INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS
AN OVERVIEW OF THE FIELD OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
As an academic field of study, International Relations (IR) became an area of inquiry in 1 919 when the University of Wales created its deartment of International !olitics and "eor#etown created its deartment of International International Relations$ %he field is devoted to the e&licit study study of how the system of states could be made ma de to work more effectively to enhance the power of law, peacefully manage interstate affairs, preserve order and minimize minimize the prospects of war $ %he words 'relations' or 'affairs' (as in forei#n affairs) are meant to si#nify that the field encomasses more than ust olitics$ %he field is closely tied, tied, administratively if not academically, to olitical science deartments (and in some cases, history or law deartments, from which IR can be said to have ori#inated, articularly from the subfields of dilomatic history and international law, but international economics mi#ht also be added to the chronolo#y)$ %he inclusion of law and economics economics (e$#$, international law is art of international relations but not international olitics, and economics and olitics have different analytical methods) is one of the thin#s that should (but does not) mae IR a comlete co mlete 'breaaway' disciline from olitical olitical science$ %oo many careers are at stae to accomlish the needed reform in academe to say that IR is an indeendent field of study not no t dominated by olitical scientists$ %here are only about *+ or so indeendent, toraned academic IR deartments in the the world$ In most laces, IR is simly treated as a subdisciline of olitical science, or is art of a olicy studies ro#ram, a ublic administration ro#ram, a eace studies ro#ram, or a security studies ro#ram$ -ometimes the labels of forei#n affairs or international international affairs are referred by those who shun the IR label as not bein# interdiscilinary enou#h$ It is robably fair to say that IR is an hetero#eneous area of study (.vans / 0ewnham 199)$ It always has and will will continue to borrow ideas from fields as diverse as sociolo#y, sociolo#y, hilosohy, sycholo#y, cultural studies, anthroolo#y, and ustice studies$ 2rom the start, IR has been a olicyoriented disciline$ disciline$ %here is no a#reeduon methodolo#y for it (other than tain# a normative ersective), but the field sees to not only analy3e forei#n olicy but to hel formulate it$ %his has led, as one mi#ht ima#ine, to various debates (called theoretical debates) about ways of thinin# in international relations$ relations$ %he content and character of those debates have shaed the field into what mi#ht be called the followin# '-chools of %hou#ht' which rou#hly followed one another chronolo#ically, chronolo#ically, desite overla4 (1) Realism5 (*) 6ehavioralism5 (7) 0eorealism5 (8) 0eoliberalism5 (+) World -ystems %heory5 () :ritical %heory5 and (;) !ostmodernism$ The two dominant perspectives today are neorealism and neoliberalism$ neoliberalism$ %hese two dominant ersectives will will be e&lained below, in the conte&t of elaboratin# on the meanin# of Realism, Realism, 0eorealism,
%he theory of classical realism (sometimes called the owerolitics school) is derived from the followin# wors4 -un %3u=s The Art of War (written (written aro&imately +>> 6:)5 from the ancient "rees, %hucydides ( History History of the Peloponnesian War 871 6:)5 from ?achiavelli (The (The Prince Spring !!"
