International Relations recent issues

Introduction

Foley, M. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

Bringing Realism to American Liberalism: Kenneth Waltz and the Process of a Cold War Adjustment

Foley, M. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

Despite being a period of reputed liberal ascendancy and settlement in the United States, the 1950s also marked a time of considerable uncertainty, not least in the matter of America’s own identity in relation to the rest of the world. Louis Hartz’s quintessential depiction of US development threw into high relief the problematic nature of a liberalism that fluctuated between the two poles of principled withdrawal and transformative engagement. This article examines the social and political context of Waltz’s Man, the State, and War in relation to the specific issue of the American liberal predicament during the emergence of the cold war. Waltz’s work tapped into deep political insecurities generated by the onset of an apparently unstable and dangerous international order that threatened to be exacerbated by America’s own indigenous ambiguity over its international position. Waltz illustrated a way by which it was possible for American liberalism, and thereby the United States, to achieve a stable and sustainable form of international involvement without falling prey to the violent swings between the Hartzian extremes of liberal overreaction. Waltz’s kind of realism contained a positive core that implicitly addressed the issue of American engagement in the international system. In effect, the dynamics of international bipolarity had enhanced the possibility of diminishing the chronic nature of liberalism’s own bipolarity.

Waltz, Realism and Democracy

Williams, M. C. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

Waltz is generally seen as one the most important advocates of a systemic theory of international politics that stresses the importance of international anarchy and marginalizes domestic politics. Locating Waltz’s thinking against debates within realism in the 1950s, and drawing especially on his neglected Foreign Policy and Democratic Politics, this article argues that Waltz’s thinking actually contains powerful domestic political dimensions that centre on a defence of democratic foreign policymaking. Rather than marginalizing domestic politics, Waltz’s theory — and his critique of classical realism — is in part actually a subtle intervention in domestic politics.

Left Behind: Neorealism's Truncated Contextual Materialism and Republicanism

Deudney, D. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

Anarchy and the balance of power are the two core ideas in Waltz’s neorealism, and he explicitly draws them from early modern political theory, particularly Hobbes and Rousseau. Unfortunately, Waltz leaves behind a key variable in these early modern state-of-nature arguments: violence interdependence — the capacity of actors to harm one another (independent of distribution of power). This difference between the extreme insecurity of the state of nature and the tractable insecurity of the state of war derives from different degrees of violence interdependence. The variable is implicit but powerful in Hobbes, and explicit in Rousseau’s analysis of topographic fragmentation as a foundation for the European state system. As the effects of the industrial revolution made themselves felt, many theorists (the global geopoliticans, Carr and many liberals) continued to employ the variable Waltz dropped, and they generally argued that Europe had shifted from a state-of-war to a state-of-nature anarchy, thus posing the choice of catastrophe or integration. Herz and Morgenthau continue this argument in the nuclear era, reaching very different conclusions than Waltz. Similarly, the balance of power was conceived by early modern republican theorists as the counter to hierarchy, and this was transposed to the ‘system level’ via the device of referring to Europe as a whole as a ‘republic’ that was in part ‘by nature’. Other important republican power restraints (notably division, mixture and union) were dropped by Waltz but are developed by liberal globalist security theory.

Understanding Man, the State, and War

Suganami, H. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

This article expounds and assesses the key contentions of Man, the State, and War. It notes that the book contains meta-theoretical and theoretical components. Through a close re-examination of the text, the article shows how Waltz arrives at his third-image conclusion, reveals a number of errors of a conceptual or logical nature in the meta-theoretical moves that lead him to this conclusion, and explains how such errors are partly rooted in a deeper issue that the book addresses — how to integrate the three images (or three contending estimates of the major cause of war) into one overarching image of world politics based on the agent/structure dichotomy and the distinction between macro and micro enquiries. The article goes on to outline Waltz’s substantive theory of international politics, found in an embryonic form in Man, the State, and War, speculates on the sources of the book’s success, and assesses its main significance.

