wmmMmmÊSimËMMgssËsaÊSgmm

The social sciences and the study

of international relations

Philippe Braillard

T h e rapid development of the social sciences as to call fundamentally in question the idea
is no doubt one of the m o r e striking p h e n o m - of the social sciences as a rigorous scientific
ena of our century. T h e diversification of discipline, on the grounds that the inevitable
approaches, adoption of n e w research tools ethnocentrism ideological commitment of any
and methods, broadening of analytical scope researcher impose radical limitations on her
and penetration into n e w areas have caused a or him.
profound upheaval in the social science land- Since the impression given by the social
scape, especially in the last few decades. T h e sciences today is of a complex field in a state
n u m b e r and pace of these developments have of flux, it is legitimate and indeed necessary to
led the social sciences to lay a claim to proper ask what functions m a y be assigned to them
scientific status, and to and what challenges and
recognition and a role of difficulties, and even
their o w n in academic Philippe Braillard teaches the theory limitations, they encoun-
institutions and in the and sociology of international re-
ter in their development.
lations at the Graduate School of
world of research in International Studies, Geneva. H e Rather than indulge in
general. W h a t is m o r e , has published several books, including general, abstract specu-
a large n u m b e r of n e w Théorie des systèmes et relations inter-lation, however, w e felt
fields have emerged as a nationales (1977), L'imposture du that it would be useful to
result of the desire to Club de Rome (1982) and Tiers
focus our attention on one
Monde et relations internationales
give the social sciences a (1984). particular aspect of social
direct active role to play. Las ciencias sociales cambian a un ritmo reality. This will enable us
However, these rápido en los últimos años, aunque no sin
sus controversias y choques internos. Se to adopt a m o r e precise
changes have not oc- enfrentan a qué roles tendrán y qué and m o r e concrete ap-
dificultades y retos deben enfrentar. Por eso,
curred entirely smoothly las CS se han decidido enfocar solo en un proach to s o m e of the
and without clashes be- aspecto de la realidad.
problems faced today by
tween different concep- the social sciences.
tions of the actual nature of social relations O f the various aspects of social reality
and between different approaches and analyti- that m a y be investigated, there is one that
cal methods. They have also had the effect of seems to lend itself particularly well to this
bringing about increasingly marked specializ- kind of inquiry, namely international re-
ation in the various disciplines, and this has lations, for here w e have a subject of research
led to increasing criticism and expressions of that, m o r e than any other, is n o w c o m m o n
concern over the tendency in the social ground for the various social sciences.
sciences to reflect in a piecemeal and often Whereas, traditionally, political philosophy,
reductionistic manner the richness and c o m - diplomatic history, international law and pol-
plexity of real life. S o m e even go so far today itical e c o n o m y all used to contribute to the
 628
study of international relations, in the course
of this century m a n y of the social sci-
ences—sociology, political science, ethnology,
psychology, anthropology, demography, etc.
Tras las dos —have progressively laid claim to the subject.
posguerras,
RRII no solo This is w h y it can be said that ever since the
ha ganado
autonomía period between the two wars not only have
como sujeto international relations earned themselves the
de estudio,
sino position of an independent field of study but
también un
grado de there has also been a degree of decentraliz-
descentraliz ation in research o n the subject, which has
ación
(similar a been increasingly extended to include m a n y of
otras CS).
the rapidly developing social sciences in ad-
dition to traditional disciplines.
Furthermore, the growing importance of
international relations today in the life of
societies cannot leave social scientists indif-
ferent, as attested to by the swift expansion
of research on the subject. W e live in an era
deeply marked by conflict and one in which
the potential for destruction available to us
renders the consequences of a major confla-
gration quite incalculable. After the Second
World W a r , the cold w a r , reflecting the
strategic and ideological antagonism of the
two superpowers, deeply affected the struc-
ture, development and lives of m a n y societies,
particularly as a result of the building of
systems of alliance dominated respectively
by the United States of America and the
U n i o n of Soviet Socialist Republics. Again,
the emergence of the Third World on the
international scene hs opened u p a n e w
dimension in international relations and has
led to confrontation between the developing
countries and the industrialized countries.
Within the Third World itself, there are ever-
growing conflicts whose consequences often
Tras las dos reach far beyond the borders of the regions
posguerras, el
sistema directly concerned. In the course of this
internacional century the international system has thus
ha alcanzado
una escala b e c o m e truly worldwide in scale; international
global. Por
ende, RRII ha relations have acquired a global dimension,
adquirido una it being no longer possible for any single
dimensión
más global y country to stand outside the international
no tan
regional. strategic context.
These changes and the importance of
international relations today do not, however,
stem solely from technological developments
Philippe Braillard
in weaponry and the—at least potential—glo-
balization of conflicts: they are also the result
of the growth of economic, technological
and cultural exchanges between the various
societies. This growth, which is one of the
end results of the modernization process set
in train by the Industrial Revolution, has un-
questionably provided the framework for a
complex network of interdependent relations
between the various societies. While this
p h e n o m e n o n is no doubt characterized by