Page # $ #
% Professor &avid A' (ice
INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS 1+17)5 from @obbes ( )eviathan 1+1)5 )eviathan 1+1)5 from Rousseau (%he -tate of War 1;++)5 1; ++)5 from :lausewit3 (*n (*n War 1*;)5 1*;)5 from .$@$ :arr (The (The Twenty +ears risis 1979)5 risis 1979)5 and from @ans ?or#enthau ( Politics Politics Among -ations 198)$ -ations 198)$ ther contributors of note would include4 include4 :ardinal de Richelieu who coined the hrase 'raison 'raison d.etat ' durin# the %hirty Bears War (1118), a 2rench term meanin# a nation=s #oals and a nd ambitions and today somewhat synonymous with the hrase 'national interest' and tto von 6ismarc who coined the term 'realpolitik 'realpolitik ' ("erman for 'olitics of reality') reality') as the Iron :hancellor of "ermany from 1;1 to 19>$ 2amous hrases include4 '%he stron# do what they can and the wea do what they must' (%hucydides) and '6etter feared than loved' (?achiavelli)$ (?achiavelli)$ ?ost conservative as well well as hardcore ?ar&ist aroaches are ultimately derived from classical realism$ realism$ ?or#enthau=s (198) boo is re#arded as the '6ible of International Relations' on the subect, and @enry Cissin#er is usually credited with introducin# classical realism into American forei#n olicy from 199 to 19;; as national security advisor and secretary secretary of state$ ?or#enthau=s (198) definition of 'ower' 'ower' is robably the most commonly cited meanin# of the term across all social sciences ower as the ossession of control or command over others, the will to mae others do what one desires$ ?or#enthauDs theory of realism in international relations is based on a synthesis of si& () rinciles, as follows4 • • •
•
•
•
International relations is #overned by obective laws that h ave their roots in human nature %he main si#nost of olitical realism is the concet o f interest defined in terms of ower Interest defined as ower is an obective cate#ory which is universally valid, althou#h its e&act meanin# may chan#e with time and circumstance !olitical realism is aware of the moral si#nificance of olitical action, and it is also aware of the ineluctable tension between the moral command and the requirements of successful olitical action %he moral asirations of a articular nation cannot be identified with the moral laws that #overn the universe Realist olitics is an autonomous shere that needs to be analy3ed as an entity, without bein# subordinated to any other shere of human concern
Realism maes several imortant assumtions$ It assumes that the international system is anarchic, anarchic, in the sense that there is no authority above states caable of re#ulatin# their interactions, which is to say that states must arrive at relations with other states on their own , rather than bein# dictated to by some hi#her entity (i$e$, no true authoritative au thoritative world #overnment e&ists)$ Realism also assumes assumes that soverei#n states, states, rather than international institutions, institutions, non #overnmental or#ani3ations, or multinational cororations, are the rimary actors in international affairs$ .ach state is seen as a rational actor who always ursues selfinterest, selfinterest, and the rimary #oal of each state is to ensure its own security$ In the ursuit of that security, states states will attemt to amass resources, and relations between states are determined b y their relative level of ower in terms of military and economic caabilities$ ?ilitary caabilities must be at least sufficient sufficient to deter attac, and strate#ic lannin# should be alon# lines of the worstcase scenario$ %here are two main subschools of realism4 ma&imal ma&imal realism and minimal realism$ realism$ %he theory of ma/imal realism holds realism holds that the most desirable osition to be in is that of the he#emon, the most owerful entity in the world (i$e$, suerower or hyerower)$ Under this theory, a situation where there is more than one suerower is an inherently unstable situation and one which will Spring !!"
Page # #
% Professor &avid A' (ice
INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS inevitably collase into a more stable system where one nation eventually becomes the most owerful$ %he theory of minimal realism holds realism holds that it is ossible to have two or more suerowers because of all the strate#ies ossible in the alliances which can be made between nonhe#emonic states who frequently enact olicies of the moment (e$#$, layin# both sides a#ainst the middle)$ NEOREALISM
Walt3= neorealism (Walt3 19;9), or what is sometimes called structural realism, is the most well nown version of neorealism, althou#h some mi#ht say 6u3an=s (1997) version is a better refinement$ 0eorealism is widely re#arded as a more scientific aroach than classical realism because it is caable of e&lainin# u33lin# behavior by states$ %he 'neo' in the name of the theory reflects a belief that the structure of the international system itself (rather than the ower and status characteristics of actors in the system) has the most influence on behavior, lie the way maret forces condition thinin#, thinin#, behavior, and interactions$ Walt3 (19;9) is also also concerned with e&lainin# why the anarchic international anarchic international system tends to reroduce itself, and he rovides three (7) reasons4 •
•
•
%he orderin# rincile of the system is anarchical not hierarchical, and the absence of a central authority leads to a selfhel system where states comete for survival an d security throu#h military ower, re#ardless if they want to or not$ %he functional differentiation of the anarchic system is such that each state is a searate and autonomous unit, forced to reali3e its interests on its own because 'no one else can be counted on,' hence all the imortant societal functions must be erformed by each state on its own$ %he distribution of caabilities is unequal and shiftin#, definin# the relative ower of the states and redictive of variation in balance of ower behavior
Under conditions of ubiquitous anarchy (lie the assumtion of continuous cometition and conflict in realism), states only have two choices4 balance or balance or bandwagon, bandwagon, and states almost always choose balance in the lon# term (they bandwa#on in the short term) whenever the system #rows calm$ %his is because for nations, the ower of others is always a threat, threat, not a lure, and times when the system #rows calm is the time they move their ieces to balance the ower of more owerful states$ Althou#h both realism and neorealism share a fundamental belief that actors will act cometitively, realism and neorealism have different imlications for national security olicy main#$ Realism leads to to oweroriented strate#ies strate#ies with ower as an end in in itself$ 0eorealism leads to securityoriented strate#ies strate#ies based on the need to comete comete for security$ %here are differences, also, between the two theories in terms of the role of uncertainty for war and eace$ eace $ 0or realism, certainty leads to war since since rational ursuit of ower simlifies calculations for war$ Also, since biolarity #ives #ives more certainty than multiolarity, multiolarity, multiolarity leads leads to eace in classical realist theory$ 0or neorealism, certainty leads to peace since peace since with balance of ower shifts, the world is made more anarchic and states tend to tae more drastic measures (such as Spring !!"
