Theory of international politics

THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS
By Kenneth Waltz

CHAPTER 1: LAWS AND THEORIES
• Kenneth Waltz’s objectives in writing the book:
 To examine theories of international politics and approaches
to the subject matter that make some claim to being
theoretically important.
 To construct a theory of international politics that remedies
the defects of present theories.
 To examine applications of the theory constructed.

• Law • Theory
 Collections or sets of laws
 widely accepted pertaining to a particular behavior or
phenomena
 establishes relations between  More complex than laws
variables
 Are made by collecting carefully
 can be absolute or can based verified, interconnected hypotheses
not simply on a relation that  Born in conjecture and is viable if
conjecture is confirmed. (Karl
has been found but on one that Deutsch)
has been found repeatedly
 “Speculative processes introduced
 “Facts of observation” to explain them (laws)”
 Have to be constructed
 May be discovered

• “A theory is born on conjecture and is viable if the conjecture is
confirmed.” –Karl Deutsch
• Inductivist illusion
 Termed by Levi-Strauss, a structural anthropologist
 it is the belief that truth is won and explanation is achieved through the
accumulation of more and more data and the examination of more and
more cases.
• Drawback of the inductivist approach:
 If the number of pieces that might be taken as parts of the problem is
infinite, then the number of ways in which pieces may be combined is
also infinite.

• Simplification
 The aim of simplifying is to try to find out the central tendency among confusion of
tendencies, to single out the propelling principles even though other principles
operate, to seek essential factors where innumerate factors are present.
• This is achieved mainly in four ways:
1. By isolation
2. By abstraction
3. By aggregation
4. By idealization

• Both induction and deduction are indispensible in constructing a theory, but using them in
combination gives rise to a theory only if a creative idea emerges.

• Models – used in two principal ways:
 Represents a theory
 Pictures reality while simplifying it
• Testing a Theory:
1. State the theory being tested
2. Infer hypothesis from it
3. Subject the hypotheses to experimental or observational tests
4. Use the definitions of terms found in the theory being tested
5. Eliminate or control perturbing variables not included in the theory under test
6. Devise a number of distinct and demanding tests
7. If a test is not passed, ask whether the theory flunks completely, needs repair and
restatement, or requires narrowing of the scope of its explanatory claims.

Reductionist Theories
CHAPTER 2

CHAPTER 2: REDUCTIONIST THEORIES
• Reductionist Approach
 The whole is understood by knowing the attributes and interaction of its parts .
• Economic theory of imperialism by Hobson and Lenin
 Considered one of the best theories that used reductionist approach
 Elegant, powerful, simply stated, and incorporates only a few elements
 Offers explanations and predictions
 Its explanation of imperialism and of war focuses on:
1. Whether the economic theory is valid
2. Whether the conditions envisioned by the theory held in most of the imperialist
countries
3. Whether most of the countries in which the conditions held were in fact imperialist
countries

• The imperialist theory of Hobson tells:
 Consumption cannot keep pace with increases of productive power.
 Faced with failing rate of profit at home and with underused resources, would-be
investors look abroad for better opportunities.
 The urge to invest abroad, and the competition among the nationals of different
countries responding to that urge led naturally to waves of imperialist activity.
 Hobson’s conclusion: Imperialism “implies the use of machinery of government by
private interests, mainly capitalists, to secure for them economic gains.
 Hobson believed that the drive to imperialism can be eliminated by governmental
polices that will redistribute wealth. Lenin, however, believed that capitalists will not
allow such policies.

• Examining the Economic theory of imperialism:
 For the economic theory of imperialism to be valid, most of the imperialist countries
must be both capitalist and surplus-producing and most of the countries so described
must be imperialists.
 From about 1870 and onward, all or practically all of the states that could be
reasonably be called “capitalist” did engage in at least a bit of imperialist activity
 However, some imperialist states exported little capital to their own colonies and
some of them did not produce surpluses of capital at all.
 A number of imperialist countries, like Japan and Russia, were not capitalist states.