the existence of serious inequalities or imbal-
ances within that interdependence, to the
point where it has often become a means
for penetration and domination, the fact re-
mains that on a global scale there is n o w
more interpénétration between societies, it is
m u c h m o r e difficult to distinguish foreign pol-
icy from domestic policy and there are m a n y
transnational forces and non-state actors that
tend to restrict governments' scope for
manoeuvre. International relations, therefore,
are tending to play an ever more decisive
role in the functioning and development of
our societies. En este contexto, los países se han vuelto más
interdependientes y ahora es imposible desarticular la
presencia global de un país, así como se difumina la
política exterior de la interior.
The need for interdisciplinarity
It is not unusual to hear researchers—par-
ticularly political scientists—assert that the
study of international relations has, in the
course of its development, given birth to a
separate, self-contained discipline.1 A s -
sertions of this kind are usually based on
the belief that it is essential to take ac-
count of the specific nature of international
relations as an object of study. Particular
emphasis is placed on the difference between
the structures and political processes specific
to integrated societies and the international
system, the latter being characterized by a
low degree of intergration and by the ab-
sence of political structures binding its
m e m b e r s . In other words, the conceptual
and methodological tools developed in the
study of integrated societies are considered
to be inoperative and even dangerous as a
means of studying a social system in its
natural state.
Debido a que esto constituye una nueva parcela de la realidad,
RRII se ha hiperespecializado y ahora está mucho más
organizada. Se reduce la brecha entre el sistema internacional y
los países políticamente integrados.
The social sciences and the study of international relations
It seems difficult to dispute the specific
nature of international relations. T h e exist-
ence of an international sphere m a d e up of
sovereign state entities able, within certain
limits, legitimately to resort to armed force to
defend their interests2 characterizes a specific
field of social relations. Admittedly, it is
increasingly difficult today to draw the line
between domestic and foreign policy, and
there is clearly an increasing part played in
international relations by non-state entities
such as multinational corporations and trans-
national forces, which tend to restrict the
power of states. T h e swift development of
bonds of economic, technological, cultural
and strategic interdependence and the emerg-
ence of countless co-operation structures,
whether governmental or non-governmental,
are also signs that international relations are
becoming increasingly highly organized, re-
ducing the gap between the international
system and the various integrated political
systems of nation-states.
Despite this growth in international re-
lations, however, there is no denying the
existence of states and of frontiers between
the various societies forming states. T h e
specific characteristic of international re-
lations is the fact that they constitute flows
that cross frontiers. International relations are
therefore determined primarily not by the
nature of the actors involved—states or other
social entities—but by the structure of the
system in which they develop—the existence
of frontiers crossed by communication flows.
The specific nature of international relations
can thus be brought out by defining them as
social relations that cross frontiers and link
the various societies forming nation-states.
Describing them as relations established
between various societies covers not only
intergovernmental relations, in which the
actors are states but also infra-govern-
mental relations, in which the actors are
such diverse social groups as enterprises,
scientific societies, sporting and religious
associations, etc.
There is no doubt that this definition of
international relations is conditioned by his-
Las r.i. no están determinadas por la naturaleza de los actores,
sino por la estructura del sistema en el que se desenvuelven.
La disciplina de RRII está basada en el concepto de Etsado,
cuando este deje de existir, probablemente RRII dejará de tener
significado, se volverá obsoleta.
629
tory, for it applies strictly to something whose
existence m a y be limited in time. It is con-
ceivable, for instance, that state structures
will disappear one day. Such a change would
not only m a k e this definition obsolete but
would even render the very notion of inter-
national relations meaningless. 3
T h e fact that international relations are
recognized as possessing a specific nature—if
only relative and partial—is a legitimate
reason for making them a clearly defined Lo que
vuelve una
object of study or field of analysis but does CS a una
not, in m y view, justify the claim for a n e w disciplina
no es su
discipline within the social sciences under the objeto, sino
el enfoque
n a m e of 'international relations'. T h e fact is que adopta
that what is properly characteristic of any el estudio
de ese
discipline is not just its object but the ap- objeto, y
por ende la
proach adopted in the study of that object forma de
and therefore the w a y of delimiting the field delimitar el
campo de
of analysis. W h e n w e look at the study of análisis.
international relations today w e are bound to
recognize that, far from being conducted by a
single discipline, it involves a great m a n y of
the social sciences, such as political science,
sociology, economics, law, history, anthro-
pology, social psychology, etc., with each of
these disciplines approaching the subject from
a particular standpoint. There are in fact
m a n y aspects to inernational relations—econ-
omic, political, social and cultural—and,
unless international relations are reduced to
just one aspect considered to be of paramount
importance, it is not possible to explain the
eminently complex subject of international
p h e n o m e n a through just one discipline, n e w
though it m a y be.
A n d yet, as has already been suggested
above, is it not likely that the social sciences
