Abstract
International relations theories attempt to explain and extrapolate possible outcomes with regard to policy issues, foreign policy decisions, war propensity and animosity between states as well as the structure of the international system. The relevance of the major international relations theories has been a matter of much debate throughout the last 25 years, with the discourse having been divided mainly between (neo)liberal and (neo)realist thought. Identifying the main attributes of these theories as well as the key thinkers in this milieu will be the primary aim of this chapter. The preeminent inference of realist theory is that violent conflict is inevitable as states seek to maximize their power and minimize the risks associated with the international environment. Liberal scholars emphasize the importance of reason, liberty, and progress, and see these attributes as mutually beneficial concerning all states. They maintain that individual freedom leads to rational choices, that rational decisions preserve freedom, and that, ultimately, this cycle is a contributing factor to the achievement of progress in international relations. The concept of structural realism postulates that state behavior is determined by the structure of the international system and that the anarchic structure of this system makes countries more prone to seek relative gains to ensure their survival. Constructivism is predicated on the assumption that all social underpinnings are constructed rather than preordained concomitants of human nature or international politics. Constructivists draw attention to the salience of norms and ideas in international relations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Further Readings
Keohane, R. O., & Martin, L. L. (1995). The promise of institutionalist theory. International Security, 20(1), 39–51.
Mearsheimer, J. J. (1994). The false promise of international institutions. International Security, 19(3), 5–49.
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(02), 391–425.
References
Acharya, A. (2008). The limitations of mainstream international relations theories for understanding the politics of forced migration, 27. Centre for International Studies, Oxford University.
Adler, E. (2013). Constructivism in international relations: Sources, contributions, an debates. Handbook of International Relations, 2, 112–144.
Burchill, S. (2005). Liberalism. In J. True, S. Burchill, A. Linklater, R. Devetack, J. Donnely, M. Patterson, & C. Reus-Smit (Eds.), Theories of international relations (3rd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Claude, I. L. (1971). Swords into plowshares: The problems and progress of international organization. New York: Random House.
Doyle, M. W. (1983). Kant, liberal legacies, and foreign affairs. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 12, 205–235.
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(04), 887–917.
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (2001). Taking stock: The constructivist research program in international relations and comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 4, 391–416.
Forde, S. (1992). Varieties of realism: Thucydides and Machiavelli. The Journal of Politics, 54(02), 372–393.
Fierke, K. M. (2010). Constructivism. In T. Dunne, M. Kurki, & S. Smith (Eds.), International relations theories: Discipline and diversity (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gilpin, R. (2011). Global political economy: Understanding the international economic order. Princeton, Princeton University Press.
Hopf, T. (1998). The promise of constructivism in international relations theory. International Security, 23(1), 171–200.
Jervis, R. (1978). Cooperation under the security dilemma. World Politics, 30(02), 167–214.
Jervis, R. (1985). From balance to concert: A study of international security cooperation. World Politics, 38(01), 58–79.
Keohane, R. (1980). The theory of hegemonic stability and changes in international economic regimes, 1967–1977. In O. Holsti, R. Siverson, & A. George (Eds.), Change in the international system (pp. 131–162). Boulder: Westview Press.
Keohane, R. O., & Martin, L. L. (1995). The promise of institutionalist theory. International Security, 20(1), 39–51.
Krasner, S. (Ed.). (1982). Regimes and the limits of realism: Regimes as autonomous variables. International Organization, 36, 185–205.
Mearsheimer, J. J. (1994). The false promise of international institutions. International Security, 19(3), 5–49.
Mearsheimer, J. J. (2010). Structural realism. In T. Dunne, M. Kurki, & S. Smith (Eds.), International relations theories: Discipline and diversity (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Morgenthau, H. (1948). Politics amongst nations. The struggle for power and peace. Nova York: Alfred Kopf.
Nye, J. S. (1990). Soft power. Foreign Policy, 80, 153–171.
Oneal, J. R., & Russett, B. (1999). The Kantian peace: The Pacific benefits of democracy, interdependence, and international organizations, 1885–1992. World Politics, 51(1), 1–37.
Powell, R. (1996). Stability and the distribution of power. World Politics, 48(02), 239–267.
Russett, B. (2010). Liberalism. In T. Dunne, M. Kurki, & S. Smith (Eds.), International relations theories: Discipline and diversity (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Smith, S. (2000). The discipline of international relations: Still an American social science? The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2(3), 374–402.
Snyder, R. S. (2005). Bridging the realist/constructivist divide: The case of the counterrevolution in soviet foreign policy at the end of the cold war. Foreign Policy Analysis, 1(1), 55–71.
Waltz, K. N. (1959). Man, the state, and war: A theoretical analysis. New York, Columbia University Press.
Waltz, K. N. (1967). International structure, national force, and the balance of world power. Journal of International Affairs, 21(2), 215–231.
Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international relations. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Waltz, K. N. (1988). The origins of war in neorealist theory. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 18(4), 615–628.
Waltz, K. N. (1993). The emerging structure of international politics. International Security, 18(2), 44–79.
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(02), 391–425.
Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wyatt-Walter, A. (1996). Adam Smith and the liberal tradition in international relations. Review of International Studies, 22(01), 5–28.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
de Buck, D., Hosli, M.O. (2020). Traditional Theories of International Relations. In: Hosli, M.O., Selleslaghs, J. (eds) The Changing Global Order. United Nations University Series on Regionalism, vol 17. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21603-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21603-0_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-21602-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-21603-0
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)