Lost in Transition: A Critical Analysis of Power Transition Theory

Lebow, R. N., Valentino, B. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

In this paper we identify and critique the key propositions of power transition theory. We find little support for any of power transition theory’s main empirical implications. Contrary to most versions of the theory, we fin d that the European and international systems almost never have been characterized by hegemony. No state has achieved a position that allowed it for any extended period to order the international system to suit its interests at the expense of the other major powers. Power transitions are remarkably rare, they seldom occur as the result of differential rates of economic growth, and have most often occurred peacefully. Power transitions are more often the results of wars, rather than the causes of them. Wars between rising and dominant powers are infrequent and are not waged by either side primarily in the effort to defend or revise the international order in their favor. Finally, we find that war rarely resolves the fundamental conflicts of interest caused by power transitions.

Hegemony, Equilibrium and Counterpower: A Synthetic Approach

Beyer, C. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

This article claims that realist and constructivist ideas are compatible. Structural realism is needed to understand the constraining and stabilizing role of material factors. Furthermore, it detects process in a law-like tendency towards international power equilibrium which is achieved via balancing. Constructivism, in turn, highlights the importance of ideas and norms as engines for change and the creative role of agency. The article therefore combines a materialist and an idealist perspective. It both detects elements of stability and argues for necessary improvements in current international relations (IR) by looking at the issues of United States hegemony, the rise of new challengers and the threat of sub-state international terrorism. This article, therefore, takes up important claims made by Kenneth Waltz on realism, hegemony and terrorism, and interprets them in the light of IR theory today. It is argued that structural realism and Waltz’s ideas are still important and viable, but that we need to combine them with additional perspectives, notably constructivism.

Beyond Waltz's Nuclear World: More Trust May be Better

Wheeler, N. J. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

In 1981 Kenneth Waltz published a controversial Adelphi Paper, ‘The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: More May Be Better’, in which he turned the conventional wisdom on its head by arguing that the spread of nuclear weapons would not be a terrifying prospect. This article rejects the proposition that fear of nuclear destruction can serve as a permanent basis of international order, and argues that securing order depends upon the building of trust between nuclear-armed and arming powers. A key contribution here has been the theory and practice of security communities, which opens up the promise of replacing nuclear threats by a new international politics in which force has been delegitimated as an instrument of state policy. This article discusses the potential for nuclear trust-building through the example of the security community that developed between Argentina and Brazil in the 1980s. Both countries had the potential to develop nuclear weapons by the end of the 1970s, and there were concerns that their rivalry might lead to a regional nuclear arms race. Having explored the factors that promoted trust between Buenos Aires and Brasilia, the article considers the lessons that can be learned for nuclear trust-building elsewhere.

Waltz and World History: The Paradox of Parsimony

Buzan, B., Little, R. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

This article provides a critique of Waltz’s work from the perspective of world history. It shows how Waltz’s commitment to a highly parsimonious theoretical approach paradoxically both sets up the possibility of his theory being universally applicable, and undermines its prospects as a viable approach to understanding world history. Using the key concepts from Waltz’s work — units, systems, structure, process — we show the detailed grounds on which his theory fails to apply to such large swathes of time and place, so that its claims to universality fall, even though it can usefully be applied to some times and places. We also show its shortcomings in relation to the essential historical task of periodization. We argue that international relations needs to engage more with world history, and that the task of doing so will fall to approaches other than Waltz’s.

How Hierarchical Can International Society Be?

Clark, I. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

Waltzian analysis proceeds from the distinction between the ordering principles of anarchy and hierarchy. This raises the large question whether the introduction of pockets of ‘authority’ would represent a fundamental challenge to an anarchical international society. The article investigates this theme by exploring a putative institution of hegemony. It begins with a distinction between primacy and hegemony, and develops the idea of hegemony as a potentially legitimate practice of international society. Since most political systems are ‘mixed’, it then concludes that adoption of a hierarchical principle of hegemony is no more contradictory for international society than is its development of other such institutions. In common with much recent scholarship, it agrees that international society can function as a form of ‘hierarchy under anarchy’, within which hegemony could play its part. The article finally demonstrates what is distinctive to hegemonic behaviour, and suggests that practices such as soft balancing do not represent any form of balancing at all, but are better understood as attempts to institutionalise hegemony.

