INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY

1
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY

• Zhou Qiujun
• Private email zhouqiujun_at_gmail.com
• Public email ggll_sz_at_163.com

2
Contents

1. INTRODUCTION
2. METHODS FOR STUDYING INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
   THEORY
3. REALISM
4. LIBERALISM
5. CONSTRUCTIVISM
6. THE ENGLISH SCHOOL
7. CRITICAL THEORIES OF WORLD POLITICS
8. INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY AND GLOBALIZATION

3
Chapter 6 The English School

• English school in IRT
• English schools approach to cooperation
• Conclusion strengths and weakness

4
Chapter 6 The English School

• English school in IRT
• The promise of a non-American school
• The term of English School comes from an
  article of Roy E. Jones, an opposite of the
  school. (Jones, The English school of
  international relations a case for closure,
  Review of International Studies, 1981.)
• ??????????(Charles Manning)??????(Martin
  Wight)???????(Hedley Bull)??????(Adam
  Watson)???????(R. J. Vincent)??????(Barry Buzan)
• The difference between the E and the American
  schools America directs its attention to
  scientific achievements and uses them to reform
  or solidify the soft science of international
  relations while the British are more likely to
  focus on historical experiences and make them the
  grounding bed of wisdom. (???)

5

• A sociological shift in IRT
• It claims that international relations should be
  historical and animates the social factors that
  regulate international relations ideas, norms,
  institutions, etc.
• The English school, embodying the traditions of
  history, law, philosophy and some of the
  conceptualizations of the social science, worked
  with Constructivism to challenge the neo-neo
  debate in the 1990s.

6

• Evolution of the English School
• Stage-1 (59-66) Constructing an object of study.
  In 1959, founders of the English school set up
  the British Committee on the Theory of
  International Politics and started to develop
  their analysis approach centered on
  international society. The hallmark of this
  stage is the publication of Diplomatic
  Investigations by Herbert Butterfield and Martin
  Wight.
• Stage-2 (66-77) Defining methodological
  approach. The Anarchical Society by Hedley Bull
  and Systems of States by Martin Wight established
  a historical approach to studying the
  international society.

7

• Stage 3 (77-92) Flourishing period of academic
  works. The English school made improvements to
  its theory of international society and
  strengthened its position in academia. A new
  generation of its members started to fill out the
  vacancies left out by the old members.
• Stage 4 (92-present) Self-transcendence. New
  members like Buzan and Dunne furnished the
  schools international society theory. In this
  period, the school discovered the American
  mainstream thoughts could not fully explain the
  post-Cold War political issues and in response,
  set it in relation to factors long ignored by the
  mainstream schools of thought, like history,
  culture and society. Therefore, the English
  school was elevated to the height on a par with
  Constructivism.

8

• International relations as social states
• 3 traditions of thought in international
  politics3R (Martin Wight)
• R-1. Realist or Hobbesian, who views world
  politics in a constant status of war.
• R-2. Rationalist (or Grotian), who acknowledges
  the birth of international politics out of an
  international society.
• R-3. Revolutionist (or Kantian), who argues for
  the effect the community of mankind plays in
  international politics.
• 3R shapes the schools perception into the
  nature of international relations by viewing
  simultaneously the different dimensions and
  observing how they balance and interact with each
  other.

9
Research agenda of the English school
Traditions of Thought Views on History Core Elements
International system Hobbesianism (Realism) Pessimistic History Repetition Anarchy/Power
? Conservative / Pluralism ? Conservative / Pluralism ? Conservative / Pluralism ? Conservative / Pluralism
International society Grotianism (Rationalism) Cautious Progressive Improvement International Interaction/Order
? Progressive / Solidarism ? Progressive / Solidarism ? Progressive / Solidarism ? Progressive / Solidarism
World society Kantianism (Revolutionalism) Positive History Progress Community of mankind/Justice
10
3 key concepts international system,
international society and world society

• An international system is formed when two or
  more states have sufficient contact between them,
  and have sufficient impact on one anothers
  decisions, to cause them to behave An
  international society exists when a group of
  states, conscious of certain common interests and
  common values, form a society in the sense that
  they conceive themselves to be bound by a common
  set of rules in their relations with one another,
  and share in the working of common institutions.
  (Bull)
• A world society is a representation of world
  community in broad terms and it include nations,
  multi-national organizations, NGOs and
  individuals. It shows the transition from
  international society to world society during
  which a strong willingness is exhibited in
  pushing for this progress and incorporating the
  positive factors working in the current system
  like international law, order, cooperation and
  coordination into a new world order whose
  components may be non-state entities.

