohibit coercive ones
Prisoner’s dilemma
Two prisoners, each interrogated; if one confesses and other doesn’t, confessor goes free; both confess, reduced prison time for both; neither confess, even shorter prison time; one time choice; neither knows what other will do; cost of not confessing extraordinarily high
Result: both confess, producing less-than-optimal outcome for both
Function of one-time interaction; repetition makes it rational to cooperate
In self-interest to cooperate
States face ongoing confrontations with other states; in their mutual self-interest to cooperate
Institutions make cooperation on host of issues possible by guaranteeing framework of interaction

6. Realism Individuals primarily selfish and power seeking
Individuals organized in states; states are the principal actors; states act in unitary way in pursuit of national interest; decision-makers are rational; national interest defined in terms of power
International system is anarchic; states can only rely on themselves
Most important concern: manage insecurity (function of anarchic international system)
Emphasis on balance of power and deterrence
States increase security by increasing domestic capacities, building up economy, forming alliances of interest
IR = continuous struggle for power
Morality function of political consequences of policy

7. Neorealism (Structural Realism)
Emphasis on structure of international system (vs. Realism’s emphasis on states; hence, neorealism)
Structure of system determined by distribution of capabilities among states
Capabilities define state’s position in system
International structure is force in itself
constrains state behavior
states may not be able to control it
international structure determines outcomes
Balance of power largely determined by structure of the system
Possibilities for cooperation are slim
State’s survival depends on having more power than other states
All power viewed in relative terms; distribution of power among states is principal form of control

8. Radicalism Grounded in Marxist theorizing
Fundamental importance of historical analysis
Of special importance is history of production – means of production, social relations, and power
Assumes primacy of economics in explaining phenomena (in contrast to Liberalism and Realism)
Structure of global system is hierarchical, the product of imperialism; uneven economic development inherent in capitalism
Expansion result of three conditions (Hobson):
overproduction in developed states
underconsumption due to low wages for working class
excess savings among upper class
Expansion means goods find new markets, keep wages low due to foreign competition; savings profitably invested in new markets
Imperialism leads to rivalry; war outcome of capitalist economic competition (Lenin)
World system (Wallerstein): core, semi-periphery, periphery
Dependency theorists: through MNCs and international banks, develop countries control developing states; forge transnational relationships with elites

9. Constructivism
State behavior shaped by elite beliefs, identities, and social norms
Individuals in collectivities forge, shape, and change culture through ideas and practices (hence, constructivism)
State and national interests are result of social identities of actors
Object of study is norms and practices of individuals and collectivities
Dismiss concept of material structures
Political structure (anarchy or distribution of material capabilities) explains nothing, tells us little about state behavior
Emphasis on normative structures
what we need to know is identity
identities change through cooperation and learning
whether system is anarchic depends on distribution of identities (not military capabilities)
if states identifies only with itself, system may be anarchic
if state identifies with other states, no anarchy
Power is important, but see it as more than material terms (military, economic, political); sees power in discursive terms (ideas, culture, language); power exists in every exchange among actors

10. 1. Is it essential to consider “levels of analysis” when thinking about IR? Use the U.S. invasion of Iraq to make your case. 2. Is Liberalism idealistic? Review the tenets of Liberalism, and identify its strengths and weaknesses. 3. Is Realism realistic? Review Realism’s basic assumptions, and identify its strengths and weaknesses. 4. What are the strengths and weaknesses of Radicalism? 5. Does Constructivism contribute to our understanding of IR? Use it to explain a particular international issue or event. 6. See Mingst, 64. According to Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” Do you agree? Do states have rights based on an international ethical and moral order, or, is a state’s power the deciding factor? In other words, does “might make right” in IR? 7. Evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of Liberalism, Realism, and Radicalism across each level of analysis.