m a y be unable to study international re-
lations to any good effect by using concepts
and models developed in the analysis of
integrated societies? T h e specific nature of
international relations—social relations across
frontiers—does not preclude the existence of
s o m e degree of organization and co-operation
in those relations. Moreover, there is a
widespread tendency in the study of what are
k n o w n as integrated societies to reject—and
in this they are following the path opened up
 Todas las CS han incluido en sus enfoques la conflictiva
característica dimensional de cualquier relación social, lo que les
permite desarrollar modelos que puedan usarse en r.i.
630
by Marxist sociology—the model of a society
exempt from conflict and proof against anar-
chy. A s a result, the social sciences have to a
great extent included in their approaches the
conflictual dimension characteristic of any
social relationship, and this enables them to
develop models that m a y shed light on inter-
national relations.
Because there are several disciplines
involved and hence a number of different
approaches, the study of international re-
lations today gives the impression of being
piecemeal or even completely disjointed. T h e
wealth of knowledge gained from a multi-
plicity of approaches tends to be achieved at
the expense of coherent analysis. W h a t at the
outset was meant simply to be a guarantee of
comprehensiveness has tended tö become
actually a source of incoherence. W e have
c o m e to the point today where the study of
international relations is broken up into a host
of different approaches and disciplines with
all too often little or n o connection between
them and too little concern to relate their
different approaches to an overall view of the
object studied. W e have here a phenomenon
that is typical of all the social sciences today
and one scientists have become increasingly
aware of, prompting m a n y of them to
advocate an interdisciplinary attitude and
approach.
Interdisciplinarity has thus become a
fashionable cry, and the study of international
relations has not remained outside its range.
It must be admitted, however, that there has
not been m u c h progress beyond solemn pro-
nouncements about the virtues of integrating
the various disciplines, which has prompted
m a n y people to accuse interdisciplinarity of
being a failure or in any event an illusion. In
m y view it cannot in fact be otherwise as long
as interdisciplinarity continues to be seen as a
global, undifferentiated exercise that has the
effect of merely juxtaposing different view-
points in a haphazard fashion. T h e inter-
disciplinary enrichment based on integration
of the various dimensions of social reality
cannot be brought about either on a global
scale or by decree. W h a t must be done, as
RRII ha llegado al punto en el que se ha dividido en diferentes
enfoques y disciplinas que no tienen relación y que tienen poco
interés en homogeneizar su objeto de estudio. Esto es común en
todas las CS, lo que le otorga a RRII el carácter de
INTERDISCIPLINARIO.
Philippe Braillard
increasing numbers of scientists are doing,
is to start out more modestly from the pre-
cise needs that emerge from the study of a
phenomenon or a structure and to seek to
achieve cross-fertilization between different
standpoints w h e n analysing the object in ques-
tion. Thus, to take but a few examples in the
field of international relations, subjects like
the study of development, that of trans-
national corporations or international organ-
izations and that of international conflicts
might lend themselves to interdisciplinary
working methods.
A n initial approach to such working
methods might be to incorporate into a
discipline dimensions, variables and hypoth-
eses taken into account and brought to light
by other disciplines. Thus, for example, the
political scientist wanting to study the strati-
fication of the international system and par-
ticularly the ascendancy of the industrial-
ized countries over the developing countries
must consider in his analysis the norms of
international public law as an element of that
stratification and as an instrument of domi-
nation.4 Conversely, a jurist looking at the
progressive emergence of development law
cannot afford to overlook the power structure
characterizing the contemporary international
system, for it is against that structure that the
Third World countries seeking to establish the
broad principles of a n e w international econ-
omic order are fighting.
H o w e v e r , this initial form of interdisci-
plinary enrichment cannot alone meet all the
requirements that arise in the study of certain
phenomena. It1 is not enough merely to
incorporate into one particular discipline
viewpoints stemming from other disciplines,
because certain phenomena must be con-
sidered globally from the outset. Only a
transdisciplinary approach going beyond tra-
ditional disciplinary frameworks and opening
the way to a paradigm of complexity5 can do
justice to the multidimensional and complex
nature of certain objects. The study of devel-
opment is highly revealing in this respect. It is
n o w realized that the phenomenon of devel-
opment, which plays a very important role in
Aun así, esta forma inicial de interdisciplinariedad no es
suficiente para cumplir todos los requisitos para estudiar cierto
fenómeno. Se necesita TRANSDISCIPLINARIEDAD.
The social sciences and the study of international relations
'An increasing part is played by multinational corporations and transnational forces'. Rapho.
the study of international relations, cannot be
apprehended satisfactorily from models de-
veloped within the frame of a specific disci-
pline, even if such models take into account
the contributions of other disciplines.6 There
is n o such thing as economic development,
social development or political development
taken separately. Development is a global
p h e n o m e n o n that must be seen as such from
the start in all its m a n y dimensions—econ-
omic, political, social, cultural, etc. This
requirement can be satisfied only by a trans-
disciplinary approach in which an attempt is
m a d e to cut across the boundaries of tra-
ditional disciplines, developing n e w concep-
tual frameworks and models. It is by seeking