11

• Distinctive features compared with the American
  schools
• F-1 Traditionalism rather than Behaviorism. The
  school believes that international relations,
  being a social science, should follow the
  analytical tradition that is observed in other
  human science like history, law and philosophy.
  The International political events should be
  interpreted not explained.
• eg. Wight thought that the only reference for
  international relations study is the historical
  classics their accounts of historical events are
  consistent, thought-provoking, neural and
  relevant to social events.
• eg. Manning takes a phenomenological approach and
  does his study of the underlying meanings of a
  phenomenon instead of the phenomenon itself (eg.
  study rules via studying the social setting in
  which the rules are established).

12

• F-2 holistic view rather than methodological
  individualism (sociological methodology rather
  than economic methodology). The English school,
  like Constructivism, seeks to demonstrate how
  international society where states interact is
  coordinated and maintained by political
  community, norms, values, international
  institutions and global culture that go beyond
  state-level.
• eg. Sovereign Realists interpretation hinges on
  human nature and inter-personal relationship,
  that is, sovereign states relations are dictated
  by patterns of relationship between individuals
  while the English school views sovereignty as
  interstate relations and international societys
  membership.

13

• F-3 The English school emphasizes the importance
  of rules and institutions in its own way, it
  defines institutions as a set of rules of games
  which give true meanings to state activities.
  They are primary institutions (Buzan), because
  they have vigorous power, long-standing history
  and solid foundation.
• Bulls five basic institutions the balance of
  power, international law, diplomacy, war and the
  great powers
• Buzan adds the norms underlying the social
  structure (sovereignty, territory, hereditary
  monarchy and colonial government, etc.) the
  inequality between people (prelude to slavery,
  aristocracy and even empire), and the notion of
  modern nationalism (which makes people and land
  be closely tied).

14

• Compared with Constructivism
• The E is similar to C in terms of understanding
  international relations both stress on the value
  of social factors such as ideas, recognition and
  norms.
• But C is a sociological paradigm, with an
  attempt studying international society while the
  E is a historical philosophy, a political theory
  on international society.

15
Chapter 6 The English School

• English schools approach to cooperation
• Possibilities of cooperation
• The school thinks of international relations as a
  social state, namely, international society. The
  term society is in relation to certain orders.
  These orders are composed of international rules,
  norms and institutions which are structurally
  social, and these components themselves ate the
  products of cooperation by the international
  society members (states).

16

• The Es ideas of international cooperation are
  based on the fundamental goals pursued by the
  international society. Bull identifies two
  societal goals. One is elementary goals by all
  societies
• to ensure life security against violence
  resulting in death or bodily harm
• to ensure the keeping of promises, or the
  implementation of agreements
• to ensure the stability of the possession of
  things which is free from constant and unlimited
  challenges.

17

• The other type is goals by the international
  society
• preservation of the system and society of states
  itself
• maintenance of the independence or external
  sovereignty of individual states
• maintenance of peace in the sense of the absence
  of war among member states of international
  society as the normal condition of their
  relationship.
• The three conditions show that international
  cooperation is represented by the international
  society. Cooperation is an endogenous variable of
  international society.

18

• Dynamics of cooperation in an international
  society
• Two foundations for the cooperation in
  international society common interests (or
  recognition of primary values), and shared value
  system (or ideational convergence in common
  culture or civilization).

19

• Approaches to cooperation
• The Es idea of cooperation takes root in the
  elementary institutions maintaining the order of
  the international society, which include the
  balance of power, international law, diplomacy,
  war and the great powers.(??????)

20
1/5 The balance of power

• states agree to regulate their interaction. It
  functions in
• the existence of a general balance of power
  throughout the international system as a whole
  serves to prevent the system from being
  transformed by conquest into a universal empire
• the existence of local balance of power serves to
  protect the independence of states in particular
  areas from absorption or domination by a locally
  preponderant power
• the existence of the both general and local
  balance of power creates conditions for the
  institutions (such as diplomacy, war,
  international law and great power management)
  that guarantee an international order to function
  well.
• ? The balance of power place an emphasis on
  cooperation not confrontation. It highlights the
  cultures and values shared by members in a
  balanced system of power, regards them as key
  elements shaping and maintaining international
  order.
• ? In reality, small states interests are often
  on the side of sacrifice maintaining the balance
  often runs counter against the principles of
  international law because for the balance to be
  kept, military force or deterrence will sometimes
  be resorted to against a states perceived
  imminent threat, even if the state is not in
  violation of international law.

