The course aims to introduce the key assumptions of the international relations theory as a part of social science and as an analytic tool, focusing on the problems of war and peace, foreign policy decision-making, etc. The course combines historic approach and analysis of the modern political problems. The historic part shows the evolution of the international relations theory from being a part of political philosophy to its emergence as a special branch of political science, which is essential to understand the key ideas of the IR science. The lectures also include broad outline of the modern concepts and debates in the context of the contemporary political problems, such as rise of China and other emerging powers, threat of terrorism, US-Russia confrontation, etc. The lectures of the two outstanding Russian scholars and political analysts – Timofey Bordachev and Dmitry Suslov - cover such fields as the problems of international security and conflict resolution, international economic relations, foreign policy decision-making, global governance, the role of power in the IR.
System and structure
Loading...
Из курса от партнера National Research University Higher School of Economics
Understanding International Relations Theory
22 оценки
National Research University Higher School of Economics
22 оценки
Из урока
Kenneth Waltz and Structural Theory
The Cold War became a new intellectual challenge for the IR thinkers. How to survive in the nuclear age? The module introduces to the realist answer, which took a form of the structural realism.
Познакомьтесь с преподавателями
Timofei BordachevAssociate professor
Department of international relations
Dmitrii SuslovSenior Lecturer
Department of international relations, HSE
So, how the Neo-realist theory takes the problem off the actors?
The problem of actors is one of the key problems of international relations.
And what are there elements of
the international relations system according to the Neo-realist.
We know, they're states.
The only essential elements of international system,
are states which policies define development and evolution.
So, as well as in classic realism,
the state is the point of departure.
And the other actors of international politics,
such as international organizations, multinational corporations,
religious organizations, and the others,
are not considered by the Neo-realist as equal to the states,
or even important elements of the system.
However, unlike political realists,
the Neo-realist do not deny the existence of these elements,
and they do not deny that they have
some influence on the behavior of the states and international environment.
So, the treatment of the non-governmental, non-state actors,
is the other main feature which
makes Neo-realist theory different from the Classical Realism.
And speaking about the states,
the more powerful states are,
the more important role they play within the system.
However, even superpowers, those dominant states,
the mightiest states, they do not seek for domination just to dominate.
This is another important difference between Neo-realist approach and Classical Realism.
We remember, that for the Classic realist, the domination,
the rule among the others has been always considered as the primary goal of any state.
Not for the Neo-realist.
For the Neo-realist, the aims by all of these states,
the aims of even super powers are limited by creation of security environment,
which is able to grant the highest security level
possible in current situation, and preserving status-quo.
This logic perfectly suited for the cold war strategic situation.
Let us look at this scheme,
the picture of how the Neo-realist,
or Structural Neo-realist see the world,
and see the main principles on which the international relations develop.
So for them, first of all,
state is a central actor.
And it is in the middle of the picture.
But the same state is a black box.
Why black box? Because so many factors influence state.
So many factors are within the states,
which we cannot analyze,
because we cannot describe all of them,
we cannot think about all of them.
The [inaudible] in one of his works, he wrote,
that the international relations science can't tell us what pressures
will exercise the system of international relations at the concretes states,
but it can never say what is going to be reaction of the state,
because of the internal factors.
So, for the Neo-realist,
the emergence of a certain foreign policy is
seen as the number of challenges which influence the state.
And state responses, do these challenges with a certain policy.
So for us, in Neo-realist theory,
the most important is to analyze these
challenges,to analyze their international environment,
and only after the state,
which is still the central actor.
The state, every state is a part of a certain structure.
And we remember, that as well as a system,
structure is another central and
the most important notion of the Neo-realist or Structural realist theory.
Structural Realism is because the structure is so important.
Because states seek to survive.
so the imbalances of power automatically form.
Such transformations of the international system,
can be described as evolution of its structure,
the change of the structure of international system.
Structure, by definition, is the weight of organizing of elements within the system.
So in the system, there are a certain number of interconnected and interacting elements.
Structure is how they are organized.
What is the subordination?
What is the role of each of them?
What role each of the states plays within the system?
What is important of each state?
In the international system,
it means first of all,
distribution of power as well as other aspects.
Particular relationships between states,
the level of development of international institutions,
et cetera, et cetera.
So, for the Neo-realist,
not only the power,
the physical power of certain states was important, but also relationships.
Certain states for example,
can be a relatively weak as most of the member states of,
say NATO or European Union,
but because of the unique relationships they have with the mighty states,
like the United States for example,
these small states can increase their power,
and can take a higher role in international system and structure.
That level of development of international institutions is also important.
In the Neo-realist structure,
the international institutions are not the actors equal to the states.
They are much weaker and the after all formed by the states.
But at the same time,
and we will speak about it a little bit later,
they can influence the international environment,
and they can affect even the distribution of power within the international system,
thus, influence the structure.
Structure is a central knowledge of the Neo-realist paradigm.
And the science of international relations has identified several types of the structure.
And this structure is shaped by the mightiest powers.
First of all, superpowers and the great powers.
So for us, the most important is to see the distribution of power,
exactly between the superpowers and great powers,
because they are the most important elements of any structure.
And they are critical for the survival of a certain structure.
Depending on the way of distribution of power,
and the number of leading powers,
several types of international structures may be defined.
Historically, the first type of
international structure was the Multi-polar structure of international system,
with three or more great powers,
balancing each other within the system of flexible lines.
The example here is of nineteenth century balance of power in Europe.
In nineteenth century in Europe as we remember from history,
there were no any single country,
or two countries which have been able to dominate the others.
Russian Empire was weak economically,
but very strong in terms of military.
British Empire was not so strong military,
but very strong in economics.
France wasn't between them,
as well as Germany, Austria, Hungary.
All these permit to the existence of this multi-polar structure,
when not one or two powers are dominating.
The multi-polar structure ceased to exist in the beginning of the twentieth century.
And after the 30 years of European Wars,
and not only Europeans,
the World Wars, the bi-polar Structure emerged.
We have been only speaking a little bit about bipolar structure, but what is it?
Bipolar structure of international system is when,
there are two superpowers or great powers which counterbalance each other.
It's assumed to be the most stable international structure.
Example, the Cold War.
The representatives of the Neo-realism believe that having two strongest possible
powers who counter balance each other helps to
the stability of international system because the others,
can decide which they support,
and the other parts of other countries,
the smaller ones, can adjust their policies,
preferences, and interests through the policies, preferences,
and the interest of one or another superpower,
and that helps to keep the world relatively stable.
And last but not least, uni-polar system.
Where uni-polar- structure of international system,
which has one hegemon,
dominating the whole international systems.
The Uni-polar is considered by the Neo-realist theory,
to be the last stable international structure.
The example, the post-Cold War uni-polar moment,
when the United States,
after the defeat of the Soviet Union,
have been able to consider enormous power,
and actually to seek the world dominance.
Ознакомьтесь с нашим каталогом
Присоединяйтесь бесплатно и получайте персонализированные рекомендации, обновления и предложения.
Coursera делает лучшее в мире образование доступным каждому, предлагая онлайн-курсы от ведущих университетов и организаций.
© Coursera Inc., 2018 Все права защищены.
