Cold War Theoretical Developments: The Second Great Debate Flashcards
1
Q
What are Laws and Theories according to Waltz?
A
Laws are facts of observation: theories are speculative processes introduced to explain them
2
Q
What is a paradigm?
A
Intellectual framework comprising interrelated values, theories and assumptions, within which the search of knowledge is conducted
3
Q
What can empirical theories be?
A
- Prescrivptive
- Explanatory
- Predicative
4
Q
What was the first great debate?
A
Realist vs Liberals (aka idealists/utopians)
5
Q
What are the core tenets of realism in regard to the Cold War?
A
- Anarchy
- State-centricity
- Unitary rational actors assumption
- States are power-seeking
- Zero-sum game
6
Q
What are the core tenets of liberalism in regard to the Cold War?
A
- Non-zero sum game
- Cooperation is possible
- History is progressive
7
Q
What is neorealism?
A
- Also called structural realism
- Most often associated with the work
of Kenneth Waltz - It focuses less on human nature and
more on the structure of the
intertnaional system - Highlights the security dilemma -
states efforts to increase its
security can be perceived as
a threat by other states
and lead to greater insecurity
(Spiral model of Conflict) - States are concerned about relative
gains
8
Q
Who was Kenneth Waltz?
A
- A structural realist focused on explaining the causes of ir at the systemic level (third image) - First book: Man, the State, and War (1959) - Outlines causes of war in three images (levels of analysis) - Second (biggest) book: Theory of IR (1979) - Waltz’s systemic structure
9
Q
How did Waltz define structure?
A
- The principles according to which countries are organised or ordered - By the differentiation of units and the specification of their functions - By the distribution of capabilities across units
10
Q
What does Waltz’s structural realism suggest about the level of analysis and international structures?
A
- If we focus only on internal charateristscs of states, we are going to be forced back into description not explanation - The systemic level offers a simplicity that reductionist (i.e. second image) theories cannot offer - Structures work to keep outcomes in narrow confines - Structures affect behaviour in the system through socialisation of the actors and competition among them - We need to omit attributes of states and the interactions between the units - Interaction is an element of the units. To define structure we have to concentrate on how they stand in relation to each other - International political systems are individualist in origin, spontaneously generated and unintended
11
Q
What does Waltz’s structural realism suggest about actor’s motivations and cooperation?
A
- Actors’ motivations are assumed, and for Waltz the main motivation is state survival not power - maximise security to balance power - In an anarchic world characteristics don’t matter - When referring to states as ‘like units’ he is claiming that they are ‘alike in the tasks that they face, though not in their abilities to perform them’. The differences are of capability not function - Overall, Waltz argues that cooperation is difficult, because security is threatened by your reliance on exports from another state - In the self help system, considerations of security subordinate economic gain to political interests
12
Q
What is neo-liberalism?
A
- Can be seen as a structural response to neo-realism - Level analysis is also the system - Mostly influential proponent is likely Robert Keohane
13
Q
What are the basic tenets of neoliberalism?
A
- Absolute gains are important
- The problem for cooperation is
that states can cheat to maximise
absolute gains
- The problem for cooperation is
- Anarchy is moderated by
interdependence - Security is not the only issue
- States are not the only relevant
actors- Transnational and non-state
actors also relevant - Such actors can reduce states
transaction costs making
cooperation easier
- Transnational and non-state
14
Q
Who was Robert Keohane?
A
- Neo-Liberal
- After Hegemony (1984) and
Neorealism and Its Critics (1986) - Argues that realism does not
provide an adequate theory of
world politics
- After Hegemony (1984) and
15
Q
What was Keohane’s critique of realism?
A
- It does not provide plausible and testable answers to questions about state behaviour - It is especially weak in accounting for change, especially where the sources of change lie in the world political economy or domestic political structures - Structural realists can be criticised for ignoring norms, institutions and change - He argues that realists have to go outside the bounds of core realist theory to fully provide explanation of their outcomes - Realists assume that power is always the same across any issue dimenstion - Keohane argues that modern history shows that the type of power focuses on by realists (military) does not always determine war outcomes as realists suggest that it should