21
2/5 International law

• a body of rules governing the mutual interaction
  not only of states but of other agents in
  international politics. It functions in
• establishing the idea of a society of sovereign
  states as the supreme normative principle of the
  political organization of mankind
• statement of the basic rules of coexistence among
  states and other actors in international society
  the principles include restriction of violence,
  agreements among states, norms concerning
  sovereignty and independence
• assisting and mobilizing actors in international
  society to abide by international societys rules
  for achieving coexistence, cooperation and other
  goals.
• ? International law increases the predictability
  of a member states foreign policies in relation
  to others, which helps guide in coordinating
  short-term and long-term interests.
• ? The principles of international law shall be
  accepted by member states before they are valid.
  Therefore, the major limitation of international
  law is obvious in that it is more ideationally
  binding than practically effective.

22
3/5 Diplomacy

• the conduct of relations between states and
  other entities with standing in world politics by
  official agents and by peaceful means. It
  functions in
• facilitating communication between the political
  leaders of states and other entities in world
  politics
• promoting negotiation of agreements
• gathering intelligence or information about
  foreign countries
• minimizing the effects of friction in
  international relations.
• ? Diplomacy in the current international
  relations is going through changes in means and
  approaches, for instance, diversified backgrounds
  of diplomatic staff. Public diplomacy, as a
  complement to formal diplomacy, plays a more
  important role whereas professional diplomats
  have witnessed a decline in their significance
  some problems facing mankind such as population,
  ecological degradation and environment have got
  on board experts regardless of their
  nationalities into global governance. However the
  rising importance of public diplomacy does not
  denote the death of formal diplomacy. (eg. the
  Copenhagen Summit on Climate Change in 2009)

23
4/5 War

• War is also an institution of international
  society which could maintain the international
  order apart from the destruction war incurs.
• From the perspective of the independent states,
  war is a policy means for a nations ends.
• From the perspective of the international system,
  wars are decisive factors shaping the
  international system. They determine states
  fates, borders and regime jurisdiction.
• From the perspective of the international
  society, war is on the one side a dimension of
  the anarchical international society, which
  should be limited and contained by international
  rules and on the other side is a necessary means
  enforcing international rules, which is sometimes
  justified.

24
5/5 The great powers

• ? The imbalance of state power enables the great
  states to have more discourse power than the
  small ones they can to some extent dominate
  international affairs and international order in
  several ways preserving the general balance,
  avoiding and controlling crisis, limiting or
  containing war, unilaterally exercising local
  preponderance, mutually respecting each others
  premise, great power concert or condominium.
• ? The legitimacy of great powers should be
  acknowledged by other members in the system,
  otherwise, great powers cannot effectively
  stabilize the order of international system.

25
Chapter 6 The English School

• Conclusion
• The English school focuses on norms, rules,
  institutions and values and develops a new
  normative thinking into international relations.
• Reasons
• Britains history as a super power. The
  experience in diplomacy, law and other areas
  accumulated since the period of British Empire
  has provided the members of the English school
  with rich historical resources
• Long-standing traditions and development of
  Europes human science empower the English school
  with inspiration from philosophy, law and history
  of thoughts
• Members of the British Committee have a diverse
  academic background, which constitutes precious
  human resources for the Committee.

26

• Strength and Weakness
• The English school remains positive about the
  future of international cooperation. Solidarists,
  in particular, are convinced that international
  society is in the right direction so that states
  can transcend logics of peaceful coexistence into
  a more proactive cooperation. (EU case)
• ? However, the school focuses more on theoretical
  thinking than on empirical studies.

27

• ????
• Roy E. Jones, The English school of
  international relations a case for closure,
  Review of International Studies, Vol.7, No.1
  (Jan. 1981), pp.1-13.
• ?????????,?????????,2004??
• ???????????????????(?/?)
• ???????????????,???????????(???),?????????,201
  0??(?????????,?58-63?)
• ?????????????????????????,?????????,2006??
• ???????????
• ?????/??????

28
Q A