Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.
International Relations Week 3  [read Baylis et. al. (2008) chapter 5] Brendon Tagg [email_address]
REALISM <ul><li>3 key principles: Statism, Survival, Self-help </li></ul><ul><li>(1) Statism </li></ul><ul><li>-The state ...
<ul><li>Between states- anarchy  </li></ul><ul><li>-zero-sum terms </li></ul><ul><li>-universal agreement difficult </li><...
(2) Survival <ul><li>Is power is an end in itself? Or security? </li></ul><ul><li>Defensive realists (Waltz) </li></ul><ul...
<ul><li>Machiavelli’s  The Prince </li></ul><ul><li>-  leaders’ heavy burden </li></ul><ul><li>- the ‘greater good’ </li><...
(3) Self-help <ul><li>international system </li></ul><ul><li>- no higher authority </li></ul><ul><li>the security dilemma ...
Three realisms: Classical <ul><li>Thucydides: leaders, states self-serving egotists </li></ul><ul><li>Machiavelli - securi...
Three realisms: Structural  <ul><li>International system is struggle for power </li></ul><ul><li>- but not a result of hum...
Structural vs. Classical <ul><li>balance of power naturally develop? </li></ul><ul><li>Waltz: individual gains vs. common ...
Three realisms: Contemporary <ul><li>domestic and individual factors </li></ul><ul><li>neo-classical realists place “domes...
Criticisms of realism <ul><li>What does it mean to say ‘states seek power’? </li></ul><ul><li>Is power a means or an end i...
Criticisms of realism <ul><li>new developments? </li></ul><ul><li>globalisation </li></ul><ul><li>response often called st...
Nächste SlideShare
Wird geladen in …5
×

international relation

  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

international relation

  1. 1. International Relations Week 3 [read Baylis et. al. (2008) chapter 5] Brendon Tagg [email_address]
  2. 2. REALISM <ul><li>3 key principles: Statism, Survival, Self-help </li></ul><ul><li>(1) Statism </li></ul><ul><li>-The state is the main actor </li></ul><ul><li>-Sovereignty </li></ul><ul><li>-Hobbes: we trade some freedom for security </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>Between states- anarchy </li></ul><ul><li>-zero-sum terms </li></ul><ul><li>-universal agreement difficult </li></ul><ul><li>-‘non-intervention’ - except for great powers </li></ul><ul><li>Morganthau - power is “control over the minds </li></ul><ul><li>and actions of other[s]” (Baylis et al 2008: 100) </li></ul><ul><li>-is both relational and relative </li></ul>
  4. 4. (2) Survival <ul><li>Is power is an end in itself? Or security? </li></ul><ul><li>Defensive realists (Waltz) </li></ul><ul><li>Offensive realists (Mearsheimer) </li></ul><ul><li>Implications </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>Machiavelli’s The Prince </li></ul><ul><li>- leaders’ heavy burden </li></ul><ul><li>- the ‘greater good’ </li></ul><ul><li>-“dual moral standard” </li></ul><ul><li>- strongly challenged by liberal theorists </li></ul>
  6. 6. (3) Self-help <ul><li>international system </li></ul><ul><li>- no higher authority </li></ul><ul><li>the security dilemma </li></ul><ul><li>- preparations principally defensive or offensive? </li></ul><ul><li>- security-enhancing developments may ‘backfire’ </li></ul>
  7. 7. Three realisms: Classical <ul><li>Thucydides: leaders, states self-serving egotists </li></ul><ul><li>Machiavelli - security of community principal </li></ul><ul><li>-obligations, treaties may be disregarded </li></ul><ul><li>-imperial expansion can be legitimate </li></ul><ul><li>By mid20thC less extreme </li></ul><ul><li>- wise leadership can mitigate anarchy </li></ul><ul><li>- power and self-interest can be self-defeating </li></ul>
  8. 8. Three realisms: Structural <ul><li>International system is struggle for power </li></ul><ul><li>- but not a result of human nature </li></ul><ul><li>lack of overarching authority </li></ul><ul><li>relative distribution of power (in particular) </li></ul><ul><li>“ because power is a possibly useful means, sensible statesmen [ sic ] try to have an appropriate amount of it” (Waltz in Baylis et al 2008: 98) </li></ul>
  9. 9. Structural vs. Classical <ul><li>balance of power naturally develop? </li></ul><ul><li>Waltz: individual gains vs. common good </li></ul>
  10. 10. Three realisms: Contemporary <ul><li>domestic and individual factors </li></ul><ul><li>neo-classical realists place “domestic politics as an intervening variable between the distribution of power and foreign policy behaviour” (Walt in Baylis et al 2008: 99) </li></ul>
  11. 11. Criticisms of realism <ul><li>What does it mean to say ‘states seek power’? </li></ul><ul><li>Is power a means or an end in itself? </li></ul><ul><li>Difficult to calculate </li></ul><ul><li>Is state power the only power? </li></ul>
  12. 12. Criticisms of realism <ul><li>new developments? </li></ul><ul><li>globalisation </li></ul><ul><li>response often called structural realism or neo-realism </li></ul><ul><li>- internal wars happen for similar reasons to interstate wars </li></ul>

×