Page # 1 #
% Professor &avid A' (ice
INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS eace) to avoid miscalculation and reduce insecurity$ Accordin# to neorealism, the term Esecurity dilemmaF describes the condition in which states, unsure o f othersD intentions, arm for the sae of security, settin# in motion a vicious circle of resonse and counterresonse$ -ecurity dilemmas result from situations, not from the statesD desires, #oals, or o r ambitions$ LIBERALISM
%he theory of classic liberalism (to most Americans) is most directly traceable to Gohn
8), the 2rench hilosoher Holtaire (1981;;), and American foundin# father %homas !aine (1;7;1>9) who believed in the followin# idea that if you ust #ive eole as much freedom and liberty as ossible, authoritarian olitical atterns would disaear, democracies would flourish, wars would never be fou#ht, and world eace and roserity would surely follow$ 0umerous rotoliberals e&ist, and the recise herita#e herita#e of liberalism is debatable (Renaissance rational humanism or .nli#htenment ideolo#y), but most scholars would a#ree that ) e&ressed
eace can best be secured throu#h the sread of democratic institutions on a worldwide basis
Spring !!"
Page # 3 #
% Professor &avid A' (ice
INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS •
•
•
a natural harmony of interests (the 'invisible hand') will ensure eole and states mae rational calculations which mae national interest and international interest one and the same if disutes occur, they should be settled by established udicial rocedures under the rule of law collective security would relace notions of selfhel
%hese core beliefs may need some elaboration$ 2irst of all, it it should be noted that some some IR scholars refer to classic liberalism (and neoliberalism) as 'institutional' liberalism recisely because of the focus on sreadin# democratic institutions$ Re#ime theory is also a liberal (and luralist or consensusoriented) strand strand of thou#ht$ -econdly, liberalism holds that state references, rather than state caabilities, are the rimary determinants determinants of state behavior, and the analo#y is carried over into into the domestic level re#ardin# individual individual motivations$ What maes the 'invisible hand' wor is tolerance of references, alon# with democratic institutions lie 'enli#htened' educational institutions which romote rational calculations amon# b oth individuals and states that 'war doesn=t ay$' !references may vary from state to state, deendin# on culture, economic system, and tye of #overnment$ "overnments mae war, however, not eole, so the best hoe for eace is democracy (as the hi#hest form of e&ressin# the oular will of the eole who will surely choose eace a self#evident proposition based on reason and natural law)$ law)$ %hirdly, the rule rule of law is ust as alicable to states as it is to eo le, and a voluntary system of international or#ani3ations ou#ht to e&ist fulfillin# the functions of a le#islature, an e&ecutive, and most of all, a udiciary while reservin# tolerance for as much freedom and indeendence amon# states as ossible$ 2ourthly, ust as it is always ossible ossible to identify a##ressors and belli#erents, it should always be ossible to ut to#ether an effective coalition of lawabidin# states to oose such violators$ :ollective security is a Cantian idea as much a art of classic liberalism liberalism in this re#ard, and one can easily see that liberalism is art of the theoretical foundation uon which or#ani3ations nown as the )eague the )eague of -ations and -ations and the 4nited -ations were -ations were built$
Page # 5 #
% Professor &avid A' (ice
INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS a middle #round between the two schools for the ultimate defeat of liberalism on moral andor economic #rounds$ 0eoliberalism in many ways is an e&tension of this this idea that the aroriate battlefield is the maretlace andor moral hi#h #round $ :ritics of liberalism (and there have been many) #e nerally 3ero in on the ambivalence in almost all liberal theories over comin# to terms with the use of force (for e&actly what reasons and for what ends)$ ther critics challen#e challen#e the sirit of moral omniotence and selfri#hteousness that that is revalent in much liberal thinin#$ %he second line of criticism maes for a lot of stalemate stalemate and antiAmericanism in the world, esecially amon# cometitive suerower layers$ NEOLIBERALISM
0eoliberalism is institutional institutional liberalism that distin#uishes distin#uishes itself by contrast andor selective inclusion with the ideas of 'commercial' liberalism (the linin# of free trade with eace), 'reublican' liberalism (the linin# of democracy and eace), and 'sociolo#ical' liberalism (theories of international international inte#ration)$ %he more inclusive theories, accordin# to 6aldwin (1997), tend to be the best challen#ers to realistneorealist orthodo&y, and neoliberalism is best understood as oosed to realismneorealism orthodo&y (its warmon#erin# and militaristic thrusts)$ Accordin# to Ce#ley (19), the classical realist world view laces moral standards subservient to the ower concerns of international actors$ In their favor, some realists sometimes address the issue of morality morality with seriousness and concern$ @owever, neorealist thinin# embraces the ultimate conclusion of realist remises that statesmen never act accordin# to moral recets thus such concerns need not be addressed by a olitical olitical theory$ -tron#ly oosed to this is is the neoliberal osition (sometimes called the neoidealist osition) that states that states consistently act according to values more than power concerns$ concerns$ 0eorealism i#nores i#nores these factors, and neoliberalism (or neoidealism) sees to e&and the notion of selfinterest to include the moral shere$ 0eoliberalism defines 'security' in broad terms, often often ar#uin# that factors such as health, welfare, and environmental issues need to be included in institutionbuildin# efforts, whether assive (noninterventionist) or active (interventionist)$ (interventionist)$ %homson (199) oints out that the literature on 'declinism' (the idea that nationstates have declined in imortance as actors) is a fundamental underinnin# of neoliberalism$ %he result of declinism declinism is a quasianarchic system system where 'absolute' (rather than relative) #ains need to be advocated as miti#atin# strate#ies in order to #et nationstates to fulfill the essential functions they ou#ht to be fulfillin# for their citi3ens$ Ceohane / 0ye (*>>>) oint out that most neoliberals advocate a mi&edactor model called the theory of interdeendence$ %his theory is based on the comle& sillover effects effects ossible for chan#e toward world #overnance (by norms, rules, rocesses, and institutions) when one dimensional militaristic solutions are abandoned and reliance is, instead, laced uon the ossibilities when other actors are involved, lie international international or#ani3ations, transnational or#ani3ations, 0"s (non#overnmental or#ani3ations), and ?0:s (multinational cororations)$
Spring !!"