Human Interconnectedness

Linklater, A. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

Kenneth Waltz’s structural realism abstracts the international political domain from other spheres of social interaction to explain recurrent patterns of competition and conflict across the millennia. There are similarities between the structural realist ‘grand narrative’ and the process-sociological approach developed by Norbert Elias. But the latter supported ‘high-level synthesis’ in the social sciences in order to understand how relations between material, ideational and emotional forces have contributed to the growth of human interconnectedness. The analysis contended that one of the purposes of the social sciences is to increase knowledge of how humans can gain control of the processes that bind them together in global networks of interdependence. Elias was opposed to partisan inquiry such as Kant’s notion of a universal history with a cosmopolitan intent. But a shared emphasis on how humans have developed the capacity to cause distant harm reveals how future grand narratives can combine the analysis of the growth of interconnectedness with the ethical argument for greater transnational solidarity.

The Virtue of Adversity

Waltz, K. N. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

This article is a personal account of how the author came to write his two best-known books, Man, the State, and War and Theory of International Politics. He explains the context of his early career, his army service, and some key academic influences. The article then discusses the origins of his two other major works, on foreign policy and democratic politics and on the implications of the spread of nuclear weapons. In commenting on the course of his long writing and teaching career, Professor Waltz highlights the critical importance and influence of his wife, Helen Waltz.

Contributors

Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:21:04 PDT

Introduction

Booth, K. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:51 PDT

Structure? What Structure?

Onuf, N. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:51 PDT

Kenneth Waltz is a structural theorist. While scholars often comment on Waltz's conception of structure, they rarely address the philosophical assumptions behind it — assumptions that go back to Kant and finally to Aristotle. Appropriately situated, Waltz's conception of structure points to a strong version of constructivist social theory. To make my case, I trace Waltz's view of political structure in his early work, recapitulate his views on science, models and theory, address the question of his (or any) theory's relation to `reality', illustrate his difficulty with structural theory and institutional reality, and consider the vexed question of any theory's fit to a world already talked into existence. I show how close Waltz is to a philosophical position that solves his problem with theory's relation to reality and specifies the conditions under which any social theory can make sense or use of the term structure.

Waltz's Theory of Theory

Waever, O. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:51 PDT

Waltz's 1979 book, Theory of International Politics, is the most influential in the history of the discipline. It worked its effects to a large extent through raising the bar for what counted as theoretical work, in effect reshaping not only realism but rivals like liberalism and reflectivism. Yet, ironically, there has been little attention paid to Waltz's very explicit and original arguments about the nature of theory. This article explores and explicates Waltz's theory of theory. Central attention is paid to his definition of theory as `a picture, mentally formed' and to the radical anti-empiricism and anti-positivism of his position. Followers and critics alike have treated Waltzian neorealism as if it was at bottom a formal proposition about cause—effect relations. The extreme case of Waltz being so victorious in the discipline, and yet being so consistently misinterpreted on the question of theory, shows the power of a dominant philosophy of science in US IR, and thus the challenge facing any ambitious theorising. The article suggests a possible movement of fronts away from the `fourth debate' between rationalism and reflectivism towards one of theory against empiricism. To help this new agenda, the article introduces a key literature from the philosophy of science about the structure of theory, and particularly about the way even natural science uses theory very differently from the way IR's mainstream thinks it does — and much more like the way Waltz wants his theory to be used.

`Big and Important Things' in IR: Structural Realism and the Neglect of Changes in Statehood

Sorensen, G. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:51 PDT

Structural realism has important insights to offer regarding the current balance of power and its effects on world politics. But structural realism is less ready to analyze changes in statehood and their implications for international relations. States are not `like units' and anarchy does not always mean self-help. A richer concept of structure which includes economic power, political—military power, and international norms gives us a better take on the ways in which international forces affect domestic structures of states. In particular, they help us detect the weak states in the developing world, and the postmodern states in the OECD world. In weak states the classical security dilemma has been turned on its head: instead of domestic order and international threat there is domestic threat and international order. In postmodern states violent external threat has been dramatically reduced because these states make up a security community.

Reckless States and Realism

Mearsheimer, J. J. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:51 PDT

Kenneth Waltz opted to reject the rational actor assumption in developing his theory of international politics. That choice, I argue in this article, creates three problems for his theory. First, it means that it is unsuited for explaining state behavior, which means it is of limited utility for explaining the workings of the international system. Second, Waltz's claim that his theory is well suited to explaining international outcomes — as opposed to state behavior — is unconvincing. Those outcomes are heavily influenced by the actions of the great powers, but if his theory cannot predict their behavior, it is unlikely to reliably predict the outcomes of their behavior. Third, Waltz's assumption that states often behave recklessly leads to a more competitive world than described in his theory. I conclude with the suggestion that the theory's greatest virtue is its normative value — its ability to explain how the world should work, not how it works.

