[MUSIC] As soon as international relations theory emerged as a discipline as a part of the academic thinking, the researchers started to publish many articles and books. And in these articles and books, they formulated the basic questions which must be addressed by everybody who thinks and who speaks about the nature of international relations. The reasons of international conflict and instruments to make peace. There were several fundamental questions formulated almost already in the very beginning of our science in the 20s, 30s years of the 20th century. The first of these questions was what were the main reasons of the Great War, First World War? And why the pre-First World War international order collapsed, destroying empires and taking millions of lives? It was the most important question to answer how the humanity with all the achievements of human genius, with all economic interdependence arrived to such a poor condition. The other question was what are the lessons of the Great War? Is it possible to prevent a new catastrophe? What must be understood by the scorers from the reasons of this war and from how this first started in order to develop a comprehensive concept, which can help politicians to prevent a new catastrophe. To create a sort of international system which might be less vulnerable to the challenges of individual of the states. To the challenges of their mutual fear. To the challenges of their mutual suspicion. In other words, what can help nations not to get trapped again in the trap? The third question was one of the most important. It sounded like on what foundation a new international order can be constructed. What must be in the very, very background of this order in order to make it self-sustainable? How international institutions, first of all, the League of Nations which was created can strengthen post-war order and bring stability to interstate relations. What is the role of international institutions? Why this question was important? Because it was the international institution which was chosen by the politicians in order to facilitate cooperation between the states. International institutions have been taken as the most reliable instruments, which can eliminate some of the reasons which bring nations to and bring nations to the conflict. The international institutions have been chosen as an instrument to decrease the level of mutual suspicion. To understand the intentions of each other better or better say, to make the intentions more predictable. Because the intentions genuinely never known, but their predictability can be achieved by. People believe that time within certain international institutions, which increase transparency which increase exchange of information between the states about what they really want. People said, if Germany, before the First World War could have been a member of certain international institutions, it could have demanded something. It could have discussed something with the other states not directly, but within the framework of this international discussion platform. This could have helped. Now before the new science emerged, even before the Great War, there were actually two types of institutions. Systematically focusing on international relation status. First, military institutions. Military always needed to understand the nature of the relationships and the driving forces behind these relationships better, because military needed to be ready for war. And military people needed to know how to predict the intentions of the other states, how the other states might behave. So already back in 1831, the Royal United Services Institute for Defense and Security Studies was established in London. The arrogant organizations focused on peace promotion. The Fabian Society in 1884, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in 1910, Carnegie Corporation of New York. Some other institutions both supported by the states and by the private individuals, by the big companies. After the First World War in 1919, Woodrow Wilson, Chair of International Politics at University College of Wales was established. And what is very interesting in the first paper of this chair, it was written clearly and precisely. This chair is established in order to make researchers understand how to avoid the war and how to achieve the peace. So we can see that even formerly in the very beginning of our science, the question of war and peace exists. And this question has been addressed from the very beginning unsurprisingly, because the science emerged by the time the most brutal one terrible war in human history. The same year, the chair for history and theory of international relations was established in Oxford University and Hudson Institute in the United States. One year later, Royal Institute for International Affairs which we know as Chatham House and New York Council on Foreign Policy. All these institutions in Britain and in America have been devoted to thinking about the international relations, about the promotion of peace. And a promotion of the instruments to achieve the goals of the states, to defend the goals of the states and the national interest by the peaceful means without falling to the next great war. So in the following years, international relation studies divided into two branches which still drive the development of international relation science. Basically, academic and policy-oriented. Academic studies, which I do belong as many of you will possibly belong focus on fundamental status. As did, as and other great philosophers. The focus on the development of IR theory and bringing up new concepts, and research methods. This is unavailable contribution, because it helps up to understand the general principles and general rules by which the international nations developed. The other branch policy-oriented research focus on making actual recommendations for the government's decision makers, advancing foreign foreign policy and diplomacy of their resident states. So now, when you see a certain paper, when you see a certain study, you can always know is it academic study or policy oriented research? Academic study is the superior to the very actual political debate. It is superior to their everyday policy making, but policy-oriented research is concentrated more on the resolving of the very practical questions and defining the national interests. So from the very beginning of our science, development of it was shaped by a number of so-called great debates. The academicians and policy diverse people divided into the big camps. Generally, realists and liberals and they debated between them. And every time the issue of the debate, the question under consideration differed. So the First Great Debate between realists and idealists took place between the two Great Wars before the Second World War. Developed around the question of post-First World War international order. And in many respects, how to deal with the emerging Germany, Nazi Germany at the time. The Second Great Debate took place already after the Second World War in 1960s, 1970s. The parties of these debates argued about scientification of IR theory. Or in a more simple way, if it is possible to integrate standard scientific matters which we know from economy, from mathematics, international relation status. This debate brought many, many available contribution and it ended with the emergence of structural realism in 1970s. The Third Great Debate was the later debates between the old paradigms represented by neo theories such as neoliberalism, neorealism and some radical IR There are theories on the other side. The Fourth Great Debate was as debate between positivists and post-positivist theories of international relations, which has emerged since the end of the 1980s. But every round of the Great Debates was caused by absence of any general theory of international relations. And paradoxically by this, the means aimed to create it just like physics aims to come up with so-called theory of everything. However, we should understand, nor should we ever forget that complexity of human society just like complexity of the universe in natural science does not allow to explain everything with one theory or concept. As a prominent international relation scholar, Stephen Walt describes our field. One world, but many theories. [MUSIC]