• The rise of neocolonial thought:
 After World War 1, Lenin and his followers tried to formulate theses that would
support the idea that capitalism produces imperialism.
 From the early 1950s the concept of neocolonialism was developed.
 Neocolonialism separates the notion of imperialism from the existence of empires.
 Private economic instruments have become so fully developed that their informal use
is sufficient for the effective control and exploitation of other countries’ resources.

• An examination of neocolonial thought will lead to several important points about
international-political theory. They are suggested by:
1. Self-verifying theories
 In the theories about imperialism, words were refined to cover the new activities.
The old theories were modified to cover the new elements.
 The neocolonial theory did not anticipate facts instead the old theory was
revised to accommodate what had actually happened.
2. Structure without behavior or disappearance of function
 Johan Galtung’s structural theory of imperialism suggests that the imperialist
relation between the rich and the poor is the major explanation of the well-being
of the few and the suffering of the many.
 The author argues that the major reasons for material well-being of states are
found within their own borders.

3. Over-explanation and the problem of change
 The effort save Lenin’s thesis has led to such a broadening of the definition of
imperialism that almost any relation among unequals can be termed.
 Neocolonialism separates imperialism from governmental policy.

Systemic Approaches and Theories
CHAPTER 3

SYSTEMS APPROACH ANALYTIC APPROACH

- A set of interacting units - Method of Classical Physics
- Consists of structure - Reduce entities to its discrete parts
- Structure: System- Level component and examine their properties &
connections.

Accomplishment of System Theory
Trace different International systems
To show how structure affects interacting units & how they in turn affect the structure

I. Rosecrance
• How changes in the different components make changes in the international system

II. Hoffman
• Historical Sociology: What is “real”
• Changes within the system = Change in the system
• Structure is defined partly according to the arrangement of the parts.
• “Configuration of power” – how states are organized politically, their aspirations & ideologies
• Structure contains elements at unit level that may themselves be affected by characteristics
of structure at the system level.

III. Kaplan- System of Action:

Components Variables
Balance of power Essential Rules of Transfer
Loose Bipolar Transformation
Tight Bipolar Actor classificatory
Unit Veto Information
Universal
Hierarchic

Reductionist and Systemic Theories
CHAPTER 4

CHAPTER 4: REDUCTIONIST AND SYSTEMIC
THEORIES
• Theories are reductionist or systemic, not according to what they deal with, but
according to how they arrange their materials.

• Reductionist theories
 Explain international outcomes through elements and combinations of elements
located at national or subnational levels; internal forces produce external
outcomes
 A reductionist theory is a theory about the behavior of parts.
• Traditionalists emphasize the structural distinction between domestic and
international politics, a distinction that modernists usually deny.
• Both (traditionalists and modernists) concentrate on finding out who is doing what to
produce the outcomes

THEORIES
• Causes not found in their individual characters and motives do
operate among the actors collectively. Each state arrives at
policies and decides on actions according to its own internal
processes, but its decisions are shaped by the very presence of
other states as well as interactions with them
• Usually, reduction results not from scholar’s intent but from his
errors
• Like the outcome of states’ actions, the implications of
interactions cant be known or intelligently guessed at without
knowledge of the situation within which interactions occur

THEORIES
• Changes within systems: technological advancements, alliances, etc
• The repeated failure of attempts to explain international outcomes
analytically strongly signals the need for a systems approach
• Since variations in presumed causes do no correspond very closely to
variations in observed outcomes, however, one has to believe that some
causes are located at a different level as well
• Systems theory shows why changes at the unit level produce less change of
outcomes than one would expect in the absence of systemic constraints
• Within a system, a theory explains continuities (what to expect and why to
expect it)

THEORIES
• In a systems theory, some part of the explanation of behaviors and outcomes is found in
the system’s structure

• Structure
 May designate a compensating device that works to produce a uniformity of
outcomes despite the variety of inputs; designates a set of constraining conditions
 Agents and agencies act whereas systems as a whole does not. But the actions of
agents and agencies are affected by the system’s structure
 Structure affects behavior within the system, but does so indirectly
 The first way in which structures work their effects is through a process of
socialization that limits and molds behavior; the 2nd way is through competition

Political Structures
CHAPTER 5

CHAPTER 5: POLITICAL STRUCTURES
• In this chapter, Kenneth Waltz first examines the concept of
social structure and then defines structure as a concept
appropriate for national and for international politics.