Structural Realism, Classical Realism and Human Nature

Brown, C. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:51 PDT

Kenneth Waltz's Theory of International Politics is a modern classic, and deserves to be read the way classic texts ought to be read, i.e. in context and in its own terms. Recovering the context in this case is difficult because of the changes in the discourse since 1979, but one difference between the contemporary and the current reception of the text does seem clear — Waltzian structural realism (or neorealism) is now, but was not then, seen as breaking with the traditions of classical realism. How is this discontinuity to be understood? Part of the answer lies in the rhetoric employed by participants in this debate, but, more substantively, there is a genuine disagreement between neorealism and classical realism over the role played by human nature in international relations. Waltzian neorealism appears, contrary to the tradition, to reject any major role for human nature, describing theories that emphasise this notion as `reductionist'; however, on closer examination, the picture is less clear-cut. Waltz's account of human nature can be related quite closely to the major strands in the realist genealogy, but at a tangent to them. Interestingly, and perhaps unexpectedly, it is also compatible with at least some of the findings of contemporary evolutionary psychology.

Human Nature and World Politics: Rethinking `Man'

Crawford, N. C. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:51 PDT

While realists acknowledge that their theories of world politics are rooted in specific assumptions about human nature, neorealists tend to discount human nature in favor of an emphasis on systemic forces. Nevertheless neorealism has assumptions about human nature that shape neorealist theorizing. Specifically, in Man, the State, and War and Theory of International Politics, Waltz make essentially the same assumptions about human nature as the realists — that our human natures are fixed, that we cannot trust others, and that decision-makers are rational calculators who seek to promote their narrowly defined self-interests. Moreover, for Waltz, human nature determines world politics as much or more than its anarchic structure. A review of biology, specifically human neuroscience, suggests that these assumptions about human nature, and its relation to world politics, ought to be challenged. Our `natures' are much more complex and flexible than realism and neorealism assumes.

Woman, the State, and War

Elshtain, J. B. — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:51 PDT

Does `gender' as a category of analysis or as a central feature of a logic of explanation alter in significant ways Kenneth Waltz's famous `levels of analysis' as developed in his classic, Man, the State, and War? One overriding claim of feminist international relations has been that `gender' alters all levels of analysis; thus, changing `man' to `woman' in the formulation `man, the state, and war' significantly transforms our understanding of international relations. I evaluate this claim critically by assessing the adequacy of feminist formulations on each of Waltz's levels of analysis and, further, by unpacking Waltz's own understanding of these levels. I conclude that Waltz remains enormously helpful in deconstructing reductionist accounts, especially on the `first level' of analysis, but that his own account is problematic insofar as it insists on a `structural analysis' sundered from his levels 1 and 2, namely, wars flow from human nature or, alternatively, from the domestic ordering of states. I point out that Waltz himself leaves some `wiggle room' in his book that permits one to `plug in' features of the first two levels of analysis that are critical to understanding the structural level. In other words, all three levels must be in play if one is to craft a compelling explanatory framework.

Contributors

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:51 PDT

Erratum

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:51 PDT

Norm Regress: US Revisionism and the Slow Death of the Torture Norm

McKeown, R. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Is the norm against torture suffering a crisis of legitimacy within the United States, and if so, does this constitute a crisis in the norm itself? Can constructivist international relations theory explain how the norm came to be significantly weakened by its most important proponent? Constructivist literature on norms has hitherto suffered from a `nice norm bias' that does not adequately take into account the reversibility of so-called `internalized' norms like the one prohibiting torture. Through an examination of the rhetoric, policies and practices surrounding US interrogation after 9/11, this article addresses omissions in constructivist literature by providing a theoretical model to explain `norm regress', or the death of norms. It claims that the torture norm is suffering a crisis of legitimacy within the United States and any future incidences of torture by liberal states may well bring about a crisis of legitimacy in the international norm itself.

