Neo-Realism vs Neo-Liberalism

Neo-liberal vs. Neo-Realist PART 1

1. Agree that there is anarchy. Neo-realists focus on survival, neo-liberals focus on interdependence 2. Neo-realists feel cooperation will only happen if states make it happen. They feel it is hard to achieve this cooperation. Neo-liberals feel it is easy to achieve when there are mutual interests. 3. Neo-realists believe in relative gains, and that states often engage in cooperative relationships to prevent others from gaining more. Neo-liberals believe in absolute gains, and want to maximize the total amount of gains for all parties. 4. Neo-realists emphasize power and capabilities, while neo-realists emphasize intentions and interests. 5. Neo-realists think that the effectiveness of institutions is exaggerated by neo-liberals, and that they do not mitigate the constraining effects of anarchy on cooperation. Neo-liberals feel institutions facilitate cooperation.

4 varieties of liberalism

1. Commercial liberalism 2. Neo-liberal Republicanism 3. Sociological liberalism 4. Neo-liberal instituionalism

Differences between (classical) realism and neo-realism?

1. In classical realism conflict happens because people suck. In neo-realism, however, conflict happens because the anarchical structure of the international system sucks. 2. In classical realism there are two types of states: status quo powers that want to keep the system the way it is and revisionist powers that want to upend the system and create one (a system) that benefits them. Neorealism doesn't bother to classify states, instead arguing that every state is always trying to change the system in order to maximize their own benefit. 3. Classical realism is largely only concerned with "high politics"-- matters of war and peace or security. Neorealism extends its approach to all levels of interaction

Complex interdependence presented 4 characteristics

1. Increasing linkages among states and non-state actors 2. New agenda of international politics with no distinction between high and low politics 3. Multiple channels of interaction across national boundaries 4. The decline of efficacy of military force as a tool of statecraft

Neo-liberal institutionalism

Biggest challenge to realist/neo-realist thinking, suggest a solution to anarchy is countries pooling together resources and even sacrificing some of their sovereignty in order to promote economic growth or respond to regional problems. Example of institution = European Union See institutions as the mediator and the means to achieve cooperation among actors

Defensive neo-realists

Costs of war outweigh benefits, interdependence and globalization, often confused with neo-liberals, they agree with neo-liberals that institutions can increase security by way of interdependence but do not see them as the most effective way to decrease wars, less optimistic than neo-liberals, more optimistic than offensive neo-realists, concerned about non-compliance of states in agreements

Neo-liberal Republicanism

Democratic peace theory

Neo-liberalism

Focus on issues of cooperation, international political economy, and environment. HOW TO PROMOTE AND SUPPORT COOPERATION IN AN ANARCHIC AND COMPETITIVE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM? Claim that cooperation does not work when states fail to follow the rules and "cheat" to secure their national interests

Neo-Realism

In general it focuses on issues of military security and war. HOW DO WE SURVIVE IN THIS SYSTEM? Power is an end in itself. Power is more than military might, balance of power is critical, believes institutions effectiveness varies depending upon the investment made by major powers Unlike realists, neo-realists suggest anarchy defines the system, while realists suggest it is a condition of the system The question is not whether all parties gain from cooperation, but who stands to gain the most from cooperation? Approach foreign policy is based on security and survival.

Neo-liberal Institutionalism

In policy world = promotion of free trade/Western democracy values/institutions. Reinterpretation of liberalism, blue prints for free-market capitalism Liberalism = rights of individual Neo-liberal = rights of a collective (also referred to as classic liberalism) Laissez-faire

Absolute gains

Increasing a states power and influence

Relative gains

Interest one state has in how much power other states might acquire in a cooperative endeavor

A: Neo-realist vs. B: Neo-liberal PART 2

International environment: A: Anarchy B: Anarchy Actors: A: States B: Transnationalism States: A: Rational Black Boxes B: Rational and different from each other State Interests: A: Security, survival B: Natural rights, cooperation Instruments: A: Self-help system/balance of power B: Cooperation/economic interdependence In order to achieve interests: A: States are on constant quest for more power B: States are on a constant quest for power Power: A: Military B: Military/economic, regime type To gain power: A: Arm, defensive vs. offensive B: Absolute gains/Cooperate to maximize everyone's gain Security dilemma: A: Constant B: Mitigated by cooperation (regimes and international institutions) Conflict occurs when: A: Power transition Balance of Power is disturbed B: Lack of interdependence/Cheating to achieve national interest Conflict is least likely in: A: Bipolar World B: Complex interdependence, highly integrated world

Sociological liberalism

More trade = more exchange of ideas = more interdependence = more peace

Structural Realism

Only one form of neo-realism, lack of a common power to enforce rules and maintain order in the system.

Polarity

Polarity in international relations is any of the various ways in which power is distributed within the international system. One generally distinguishes four types of systems: unipolarity, bipolarity, tripolarity, and multipolarity for four or more centers of power.

Offensive neo-realists

Relative power rather than absolute power is more important to states. Differences create more tension.

Commercial liberalism

free trade, capitalist, promoted by global financial institutions, way to peace and prosperity. doesn't appreciate that free trade impacts states differently depending on level of development

Unipolarity

•Everyone will balance •The dominant power will often underbalance •Loosening the constrains of relative gains concerns •Empire or multipolarity

Tripolarity

•Rare historically •Inherently unstable

Bipolarity

•Rivalry spreads through the whole system •Conflicts are displaced from the core to the periphery

Multipolarity

•Same as systems with no GREAT POWERS •Unstable