to respond to this need for transdisciplinarity
that the study of international relations will n o
doubt m a k e s o m e progress in the future
beyond its present fragmented state.
Por ejemplo, para entender el desarrollo es necesario
comprender todas sus dimensiones, lo cual se logra con
transdisciplinariedad.
'631
Looking for a paradigm
T h e study of international relations is frag-
mented or piecemeal not only because of the
diversity of disciplines or viewpoints upon
which it is based but also—and to a far greater
extent—because of lack of agreement a m o n g
scientists about what it is that constitutes the
specific nature, the essence, of its object and
about the general explanatory framework to
be built for organizing the research. In other
words, the study of international relations is
characterized by the absence of a paradigm 7
and by the fact that there are several gen-
eral explanatory models pitted against one
another, several conceptions of its object.
This situation is not in fact peculiar to the
study of international relations: it is charac-
teristic of the whole field of investigation
covered by the social sciences.
An initial conception of international
El estudio de RRII está caracterizado por la ausencia de paradigma y
por el hecho de que hay varios modelos explicativos opuestos unos a
otros. Varias concepciones del objeto.
 632
relations, which stems from T h o m a s Hobbes'
theory of the natural state, puts emphasis on
the non-integrated anarchical and therefore
conflictual nature of the international system.
It sees the specific characteristic of internatio-
nal relations in the recourse to conflict, or
m o r e precisely in what R a y m o n d Aron calls
'the legitimacy of recourse to armed force on
the part of states'. F r o m this standpoint, the
state is seen as the central actor in inter-
national relations, whose dynamic is the
El Estado es el
actor central en evolving pattern of the balance of power
las relaciones
internacionales, a m o n g states. T h e sphere of foreign policy is
cuya dinámica quite distinct from that of domestic policy,
es el patrón
evolutivo del and its central concern in the security of the
balance de
poder entre los state. Foreign policy options are rational
Estados. choices m a d e in the national interest. T h e
foreign policy of states, while it does not
succeed in obliterating the profoundly an-
archical nature of the international system,
can nevertheless ensure a m i n i m u m degree
of order and s o m e balance of power,
notably through diplomacy and the develop-
ment of international law and international
organizations.8
F r o m the end of the Second World W a r
onwards, this conception of international
relations was widely disseminated by the
American realistic school of thought which set
itself up in opposition to the Wilsonian ideal-
istic and legalistic view of an international
society progressing towards pacification and
integration as a result of a process of d e m o -
cratization. T h e failure of the League of
Nations, the Second World W a r and then the
development of the cold war unquestionably
lent weight to this 'conflictual' conception
of international relations, which prevailed
until the 1960s and still has a considerable
following.
A second conception of international
Desde la relations places emphasis on interdependence
2GM hasta
los 60s, la
and co-operatjon and subscribes to the view
corriente that contemporary international relations do
dominante en
RRII fue la not correspond to the conflictual and inter-
realista. La
segunda
state model of the realistic paradigm. T h e
teoría clásica dynamic of modernization set off by the
después del
idealismo. Industrial Revolution and given an unpre-
cedented impetus after the Second World
La interdependencia ha generado Philippe Braillard
que existan nuevos actores de
RRII
W a r as a result of the development of tech-
nology and growth of international exchanges
has helped to construct a complex pattern of
interdependence between the various societies
and has led to the emergence of new types of
actors in international relations. This modern-
ization process has for instance given rise to
n e w needs and demands in our societies and
to value systems based on economic and social
welfare. T h e development model progress-
ively adopted by the various societies,
whether in the Third World or in the indus-
trialized countries, has placed n e w social
and economic responsibilities on the state,
which has proved less and less1, capable of
meeting these n e w demands on its o w n . Other
forces—supranational, transnational and sub-
national—have thus emerged on the inter-
national scene and in m a n y cases have tended
to restrict states' room to manoeuvre, as
testified to, for example, by the development
of transnational corporations. In order to
meet the demands for economic and social
development, states have as a rule had to
open themselves up increasingly to exchanges
with the outside world, thereby heading
towards growing interdependence and as a
direct consequence, a restriction of their
o w n autonomy. This is w h y it is becoming in-
creasingly difficult to distinguish foreign
policy from domestic policy and to account for
the international behaviour of a state in
purely strategic and military terms.
In this context the development of inter-
national co-operation with, in particular, a
growing number of co-operation mechanisms
in the form of international organizations,
reflects a far-reaching change in international
relations, whose conflictual nature is coming
to be of secondary importance, and a tend-
ency towards the organization of an inter-
national system characterized ever more
deeply by interdependence and community
of interest.
This view of international relations was
already to be found in the functionalistic ideas
of such theorists as David Mitrany, w h o saw
the foundations of a n e w , more integrated
international system in the demand for func-
La naturaleza conflictiva de RRII ha pasado a segundo
plano, pues la tendencia a la organización es cada vez
mayor causada por la interdependencia y el interés por
la comunidad.
 Este contexto promovió la aparición de
ideas funcionalistas para explicar mejor
la realidad internacional.