Welfare Spending in an Era of Globalization: The North--South Divide

Glenn, J. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

This paper examines the assertion that economic globalization has led to the decline of welfare spending in recent decades. Although it is often argued that the increasing intensity of globalization has led to such a decline in the industrialized states, the paper finds that there has been little, if any, downturn in either levels of state expenditure in general or in levels of welfare spending in particular. However, the experience of the developing states has been rather different. In their case, the last few decades indicate that stagnation or a decline in welfare spending has occurred, particularly during the period of structural adjustment implementation. It is argued that the OECD countries still manage to provide a high level of social welfare to their populations that closely resembles the compensatory state model. In contradistinction, many of the states in the South have struggled to maintain their levels of social expenditure and therefore most resemble Cerny's competitive state model. In order to explain these two divergent outcomes, the paper examines the way in which the behaviour of certain key international financial actors (investors, multinational companies, international financial institutions) differs with regard to these two sets of countries.

Forum: Bridge-building and Terrorism

Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Making Terror/ism

Onuf, N. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Metaterror

Burke, A. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Feminist Interrogations of Terrorism/Terrorism Studies

Sjoberg, L. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Bridging Multiple Divides in IR Theory: Confronting Terrorism, International History, Culture and the War on Terror

Finney, P. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Ideas and Avocados: Ontologising Critical Terrorism Studies

Stokes, D. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Critical of What? Terrorism and its Study

Joseph, J. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Theorising Terrorism: The State, Structure and History

Wight, C. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Liberalism, International Terrorism, and Democratic Wars

Dunne, T. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Roundtable: The Limits of Bridge-Building

Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

This roundtable develops arguments presented at the 2008 International Studies Association (ISA) annual convention. The theme of the convention was `Bridging Multiple Divides' and its aim to enhance dialogue among the diverse research communities within international studies. The aim of the `Limits of Bridge-Building' panel at ISA, and the present roundtable, has been to probe the challenges presented by bridge-building and specifically the possible limitations or dangers that might inhere within attempts to build bridges in International Relations. The roundtable then is aimed at problematising the concept of bridge-building and sounding a hesitant note that takes seriously not only the possibilities but also the limitations and, indeed, possible dangers of `bridge-building'.

Introduction

Kurki, M., Stavrianakis, A. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

The Bridge Crack'd: A Critical Look at Interdisciplinary Relations

Klabbers, J. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Feminist Scholarship, Bridge-Building and Political Affinity

Eschle, C., Maiguashca, B. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

No Bridges to Swamps: A Postcolonial Perspective on Disciplinary Dialogue

Grovogui, S. N. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Roundtable: Actors, Motives, and Politics among Nations A Symposium on Richard Ned Lebow's Cultural Theory of International Relations

Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Motivation

Onuf, N. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Man, Culture and the Theory of International Relations

Suganami, H. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Back to the Renaissance?

Patomaki, H. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

A Matter of Honour: Ned Lebow, A Cultural Theory of International Relations

Coker, C. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Theory, Motives and Falsification

Lebow, R. N. — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Contributors

Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:12:13 PDT

Introduction

Puglierin, J. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:55 PST

A Life of Passionate Scholarship

Karis, T. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:56 PST

The Government Advisor: John H. Herz and the Office of Strategic Services

Schale, F. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:56 PST

Towards Being a `Traveller between All Worlds'

Puglierin, J. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:56 PST

John H. Herz and the International Law of the Third Reich

Stirk, P. M. R. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:56 PST

John H. Herz was unusual amongst the founding fathers of international relations in having paid detailed attention to the ideology and international law of the Third Reich in a study published in 1938. This article sets his investigation in the context of the turn away from law in the emerging discipline of international relations and the competing visions of Hans Kelsen and Carl Schmitt. It assesses developments in the international law of the Third Reich during the war years against Herz's own expectation of the emergence of a coherent doctrine, and concludes by suggesting that Herz's defence of international law has much to recommend it.