• A system is composed of a structure and of interacting units.
The structure is the system-wide component that makes it
possible to think of the system as a whole.

• What is a structure?
 To define a structure requires ignoring how units relate with one another (how
they interact) and concentrating on how they stand in relation to one another
(how they are arranged or positioned)
 Interactions take place at the level of the units
 A structure is defined by the arrangement of its parts. Only changes of
arrangement are structural changes

• The constitution of a state describes some parts of the
arrangement, but political structures as they develop
are not identical with formal constitutions.

• Domestic politics –> hierarchically ordered

• Political structures shape political processes (i.e.
different governmental systems)

1. Ordering Principles
 International systems are decentralized and anarchic; In the absence of agents with
system-wide authority, formal relations of super- and subordination fail to develop.
 Internationally, the environment of states’ action or the structure of their system, is
set by the fact that some states prefer survival over the other ends obtainable in the
short run and act with relative efficiency to achieve that end
2. Character of the Units
 market: number of firms; international political structures: states
3. The Distribution of Capabilities
 The structure of a system changes with changes in the distribution of capabilities
across the system’s units. And changes in structure change expectations about how
the units of the system will behave and about the outcomes their interactions will
produce.

Anarchic Orders and Balances of Power
CHAPTER 6

CHAPTER 6: ANARCHIC ORDERS AND BALANCES
OF POWER
• VIOLENCE AT HOME AND ABROAD
 Because some states may at any time use force, all states must be prepared to do
so-or live at the mercy of their militarily more vigorous neighbors. Among states, the
state of nature is a state of war.
 rulers have had to bear in mind that their subjects might use force to resist or
overthrow them.
 The distinction between international and national realms of politics is not found in
the use or the nonuse of force but in their different structures.
 The difference between national and international politics lies not in the use of force
but in the different modes of organization for doing something about it.
 An effective government has a monopoly on the legitimate use of power and
legitimate here means that public agents are organized to prevent and to counter the
private use of force

OF POWER
• INTERDEPENDENCE AND INTEGRATION
 Differentiated units become closely interdependent, the more closely so as their
specialization proceeds. Because of the difference of structure, interdependence
within and interdependence among nations are two distinct concepts

• STRUCTURES AND STRATEGIES
 So long as one leaves the structure unaffected it is not possible for changes in the
intentions and the actions of particular actors to produce desirable outcomes or to
avoid undesirable ones.
 rational behavior, given structural constraints, does not lead to the wanted results.
With each country constrained to take care of itself, no one can take care of the
system
 The only remedy for a strong structural effect is a structural change

OF POWER
• THE VIRTUES OF ANARCHY
 Self-help is necessarily the principle of action in an anarchic order
 Risks may be avoided or lessened by moving from a situation of coordinate action to one
of super and subordination by erecting agencies with effective authority and extending a
system of rules
 States, like people, are insecure in proportion to the extent of their freedom
 Nationally, the force of a government is exercised in the name of right and justice.
Internationally, the force of a state is employed for the sake of its own protection and
advantage
• ANARCHY AND HIERARCHY
 anarchy: presence of disorder and chaos
 hierarchy: ordered by the social division of labor among units specializing in different tasks

OF POWER
• Theory: international politics as a bounded realm or domain
 one must discover some law-like regularities within it; and one must
develop a way of explaining the observed regularities
 contains at least one theoretical assumption; must be evaluated in terms
of what they claim to explain
 cannot account for particularities