The social sciences and the study of international relations 633

tional, technical and economic co-operation,9 international relations is today central to the
and it served as an ideological framework for demands for a n e w international economic
the development and functioning of m a n y order and to a significant school of thought on
international organizations after the Second development problems that rejects an analysis
World W a r . It has also taken on increasing of underdevelopment in terms of endogenous
importance since the beginning of the 1960s in factors alone (cultural, political, social, etc.)
political-science studies on international re- and attempts to explain the p h e n o m e n o n by
lations, particularly those on international or- the dependence of Third World societies and
ganizations,10 the settlement of conflicts,11 m o r e specifically by the incorporation of these
the formulation of foreign policy12 and certain societies into the world capitalist economy.
other themes. In addition, it is central to T h e development of international relations,
m a n y analyses of North-South relations.13 with, in particular, the division of the world
A third conception of international re- into rich and poor countries, is thus alleged to
lations, stemming more or less directly from be a logical corollary of the word capitalist
a Marxist view of social relations, considers system. 15
that the international system today is the direct T h e compartmentalization of the object
expression of the functioning, development of research that emerges from these three
and contradictions of capitalism. In other paradigms of international relations is, no La variación
words, the international system is held to be doubt, not entirely insurmountable. It is clear de los
paradigmas
marked by the dynamic of capitalism, which, that each of these conceptions of international responde a la
because of its contradictions, is a vehicle for relations is based on an important dimension forma en que
las relaciones
imperialistic policy. This conception of inter- of the p h e n o m e n a studied and that by at- internacionales
se han
national relations was formulated in the works tempting to highlight that dimension it tends desarrollado y
of Rudolf Hilferding, Nicholas Bukharin, to overlook other no less important aspects. It se arraigan a
ciertas
Rosa Luxemburg and Lenin in an attempt to can also be seen that the development of each corrientes.
account for colonial expansion at the end of paradigm is connected with the way in which
the nineteenth century and the conflicts that international relations have themselves de-
arose a m o n g the imperialist powers. After veloped and that each conception of inter-
decolonization, a great m a n y neo-Marxist national relations tends to reflect certain
I schools of thought or those drawing on certain trends and concerns of a particular period,
Marxist-Leninist theories m a d e attempts to neglecting quite naturally other factors that
demonstrate that imperialism was still the m a y have been brought to the fore previously.
dominant factor in international relations and Thus for instance the second paradigm, by La variación
the reason for the underdevelopment of the according somewhat less attention to conflict, de los
paradigmas
Third World. gives precedence to the growth of interdepen- responde a la
dence and the development of non-state forma en que
They suggested that capitalism, in order las relaciones
to survive, has to rely on the exploitation of a actors—significant phenomena of the 1960s internacionales se han
'periphery' to which it can export its capital at that, in the prevailing climate of détente, desarrollado y
higher profit rates and where it can find an seemed to be conducive to an abatement of ciertas
se arraigan a

outlet for part of its production and secure East-West conflict. Hence, as is beginning to corrientes.

raw-material supply sources. This state of de- be realized today, the various paradigms m a y
pendence of the 'periphery', maintained and well be complementary rather than irrevo-
reinforced by various means—transnational cably antagonistic in that they show up the Estos
various facets of a single reality m a d e up, like son
corporations, international organizations, aid, complem
export of capital, self-colonization, the part any social reality, of both harmony and entarios.

played by Third World élites as relays of conflict, interdependence and dependence,

16
imperialism, etc.—is thus held to lead to a balance and change.
plundering of the Third World by the indust- There is, however, a fundamental limita-
rialized capitalist countries.14 This view of tion to this complementarity of paradigms as

Idealismo - Realismo - Liberalismo / Funcionalismo - Marxismo - Perspectivas posmodernas (?)