John H. Herz and the Resurrection of Classical Realism

Sylvest, C. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:56 PST

This article argues that the political theory of John H. Herz — best known in International Relations (IR) for the invention of the concept of the security dilemma — reveals a sophisticated body of thought deeply relevant to the ongoing attempt to resurrect classical realism. Like other forms of classical realism, the Herzian variant was strategic and rhetorical in character. Beneath its realist posture we find a liberal ideology focused on achieving order, progress and justice in international politics. Although this positive project began from a pessimistic rendering of the political, Herz's political theory was never fatalistic. In combining liberal ideals with a realist understanding of politics, Herz continuously stressed how international politics could be mitigated and changed. This vision was, in turn, based on a broadly constructivist rendering of the security dilemma. Through an identification and analysis of these three central characteristics of Herz's realism (its strategic character, its liberal internationalist purpose, and its underlying constructivism), the article stresses the coherence and continuity of Herz's political thought, and provides a nuanced and complex understanding of an innovative and overlooked scholar of international relations, as well as a normatively compelling position from which to re-articulate classical realism today.

`Survival Research' and the `Planetary Interest': Carrying Forward the Thoughts of John Herz

Graham, K. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:56 PST

John Herz pioneered global thinking in international relations in the mid-twentieth century with his advocacy of `survival research'. The `planetary interest' reflects similar thinking. The `vital planetary interest' identifies fundamental issues of human survival, emphasising legitimate global policy-making and enforcement power. Global policies require a pursuit of the `legitimate national interest'. This approach to IR carries revolutionary implications for the traditional political process (national policy-making) and diplomatic method (international negotiating). The conceptual framework of the `planetary interest' should be placed in a broader jurisprudential framework of `global constitutionalism'. Further work is required to develop `survival research' and the `planetary interest'.

Identity and International Relations

Lebow, R. N. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:56 PST

Drawing on Kant and Hegel, debates in political theory and international relations generally assume that an identity cannot be created without the simultaneous creation and negative stereotypy of an `other'. Figures such as Schmitt and Huntington accept and even welcome this binary, while others, among them Nietzsche, Habermas and Rawls, look for ways of overcoming it. Drawing on Homer's Iliad and psychological research, I challenge the assumptions on which Kant and Hegel, and their successors, build their argument. The Greco-Roman literary tradition and recent survey and experimental research indicates that identities generally form prior to construction of `others', that `others' need not be associated with negative stereotypes, and that even when they are, boundaries between in- and outgroups are quite plastic. Nor must stereotypes be negative. Homer and modern history suggest that identity construction and maintenance often take place through positive, although not necessarily equal, interactions with `others'.

`To Put Oneself into the other Fellow's Place': John Herz, the Security Dilemma and the Nuclear Age

Wheeler, N. J. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:56 PST

It is well known in the literature on security dilemma theorising that John Herz coined the concept in the early 1950s, with Herbert Butterfield developing a very similar concept at the same time. What is less well appreciated is that Butterfield powerfully argued in his 1951 book History and Human Relations that there was no prospect of state leaders and diplomats overcoming the dynamics of mutual suspicion and distrust that created what he had chosen to call a condition of `Hobbesian fear'. Herz parted company with Butterfield on this fundamental question, considering that two adversaries could come to appreciate that what they perceived as the other's hostile behaviour was a defensive response to their own actions. This article revisits this fundamental question that divided the pioneer theorists of the security dilemma as to whether better mutual understanding between potential rivals might be the key to mitigating fear-based hostility. The article discusses this question in relation to Herz's ideas about surviving the nuclear age, and shows how he believed that knowledge of the security dilemma was critical if the superpowers were to mitigate their security competition. Having examined how far the end of the Cold War supports Herz's position, the article concludes by showing how Herz became increasingly disillusioned that the United States was capable of acting to mitigate the security dilemma in the post-Cold War world.

Navigating the `Absolute Novum': John H. Herz's Political Realism and Political Idealism

Booth, K. — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:56 PST

This article situates John Herz's work within the perennial debate about realism and idealism, and the issue of whether and how the two sets of ideas can be reconciled. The variety of `realist' and `idealist' concepts and conceptualisations within Herz's work, and his attempt to combine them in an approach he called `Realist Liberalism', reveals the inadequacy of the addiction of many teachers and researchers in academic international relations to stick unhelpful labels on theorists (such as `Realist') who advance complex and sometimes apparently contradictory intellectual positions. Placing Herz's work alongside other theorists who have grappled with the relationships between realism and idealism — notably Carr and Rawls — the article argues for categorising ideas and not individuals. More importantly, a case is made for the continuing validity of seeking to comprehend IR in terms of the interplay of idealism and realism, and for greater recognition of Herz's contribution to it.

Contributors

Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:14:56 PST