Page # " #
% Professor &avid A' (ice
INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS OTHER PERSPECTIVES IN IR THEORY
-o far, this has only been a brief overview of the dominant ersectives in the field$ field$ 'ther' ersectives include behavioralism (the social science aroach), world systems theory, theory, critical theory, ostmodernism, and feminism$ -uch ersectives have made, made, and continue to mae, valuable contributions andor inroads to to the field$ 2or e&amle, the followin# oints oints can be made toward an elaboration of these other ersectives$ Behavioralism J6ehavioralism is the term commonly used (but not always) for when interdiscilinary borrowin# taes lace (of ideas, concets, models, theories, or methods) from one of the other fields in social science5 e$#$, sociolo#y, sociolo#y, sycholo#y, anthroolo#y, etc$ Usually, the urose is to develo an IR theory which better e&lains some henomenon, some asect of a henomenon, or sheds better li#ht on a level of analysis lie analysis lie the macro (system, subsystem, unit) or micro (bureaucracy, individual) dimension (-in#er 199) where unit refers to the nationstate level of analysis only$
6ehavioralist theories tend to be eclectic, crosslevel, and some are cuttin#ed#e while most are at least an attemt to to e&and the boundaries of the disciline$ disciline$ %hey are distin#uishable by either either a heavy emirical research thrust andor a heavy discursive critique of the 'classical' tradition in IR (the hilosohyolitical theory tradition that doesn=t really reach out to discilines other than history, hilosohy, and olitical olitical theory for insi#ht)$ %he behavioralist critique, critique, as a movement, reached its ea in the 19>s as an 'American -chool' of o f IR in contrast to the '.n#lish -chool' of IR$ -ome fresh ideas, or aradi#ms, aradi#ms, were develoed, and some lasted while while others didn=t ("room / s, behavioralism resurfaced, resurfaced, and Waler (1997) is tyical of modern behavioralists who umed on the 199 bandwa#on, e&lained below$ 0ineteen ei#htynine (199) was a year of historical rutures that altered the ma of international international relations forever$ In that year, the two halves halves of "ermany were reunited, and communism communism collased$ 6y the way, .vans / 0ewnham (199) claim that most that most 7( scholars believe communism collapsed of its own accord rather than due to the resolute determination of 4'S' foreign policy and this oint may be debatable$ In retrosect, it can be ar#ued, ar#ued, of course, that the writin# was on the wall with -olidarity movements in !oland and :3echoslovaia, and with the "orbachev Koctrine of oenness and nonintervention, but olitical (conservatism) and cultural trends toward a more accelerated lifestyle in America may have layed a art$ A focus on cultural factors that are not the roerties of states but roduced by interactions, institutions, norms, and cultures is called constructivism in constructivism in IR theory and is normally a art of the '.n#lish -chool' alon# with re#ime re#ime theory (see Wendt 199*)$ %he endin# of biolarity with dissolution of the :old War had numerous reercussions$ %he U$0$, for e&amle, enoyed a resur#ence (and was able to launch an effective coalition a#ainst Iraq=s attemted anne&ation of Cuwait in 199> the '?other of o f all battles' or the 2irst "ulf War)$ %he year 199 rovided much intellectual fodder for IR theory, and the concet of ' -ew -ew World *rder ' (!resident 6ush=s seech in -etember 199>) rovided the oortunity for dramatic chan#es in olitical olitical thou#ht$ %he concet of 0ew World rder is not new$ -imilar seeches were made in 11+, 191, and 198, but !resident 6ush in -etember 199> was romisin# 'a 'a Spring !!"