 634 Philippe Braillard

they can be seen today in that their taking into tion of the field of study, a departure to
account this or that aspect of international s o m e extent from notions of c o m m o n sense
relations is based o n philosophies of history, and the possibility of intersubjective control,
on views of social relations and on ideological rather than indiscriminate adherence to
options that are difficult to reconcile. In other rigid procedures. 18
words, although one can hope to integrate T h e question remains whether there is
within a c o m m o n model the various aspects of not an essential difference in kind between
international relations channelled by the para- the social sciences—whether nomothetic or
digms, that integration can be effected only by idiographic—and what are k n o w n as the
dissociating those aspects from the philosophi- exact sciences. A s Jean Piaget clearly d e m o n -
cal and ideological frameworks within which strated:
they appear. It stills remains to be seen h o w
they can be integrated within a coherent having h u m a n beings in their countless activities
structure that might one day b e c o m e the as their object and being developed by human
paradigm around which the research could beings in their cognitive activities, the human
develop. This is n o easy matter, however, for sciences find themselves in the distinctive pos-
it is not a technical problem but one that ition of depending on h u m a n beings both as
involves the philosophical and ideological subject and as object.19
choices o n which such a paradigmatic struc-
ture would be based. This epistomological situation means that
it is m u c h m o r e difficult to separate the
epistemic subject from the egocentric subject.
Towards a scientific approach It is even doubtful—if one agrees with Jürgen
H a b e r m a s that the social sciences derive from
In the last three decades a marked feature of gnoseological interests (Erkenntnisinteresse)
the study of international relations, as of fields that are different from those upon which the
of social reality, has been the trend towards natural sciences are based 20 —whether such a
acquiring scientific status. Increasing numbers separation is really possible in the social
Las ultimas
décadas se of scientists have been striving to adopt a sciences. This is w h y the scientist studying
caracterizan scientific approach to the study of inter- social reality must constantly be ideologically
por la
búsqueda national p h e n o m e n a , and several debates critical of his o w n approach and of his o w n
del estado
científico. have grown u p over the criteria for such an situation in relation to its object, while recog-
approach. nizing the relative and partial nature of such
T h e fallacious argument consisting in an approach. Only then can the social sciences
contrasting the so-called classic approaches acquire a genuinely critical dimension, adopt
relying to a great extent on intuition and a critical outlook on society and avoid being
21
qualitative analysis with the so-called scientific merely techniques for solving problems and
approaches based o n the quantification of instruments that, under cover of a value-free
social p h e n o m e n a and recourse to formal- approach, tend to justify an established social
22
ization is fortunately n o w a thing of the order.
17
past. It has n o w been realized that neither This, however, has all too often been the
Ni la
cuantificación quantification nor formalization can m a k e case until n o w in the study of international
ni la
formalización
an approach scientific, for these are merely relations. W h o l e areas of research have been
de la disciplina instruments that c o m e into play only once determined largely by ideological options—of
le otorga un
carácter an object of study has been delimited, the which the scientists themselves have been
científico a RRII
problem areas identified and a conceptual unaware—channelled by the choice of analyti-
framework and certain initial assumptions cal tools or conceptual frameworks. A n
adopted. It is coming to be accepted that a example of this is systems analysis. For one
scientific approach involves precise defini- thing it is all too often reduced to a mere
The social sciences and the study of international relations 635

... í *

'The positivist illusion is firmly rooted in the collective mentality', Temple of Humanity, the Positivist
Church of Brazil. Edimedia.

pseudo-scientific language that b y a confused high value o n the status q u o , treating as