• Balance-of-Power Theory
 States are unitary actors who at a minimum seek their own preservation
and at maximum drive for universal domination

Structural Causes and Economic Effects
CHAPTER 7

CHAPTER 7: STRUCTURAL CAUSES AND
ECONOMIC EFFECTS
• The logic of small number systems applies internationally
between of the imbalance of capabilities between each of
the few larger states and the many smaller ones.
• Inequality is inevitable. And the imbalance of power can
pose danger to both weak and strong state.
• But extreme equality is associated by instability. In
collection of equals, any impulse ripples to the whole
society.
• Inequality, though it does not guarantee, at least makes
peace and stability possible.

ECONOMIC EFFECTS
• Economic stability increases as oligopolistic sectors narrow.
• As collusion and bargaining become easier, the fortune of firms
and the orderliness of their markets are promoted; and collusion
and bargaining becomes easier when number of parties decline.
• Smaller systems are more stable and their members are able to
manage affairs for their mutual benefit.
• In a self-help system, interdependence tends to loosen as the
number of parties decline, and so it does so system becomes
orderly and peaceful.

ECONOMIC EFFECTS
• Close interdependence means closeness of contacts and may raises the
prospect of occasional conflicts.
• Interdependence describes a condition in which anything that happens
anywhere in the world may affect somebody or everybody elsewhere.
• Interdependence tends to decrease as the number of great powers
diminishes; and two is the lowest possible number.
• The correlation between the change of system and extent of
interdependence is not perfect because economic interdependence varies
with size, and not necessarily the number of great powers.
• Interdependence affects economics and politics.

ECONOMIC EFFECTS
• Conclusion:
 Smaller number of great power in international politics is
better.

Structural Causes and Military Effects
CHAPTER 8

• Two great powers can deal with each other
better than more can.

• To say that international system is stable means
that it remains anarchic and there is no
consequential variation takes place in the
number of principal parties that constitute the
system.

CHAPTER 8: STRUCTURAL CAUSES AND MILITARY
EFFECTS
• Multi-polar system
 In a balance-of-power theory, the concept of a balancer is not acceptable, because
there is no reason that the odd party will be willing to play as a balancer.
 In a multi-polar system, a difficulty may arise when some states threaten others and
the alignments are uncertain.
 Uncertainties about who threatens whom, who opposes whom arise as the number of
great powers increases. One state should be attractive enough to be considered by
the other as a possible ally.
 Great powers in multi-polar world depend on one another for political and military
support
 Militarily, interdependence is low in bipolar world and high in multipolar world.
 Miscalculations by some or all of the great powers is the source of danger.

MILITARY EFFECTS
• Bipolar system
 The question of who is the enemy is never in doubt.
 There are no peripheries with only two powers capable of acting on a world scale.
 Parties are self-dependent.
 Overreaction by either or both of the state is the cause of danger.
 Success or fail of the peripheral states means less in material terms for the great
powers.

The Management of International Affairs
CHAPTER 9

CHAPTER 9: MANAGEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL
AFFAIRS
• Management & Control of States

• There is a huge impact on how one cluster has the ability to set conditions under which one
must function.
• In the 18 th & 19th century, as independent policies and unregulated competition became
rampant, war is seen as a strategy on how nations and states adjust their relations.
• Regulation of collective affairs.

II. Systems are either maintained or transformed
• Once a system’s interest reach a certain extent, they become self-reinforcing. The author
used the Imperialist countries as examples of how they promote their power, maintain and
preserve balance of power by promoting political unity.

• Principle elites as the system managers.
• International system; System-Transforming wars
• Bipolar worlds; Hegemony (Maintaining order)
• US Policy; Maturation/ Dominance

National International
Institutional Conflict Management
Ordered expectation
Rewards/ Deprivation
Laws and regulation
State control

• High Interdependence:
Central management of world affairs

Theory of international politics

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Theory of international politics

Similar to Theory of international politics (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Theory of international politics