Page # 8 #
% Professor &avid A' (ice
INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS new era, freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the p ursuit of 9ustice and more secure in the :uest for peace, an era in which nations of the world, ;ast and West, -orth and South, can prosper and live in harmony$' harmony$' 6ehavioralists usually embrace this concetion of 0ew World rder while traditional realistsneorealists are more essimistic about it, claimin# the collase of communism has unleashed numerous centrifu#al forces in the form of entu ethnic and nationalist conflicts$ -cholars and olicymaers alie are currently worin# to e&lain the confusin# atterns of ost 199 fra#mentation and inte#ration in the the world today$ In the meantime, the events of 911 (-etember 11, *>>1) have fueled the intellectual landscae with even more comlications, and franly left the disciline of IR in flu&$ World Systems Theory JWorld systems theory (Wallerstein (Wallerstein 19;8) is a #rand sociolo#ical, ?ar&istinsired, deendency theory (:hirot / @all 19*) aroach to the study of world olitics, althou#h some would say it=s only a ersective for looin# at the world$ 2rom ?ar&ism, the influences are historical materialism, the concern for totality, the transitory nature of some social forms, the centrality of cometitive class stru##le, and the dialectics of contradiction$ 2rom deendency theory, the influences are a neo?ar&ist critique critique of economic develoment, articularly in %hird World countries, and
%he critique is rimarily a#ainst the world caitalist system where the rocesses behind this ind of economic develoment are seen as bein# the structural causes of inequalities, asymmetries, an e&loitative international division of labour, and e&loitation between relations amon# core, erihery and semierihery states$ %he unit of analysis is the worldsystem rather rather than unit states, which is what distin#uishes worldsystems analysis from other aroaches that are less #lobal and less lon#itudinal$ Wallerstein (19;84 78;) defines a world system as4 'a 'a social system, one that has boundaries, structures, member groups, rules of legitimation, and coherence' 7ts life is made up of the conflicting forces which hold it together by tension and tear it apart as each group seeks eternally to remold it to its advantage' 7t has the characteristics of an organism, in that it has a life#span over which its characteristics change in some respects and remain stable in others' *ne can define its structures as being at different times strong or weak in terms of the internal logic of its functioning $' $' %he theory has romted a somewhat e&tensive ublishin# and emirical research enterrise to srin# u in academe, and continues to attract adherents from time to time in sociolo#y and olitical science deartments, with the Gournal of World-ystems World-ystems Research bein# the most oular outlet for ideas$ An Internet boo review of Wallerstein=s boo can be found, alon# with !rofessors= notes e&lainin# e&lainin# the aroach and various other Wallerstein Wallerstein resource a#es$ %here are as many critics of world systems theory as there are devoted adherents to it$ Critical Theory J%here are a variety of critical aroaches in IR, but almost all 'critical 'critical theorists' hold to the the belief that all theories theories are for someone and for some urose$ :ritical Spring !!"
