Q5. Does the hawk/dove axis reflect the differences between the theories of 'realism' and 'liberalism'? Flashcards
Respond to Q5: Does the hawk/dove axis reflect the differences between the theories of ‘realism’ and ‘liberalism’?
No, the hawk/dove axis seeks to separate realism from liberalism into two isolated realms. Though many felt this was an appropriate approach at some point, today we see that this does not work. On the surface this theory does indeed illustrate the differences between the realist and liberalist.
Describe the Hawk
The realist is a hawk and will fight tooth in nail for what it believes it deserves in order to protect its territory. It will practice an offensive strategy.
The realist hawk will favor war in times of insecurity without hesitation, reminding itself that protecting self-interests is necessary for survival.
Describe the Dove
The liberalist dove will use dialogue and diplomacy to practice an optimistic strategy of how it believe the world should be arranged.
the liberal dove will use self-restraint, seeking compromise and socio-economic integration to prevent such conflicts from escalating to a point of no return. To liberals, war is not only unnatural, it is irrational.
Liberal states will not wage war with other liberal states
However, like realists, liberals recognize that it is human nature to seek power, which is why they rotate positions of power
The birth of modern liberalism is rooted in the transformation of IR. **Liberalism is the response to the 30 years war. **
Speak about U.S. and Russia in Hawk/Dove axis analysis
It seems that neither the U.S. or Russia fit the profile of either the hawk or the dove. They’re both claiming to be doves while behaving like hawks. It seems that the United States has chosen to embrace both the hawk and the dove operating under multiple sets of rules. Liberalism towards liberal States, as advised by Kant, and realism toward non-liberal States. (Look at NATO) And so, as with most social sciences, it seems international relations and its different schools of thought have established a large grey area. Countries must support each other through the promotion of the liberalistic beliefs that war is unnatural, and that individuals (and States) have the agency to choose. They must do this while supporting the notion that globalization will prevail and assist in keeping the balance of power in a peaceful place, helping the world and its people to thrive. While at the same time, a realistic approach to self-defense must be kept up. Countries should not let their guards down or convince themselves that higher multilateral institutions rule supreme over the sovereign State. Over are the days when liberal thinking would prevail after long periods of peace and realists would have their moment at the front during times of aggression (as we are seeing today).