use of terms and concepts employed by the
various exact sciences—system, structure,
function, balance, homoeostasis, morphostasis,
morphogenisis, feedback, etc.—is designed to
confer scientific status and social recognition
on the social scientists. M o r e seriously, sys-
tems analysis as it has usually been employed
in the study of international relations tends to
have a highly normative effect by placing a
normal anything that contributes to the in-
ternal h a r m o n y of the system by maintaining
existing structures a n d as deviant a n d dys-
functional anything that upsets the balance of
the system. 23 T h u s , for example, John B u r -
ton considers that in studying international
systems, systemic patterns of behaviour must
be distinguished from non-systemic patterns,
the former implying integrative processes and
 636
the latter disintegrative processes based on a
differentiation of power. 2 4
T o take another example, the fact of bring-
ing into play—as is increasingly done today
—the concept of interdependence, which is
indeed the basis of one of the paradigms of
contemporary research on international re-
lations, also tends to introduce implicit ideo-
logical choices into the analysis. Emphasis on
the growth of interdependence and its depic-
tion as a symmetrical situation (the mutual
dependence of social actors) to obscure the
conflictual aspect of international relations
and the stratification of the international
system. This type of attitude is very clearly to
be seen in m a n y analyses of North-South
relations that underscore the bonds of inter-
dependence between industrialized and Third
World countries, ignoring the asymmetrical
nature of that interdependence and the far-
reaching clashes of interest between the two
groups of countries, as are attested to by the
breakdown of the negotiations to define in
concrete terms the structure of a new inter-
national economic order. T h e report of the
independent commission chaired by Willy
Brandt provides a good illustration of this.
T h e report endeavours to show that the
conflict between the North and the South can
be resolved only if there is a recognition, both
in the North and in the South, of interdepen-
dence reflecting a profound community of
interests. B y proclaiming that the develop-
ment of the North necessarily involves the
development of the South, and vice versa, and
Después de that that interdependence should be the basis
la 2GM se for a new international economic order foun-
empieza a
gestar la ded on a community of interests, the Brandt
perspectiva
del Norte y report obscures the fact that such interde-
Sur pendence is asymmetrical and supports a plan
Globales,
donde existe for restructuring the world economy de-
una relación
asimétrica y signed merely to reinforce the Third World
de countries' incorporation into a world econ-
dependencia
. omic system in which their situation is one of
dependence.
A s can be seen, ideological criticism is
essential, both in the study of international
relations and in that of other sectors of social
reality. It does, however, if it is considered
La crítica
ideológica es
esencial para
RRII
Philippe Braillard
merely a technique, entail the danger of a
return to the positivism its function is to
combat, by giving the illusion of an approach
that has been thoroughly purged of all ideo-
logical contamination. This danger is all the
greater in that the positivist illusion is firmly
rooted in the collective mentality, a fact that
moreover enables some scientists to speak of
scientific and ideology-free analysis for the
purpose of deliberately concealing their ideo-
logical commitment and political options.
A good example of this attitude is to be
found in the approach adopted by the Club of
R o m e , which is a grouping of about a hun-
dred leading figures—company directors, aca-
demics, etc.—and has set itself the aim of
shedding light on the complex problems of the
world today and proposing new courses for
action so that the world m a y be saved from
the dangers threatening it.25 T h e Club of
R o m e maintains that it has 'no ideological or
political prejudice'.26 It has moreover at-
tempted to authenticate its analysis of the
contemporary world by several reports drawn
up by research-teams, sometimes using math-
ematical analysis and computers. 27 The stated
aim is thus to replace the myth of growth,
which lies at the heart of the model for the
development of our societies and threatens to
lead them to their downfall, by a scientific,
clear-sighted view of the world today and its
problems.'However, as w e have shown else-
where, 2 8 the picture that emerges from all
the reports presented at the Club of R o m e
and sanctioned by it and from the publications
and declarations m a d e by the Chairman of the
group, the Italian Aurelio Peccei, remains a
fanciful hypothesis and surreptitiously intro-
duces a whole set of political options which it
tries to pass off simply as self-evident con-
clusions drawn from lucid, scientific analysis.
While proclaiming that it speaks on behalf of
mankind, and more specifically as the de-
fender of the survival of the human race,
the Club of R o m e is trying, by means of a
technocratic ideology, to impose on us a
planned world society whose leadership takes
as its model the transnational corporation.
El objetivo de la crítica es tirar la
ilusión de crecimiento, el cual es la
base del modelo de DESARROLLO de
nuestras sociedades.
The social sciences and the study of international relations 637

> i
*"** "^.»i/ " • < • . . ' • * a r - i ^ « - ' ; W

Le Père Ubu, the central character of the satirical plays of Alfred Jarry (1873-1907), exploring modern
absurdity. Lithography by the author. Snark.
 638 Philippe Braillard