Page # < #
% Professor &avid A' (ice
INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS theorists, therefore, try to mer#e or connect nowled#e and ractice (called pra/is (called pra/is), ), fact and value, and the nower and the nown$ -uch eistemolo#ical contributions are not only an alternative to traditional ositivist methods of roblem solvin#, but reflect a commitment to emanciation, eace, freedom, and cooeration as core concets andor variables of interest$ 6ehavioralists also tend to focus on eistemolo#y (how nowled#e is #enerated) and ontolo#y (the nature of bein# or e&istence)$ !rof$ Andrew ) is robably the most well well nown roonent of critical theories of international relations$ -ome critical theorists theorists are postmodernists while postmodernists while others are not$ !ostmodern critical theorists theorists tend to critique modernity modernity and modernity=s notions of inevitable ro#ress in the name of reason and technocratic alication of scientific nowled#e to world roblems$ %he hardcore ?ar&ist view, of course, is that the basic tas is not to interret the world, but to chan#e it (also art of pra/is of pra/is)$ )$ ther critical critical theorists theorists are deconstructionists, deconstructionists, who tend to critique or tae aart other theories (mostly liberalneoliberal theories) in order to find and oen u 'discursive saces' where an imortant dialo#ue mi#ht have been missed$ missed$ It is debatable whether critical theory has made si#nificant contributions to the field other than to mae it more introsective$ Feminist Theory J%here are a variety of feminist aroaches in IR, but almost all feminist feminist theories hold that #ender is of cardinal imortance and it matters that almost all IR theories have been constructed by men$ Realism, for e&amle, is the frequent tar#et of feminist feminist critique because, amon# other thin#s, it is seen as a maledominated theory about the a##ressive world of states controlled by a##ressive men (%icner 199*)$
0onviolence is therefore an imortant art of the feminist feminist commitment to world eace$ 2eminists in IR sometimes claim that the world would be a less cometitive and less violent lace if women #ained dominance in ositions of ower$ %he feminist aroach attemts to critique IR theory at its core (attacin# basic concets lie soverei#nty, boundaries, and the meanin# of bein# 'civili3ed'), and it also attemts to oen u new toics and hori3ons (e$#$, the roblems of women facin# system transformations)$ transformations)$ A coule of imortant underinnin# feminist ar#uments are that unity can be found in difference and that the personal is the political $ A few feminists are ostmodernists or deconstructionists, but the aroach is so diverse and new that it is safer to say that there are as many feminisms feminisms as there are feminist eole$ ONLINE RESOURCES
Ama3on "uide to International Relations %heory A Readin# of @ans ?or#enthau=s Politics ?or#enthau=s Politics Among -ations Association of !rofessional -chools of International Affairs (A!-IA) 2eminist %heory and "ender -tudies in International Relations International
