This book traces discussions about international relations from the middle ages up to the present times. It presents central concepts in historical context and shows how ancient ideas still affect the way we perceive world politics. It discusses medieval theologians like Augustine and Aquinas whose rules of war are still in use. It presents Renaissance humanists like Machiavelli and Bodin who developed our understanding of state sovereignty. It argues that Enlightenment philosophers like Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau laid the basis for the modern analyses of International Relations (IR). Later thinkers followed up with balance-of-power models, perpetual-peace projects and theories of exploitation as well as peaceful interdependence. Classic IR theories have then been steadily refined by later thinkers – from Marx, Mackinder and Morgenthau to Waltz, Wallerstein and Wendt. The book shows that core ideas of IR have been shaped by major events in the past and that they have often reflected the concerns of the great powers. It also shows that the most basic ideas in the field have remained remarkably constant over the centuries.
International Relations scholars. It argues that the scholarly study of International Relations distanced itself from the structural approaches of the past and instead embraced the core ideas of rejuvenated liberalism. This is evident for example in the so-called Neorealist approach which gained an enormous influence in the International Relations community during the 1980s. Although it retained the holistic view that marked structuralism, its basic logic rested on the individualistic rationalism of liberal economic theories. Neorealism was a child of its times. And it
underpinned neorealism and neo-liberalism. 3 The end of the Cold War, which no
theoretical approach in IR had predicted, dealt a powerful blow to
neorealism given the latter’s understanding of the limits of
change in an anarchic system. 4 Neorealism became the target of criticism that
it reified a particular international order which privileged the
interests of certain dominant states and therefore served
relations, this study will deploy a combination of several to capture its complex reality.
The Middle East is arguably the epicentre of world crisis, chronically war-prone and the site of the world’s most protracted conflicts. It appears to be the region where the anarchy and insecurity seen by the realist school of international politics as the main feature of states systems remains most in evidence and where the realist paradigm retains its greatest relevance. Yet neo-realism’s 1 a-historical tendency to assume states systems to be unchanging
Liberal institutionalism emerged as a major alternative to (neo)realism and played a prominent role in the literature on international institutions, regimes, and regional integration in the 1980s and 1990s.
Scholars chose to challenge neorealism in its own turf, so liberal institutionalism combines the belief in the possibility of change and improvement with some traditional realist assumptions. Its contribution to the analysis of international relations and its influence on policy
Juvenile actors and humanitarian sentiment in the 1940s
“art,” are awash with the same trappings of sentimentality … that are
often considered negative in “commercial” narrative films’. 38 Karl Schoonover has
discussed the international reception of Italian neorealism in relation to ‘the emergence of a new visual politics of
liberal compassion’ and argues that for both American and European
commentators alike ‘an emergent realist aesthetic of cinema could build
new vectors of post
). This was another facet
of the ‘Greek exception’ (alongside it being the only post-Civil War
European country to receive the MP aid), because most of the MP films
about a specific country were directed by national filmmakers, sometimes
building on the country’s cinematographic and documentary tradition, as
in the cases of Italy (neorealism) and the UK (the British Documentary
Movement). Many MP films
Germany in American post-war International Relations
reading of Morgenthau was indeed a misunderstanding. 85 Still, it was ‘productive’ because émigré scholars’ knowledge allowed Waltz to question commonly accepted liberal assumptions and, to this day, neorealism has retained a decisive influence on the discipline, at least in the US. Hence, although the example of Waltz demonstrates that the engagement with émigré thought did not establish more creative and humane world politics per se, it did create the space to rethink world politics.
However, the integration of émigrés not only affected American scholarship, but
peace-building programmes. While each side needs to
adjust and accommodate to the other, the onus is on US and European officials to take the lead in encouraging, funding, coordinating and smoothing
the way for the NGOs to do their work in places like Bosnia, Macedonia and
Karabagh. Such a transformation does not presently seem to be in the offing.
And that means that peace in all three regions will remain tenuous at best.
1 Randall L. Schweller, ‘Neorealism’s Status Quo Bias: What Security Dilemma?’,
Security Studies, 5:3 (1996), pp. 90–121.
2 A recent
.’ 5 The theory of neorealism or structural realism, which holds that any state’s relative power, self-interest, and structural constraints are the most important causal factors directing its foreign policy, 6 has been particularly influential in the field. In this school of analysis, the special relationship is generally portrayed as developing from shared and overlapping national interests that formed a utility-based partnership. Numerous accounts focus on one or more aspects of this functional dynamic, particularly defense, nuclear and intelligence cooperation