"The authoress outlines in this article, how latecomer countries are much more willing to use economic tools for strengthening their position in international negotiations and for intervening in their domestic economies to achieve political goals than economically developed countries in Europe and North America. To do so she reconceptualises the economic dimension of power by adjusting existing theoretical concepts that link economics and politics, to current realities and contemporary debates. In analysing Chinese foreign policies she is able to validate her initial assumptions and confirms concerns of the future success of foreign policies from European countries." (author's abstract)
While it is realistically acknowledged that economics is of major importance in the balance of power, the specific economic components of balancing, band-wagoning, & buck-passing are not incorporated in the theory itself. It is argued that their inclusion might lead to a better understanding of states' economic strategies & how they address the balance of power & anticipate changes within it. Three major conclusions are reached with regard to the current world situation: (1) Europeans are not responding to US superiority by trying to balance power because they do not fear US dominance. (2) Despite advice to cut back, the US has continued heavy investment abroad, while Japan & Western Europe have been buck-passing & band-wagoning. (3) For balance-of-power theory to be of much use, realists need to rectify its shortcomings & pay greater attention to economics. J. Stanton
An introductory chapter notes that this volume offers a different approach to security than the "political realism" approach that emerged during the Cold War & is a static theory that fails to explain how the world really works. The inadequate methodology, regressive assumptions, & narrow agenda of political realism are pointed out to illustrate the many ways it runs counter to human interests. In contrast, critical approaches to international relations are said to provide a more sophisticated & genuinely realistic accounting for phenomena that is both self-reflective & open to change. Critical security studies (CSS) is based on the idea that "security is essentially a derivative concept" that involves rethinking security from the bottom up in ways that deepen & broaden the security studies agenda. The chapters in this volume are organized in relation to three core concepts of CSS: security, community, & emancipation. Taken together, they offer students of security a deeper perspective than what is currently available within more orthodox security studies. J. Lindroth
Argues that three elements in the work of Niccolo Machiavelli attracted Louis Althusser: (1) the parallel between Machiavelli's position as the primary critic of the social contract theorists & Karl Marx's position as the primary critic of the bourgeouis economy; (2) Machiavelli's attention to the revolutionary conditions under which a new regime or state can be established; & (3) Machiavelli's position as the first modern theoretician of politics. It is suggested that Althusser's interpretation of Machiavelli closely follows that of Antonio Gramsci, which highlights Machiavelli's political realism, amoralism, & notion of a dialectic of force & consent, along with the parallels between Machiavelli's prince & the modern political party. In broad terms, Althusser's fascination with Machiavelli is due to the belief that he is a deeply materialist thinker who recognizes the irreducible plurality of social reality & the fact that such differences are not easily surmounted. 18 References. D. M. Smith
A critical analysis of cosmopolitan ideals argues that the development of civilized & non-humiliating international institutions requires an emphasis on global decency. A "decent" society is defined as one whose institutions do not humiliate people. The notion of a decent society is said to be guided by political realism & a sense of urgency. Although it is more important to have a just society, it is not as urgent as achieving a decent society. Stressing the behavior of institutions rather than personal relations distinguishes a decent society from a civilized society. Depending on the prior creation of a world-state is not the way to either stop institutional humiliation or establish a decent society. Rather, there is a need for international interventions aimed at ending cruelty & the humiliation of persons & national minorities. Although decolonization promoted non-intervention in the "internal affairs" of independent sates, it is argued that international intervention carried out on a case-by-case basis to prevent cruelty & humiliation must be considered a prime political priority. J. Lindroth
Following an overview of the realist tradition in international relations, two criteria for judging its theoretical progress -- explanatory power & internal fertility -- are offered. Competing theories -- neorealism, defensive realism, offensive realism, & neoclassical realism -- are detailed in terms of the debates surrounding their respective utility. Neorealism is seen to originate with Kenneth Waltz (eg, 1979); criticisms center on the purely structural theory's parsimonious nature. Defensive realism makes an important revision to Waltz's structural theory by looking to the "fine-grained structure of power" & how geography & technology together impact state security. Offensive realism offers the greatest challenge to defensive realism, emphasizing the inability of states to gauge each other's intentions with total confidence, leading to competition. The split between offensive & defensive is illuminated to show how the two might be reconciled. Neoclassical theory returns, to a degree, to the views of Thucydides, Machiavelli, Carr, & Morgenthau, combining elements of structural theory with an empirically grounded sensitivity to the calculus of real-world decisionmakers. It is seen as useful in building historical narratives. Key limitations include ad hoc incorporation of domestic variables & a lack of its own explanatory hypotheses. Important theoretical refinements coming from the realist tradition include work on alliance theory, international political economy, emerging topics (eg, military doctrine, coalition formation), international history, & the post-Cold War era. Incisive realist critiques of alternative traditions (eg, institutionalism, cultural approaches) are noted. Remaining areas of inquiry are addressed along with the position of the realist tradition in international relations. J. Zendejas