Page # = #
% Professor &avid A' (ice
INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS !eace 2eminism in International Relations !rof$ 6roo=s Article on Kuelin# Realisms Realism,
Aron, R$ (19)$ Peace (19)$ Peace and War> A Theory of 7nternational (elations$ (elations$ >7)$ The 4se of 0orce> ?ilitary Power and 7nternational Politics$ Politics$ >>)$ 7nternational (*>>>)$ 7nternational Systems in World History History$$ 0B4 &ford Univ$ !ress$ :arr, .$@$ (1979)$ The Twenty +ears risis$ risis$ 0B4 ?acmillan$ :hirot, K$ / @all, %$ (19*)$ 'World-ystem %heory$' Annual %heory$' Annual (eview of Sociology 411>$ Sociology 411>$ :lausewit3, C$ (17*)$ *n War $ .dited and trans$ by ?$ @oward / !$ !aret, 1997$ 0B4 .veryman=s >>)$ ontending Theories of 7nternational (elations$ (elations$ 0B4 >7)$ Progress (*>>7)$ Progress in 7nternational (elations Theory$ Theory$ :ambrid#e, ?A4 ?I% !ress$ .vans, "$ / 0ewnham, G$ (199)$ The Penguin &ictionary of 7nternational (elations$ (elations$ 0B4 !en#uin$ 2oot, R$, "addis, G$ / @urrell, A$ (.ds$) (*>>7)$ *rder and @ustice in 7nternational (elations$ (elations$ 0B4 &ford Univ$ !ress$ 2uuyama, 2$ (199*)$ The ;nd of History and the )ast ?an$ ?an$ 0B4 2ree !ress$ 2uuyama, 2$ (*>>8)$ State#6uilding> overnance B World *rder in the $st entury$ entury$ 0B4 :ornell Univ$ !ress$ "riffiths, ?$ (1999)$ 0ifty (1999)$ 0ifty Cey Thinkers in 7nternational (elations$ (elations$
Spring !!" (ice
Page # $! #
% Professor &avid A'
INTERNATIONAL LAW & ORGANIZATIONS "room, A$ / A uide to Theory$ Theory$ >>)$ Power (*>>>)$ Power and 7nterdependence, 1e$ 1e$ 0B4 )$ 6eyond (199>)$ 6eyond (ealism and ?ar/ism> ritical Theory and 7nternational (elations (elations$$ >)$ 7nternational (*>>)$ 7nternational Security$ Security$ Washin#ton K:4 :L !ress$ 0ye, G$ (*>>*)$ 4nderstanding 7nternational onflicts$ onflicts$ 0B4 >8)$ Soft Power $ 0B4 !ublic Affairs$ -in#er, G$ (199)$ '%he *9 in G$ Rosenau (ed$), 7nternational (ed$), 7nternational Politics and 0oreign Policy$ Policy$ 0B4 2ree !ress$ -illen, G$ (*>>+)$ With or Against the World> America.s (ole Among the -ations$ -ations$ Positivism and 6eyond $ 0B4 :ambrid#e Univ$ !ress$ %homson, C$ (.d$) (19+)$ Politics (19+)$ Politics Among -ations$ -ations$ 0B4 Cnof$ %homson, C$ (199)$ '%he (1997)$ 7nsideD*utside> 7nternational (elations (elations as Political Theory$ Theory$ 0B4 :ambrid#e Univ$ !ress$ Wallerstein, I$ (19;8)$ The ?odern World System$ System$ 0B4 Academic !ress$ Walt, -$ (*>>+)$ '%he Relationshi 6etween %heory and !olicy in International Relations$' Annual (eview of Political Science $ Science $ Walt3, C$ (19;9)$ Theory of 7nternational Politics$ Politics$ 0B4 ?c"raw @ill$ Walt3, C$ (*>>1)$ ?an, (*>>1)$ ?an, the State, and War $ 0B4 :olumbia Univ$ !ress$ Wendt, A$ (199*)$ 'Anarchy is What -tates ?ae of It4 %he -ocial :onstruction of !ower !olitics$' 7nternational !olitics$' 7nternational *rganization 8(*)4 *rganization 8(*)4 7918*+$ Wittof, .$ / ?c:ormic, G$ (.ds$) (*>>7)$ The &omestic Sources of American 0oreign Policy$ Policy$
Spring !!" (ice
Page # $$ #
% Professor &avid A'