Neither realist nor neoliberal perspectives can adequately address the position & function of concepts such as identities, norms, & values in international relations. The realist camp falls short because innovation is absent, & norms are only agreed with when it is convenient. On the other hand, the neoliberal camp fails to acknowledge that ideas may change a political actor's goals &/or identity. Even the constructivist camp exaggerates the importance of ideas & norms while failing to reconcile how ideas & norms change with time. The only viable solution, therefore, is to adopt an analysis of normative evolution. This theory supports the discovery of new ideas, allowing new ideas to compete with existing ideas. Those ideas that survive are then adopted through the processes of socialization & institutionalization. Sooner or later, these ideas will be challenged by even newer ideas. Because international relations theory is not yet equipped to deal with normative life cycles, a new emphasis on normative evolution is needed. 2 Tables, 4 Figures, 142 References. K. Larsen
In an attempt to build bridges between evolutionary international relations theory & alternative theoretical perspectives, it is proposed that international relations (IR) theory has already laid the necessary groundwork to link traditional IR thinking with evolutionary theorizing. This idea is supported by the argument that rational choice does not dictate theoretical IR hypotheses. Rather, the idea of evolutionary adaptation is a central principle, though liberal & realist viewpoints differ on how adaptation actually occurs. Liberals emphasize structural discontinuity & adaptations that result from technological change while realists focus on structural continuity & the influences of competitive survival. It is proposed that these divergent viewpoints might be reconciled if the evolutionary component were granted a central position in the argument. Because the most appropriate viewpoint is located between the liberal & realist perspectives, an evolutionary assessment must be considered. 90 References. K. Larsen
Contends that Richard Rorty's Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (1979) is one of the most significant events in recent American philosophy. Rorty's critique of reason & disinterested thought is described as "an effective apology for legal realism of the left (Critical Legal Studies) & of the right (Law & Economics)." An examination of Rorty's "social theory" suggests that it is only superficially Rawlsian. Attention is given to his arguments that the experience of pain is the basis for human solidarity & that ideal society is maintained by the belief that everyone should have an opportunity for self-creation. Rorty's unique brand of secular humanism is explored & excerpts from his work are used to show that Freud provides the needed link between Rorty's "profound materialism & his guarded humanism." Rorty is described as both a liberal & a romantic whose optimism about human progress enhances his secularism. Although he sees faith as a valuable part of one's life, he believes religion brings trouble when it is introduced into the public sphere. Rorty's avoidance of the issue of power is discussed. J. Lindroth
One of the most fundamental concepts in international relations is the realistic theory of balance of power. David Hume saw the concept as a scientific law. Hans Morgenthau referred to it as an "iron law of politics. Henry Kissenger viewed it as an art rather than a science, which some political leaders practiced better than others. Some thought it more relevant for state strategy while others tried to understand its role in international relations. Thus, the only thing certain about the concept of balance of power is the ambiguity in its definition. This essay explores what the great powers are balanced against, under what circumstances, & with what potential outcomes in the contemporary world. J. Stanton
Rather than trying to find ways to apply traditional theories of the balance of power to the contemporary world, it is argued that we should abandon this line of theorizing. The two basic propositions of balance of power theory -- that states pursue a military balance of power, & that military balances are likely emerge -- do not fit the current situation of global politics, nor are they likely to in the future. In fact, huge imbalances, rather than balances, are the logical expectation. This argument seems to fly in the face of realist theories of balance of power, but actually, it may be read as a plea for greater realism, ie, for greater sensitivity to & historical awareness of how realities change over time. This paper analyzes international conflicts over time & argues that we have emerged from a period of trinitarian (based on politics, passion, & reason) wars, in which balance of power was sought, & are now in a non-trinitarian era, where we must live without balancing our power against that of others. J. Stanton