The nature and limitations of international relations very little satisfactory

theory progress has been m a d e towards any such
process of selection and ordering. Most of
In their bid for scientific status and social the 'explanatory models' that have been de-
recognition, the various nomothetic social' veloped are in fact merely taxonomies or
sciences—sociology, political science, econ- conceptual frameworks pointing up a set of
omics, etc.—set themselves in their study of variables that m a y have a bearing o n the
international relations the goal of developing p h e n o m e n a and processes studied, without
an explanatory theory of an abstract, general there being really any selection and arrange-
and timeless nature. Their approach w a s ment of the kind needed in developing an
based on a positivistic epistemology modelling explanatory model.
the social sciences on the natural sciences. T o take just one example, w h e n G r a h a m
T h e aim was to single out a number of Allison attempts to shed light on the processes
recurrent themes from all the various events of foreign-policy decision-making, he places
coming within the scope of international emphasis, in each of the three paradigms he
relations and to formulate the explanatory proposes (rational, organizational, bureau-
models or laws governing the behaviour of cratic), on a number of variables that m a y
those involved in international relations. In have a determining role in decision-making
other words it meant developing explanatory but does not establish any precise relation-
models composed of a n u m b e r of variables ships between these variables and confines
Después de
and putting these models to the test by using himself m o r e to a description of the process
la 2GM se history as a laboratory, either by comparing governing the formulation of a particular
empieza a
gestar la the models to the past record of international foreign policy (that which w a s behind the
perspectiva
del Norte y
relations or by endeavouring to apply them C u b a n missile crisis in 1962).31 W h a t is m o r e ,
Sur to the present time, or again by making he does not really tell us h o w to integrate
Globales,
donde existe forecasts—which would in due course b e the three different interpretations he makes
una relación
asimétrica y
tested—of the future pattern of international of the decision-making process in terms of
de relations. T h e collection of statistics in an the three paradigms h e presents. Allison's
dependencia
. attempt to find correlations in the study of contribution is therefore descriptive and
international conflicts29 and the construction taxonomic.
of models in sectors like foreign policy O n e might of course be tempted to
decision-making30 are altogether representa- bypass this difficulty in incorporating the
tive of approaches directed at this type of various potential explanatory variables into a
objective. model by resorting to a reductionistic ap-
T h e fact must be faced today that this proach basing the explanation o n a single
goal is far from being attained and that the factor.32 But it has been amply d e m o n -
quest for a general, timeless explanatory strated that such an approach is unable to
theory applicable regardless of w h o is apply- explain the multidimensional character of
ing it or where and w h e n it is applied has social p h e n o m e n a and their m a n y and varied
brought research to a dead end. causes.
A n y explanatory model involves a T h e current block to finding an explana-
choice, a selection from a m o n g the huge tory theory of international relations, without
range of variables relating to a set of p h e n o m - any progress in fact having been m a d e beyond
ena. It means singling out from the c o m - the taxonomic stage, can but lead scientists to
plexities of real situations those factors that become m o r e fully aware of the possibilities
are significant and leaving aside those that and limitations to which the formulation of a
are not. In addition, precise relations must be theory is subject. In opting for a general
established between the variables selected. approach, the representatives of the n o m o -
T h e fact is that in the contemporary study of thetic social sciences strove to devise too
The social sciences and the study of international relations 639

timeless a theory, w h o s e only link with history
would c o m e from the scientist's neutral action
in a particular experimental field. T h e y did
not realize however that it is not possible to
understand international relations without
incorporating the dynamic of history into
the explanatory models themselves. E v e n if
the establishing of a set of potential explana-
tory variables m a y b e valid in general terms
and is hence not linked to a specific situation,
it is only b y interpreting a given set of
historical circumstances that the scientist can
and must select and arrange those variables.
In other w o r d s , progress beyond the taxo-
n o m i c stage can be m a d e only by taking into
consideration a specific historical dynamic,
by analysing a given set of historical
circumstances.
N o doubt there are explanatory factors
c o m m o n to latter-day conflicts like the cold
w a r or the Viet N a m W a r and to the major
conflicts of European history in the eighteenth
and nineteenth centuries. Explanatory models
of these various conflicts cannot be con-
structed, however, without taking into ac-
count the dynamic and the forces at w o r k in
the international system during the period
in question. Furthermore, o n e cannot set out
to infer laws governing the functioning and
balance of international systems merely from
a comparison of the polarity of the con-
temporary system with that of the E u r o p e a n
system in the nineteenth century and without
taking into consideration the other basic
structural characteristics of each of these two
systems (in particular stratification a n d the
degree of ideological and cultural h o m o g e n -
eity) and the dynamic of their development. 3 3
It is n o doubt possible to conceive of
spheres of generalization other than that of
highlighting potential explanatory variables.
B y elaborating various explanatory models
concerning specific historical situations,
scientists m a y reasonably expect to discern
certain trends evolving as laws 3 4 and certain
explanatory structures c o m m o n to different
phenomena.35
Trying to find a general theory in the
study of international relations should not,
however, m e a n negating the cultural dimen-
sion of international relations, as has unfortu-
nately too often the case in the past. 36 It is
not by generalizing from the study of a
particular society—particularly the United
States of A m e r i c a in the case under dis-
cussion—in other words by refusing to con-
sider cultural diversity, that the theory of
international relations can acquire a genu-
inely transcultural, transsocietal and trans-
national dimension consistent with the
requirements of anomothetic approach. Cul-
tural diversity, as indeed the dynamic of
history, m u s t b e central to the social sciences'
proposed theory for the study of international
relations.
[Translated from French]

Notes

1. See for example Hoffman
(ed.), I960, pp. 2-3. See also
Taylor (ed.), 1978, p. 1.
2. This is the characteristic
emphasized by Raymond Aron
(1962) to identify the specific
nature of international relations.
3. O n e might in that case
speculate whether it would not
be preferable to see
international relations as the
expression—at a given m o m e n t
in history—of the development
of a world system—which would
thus become the object of study.
See, for example, Immanuel
Wallerstein's works in which he
sets out to develop a theory of
world systems, in particular The
Capitalist World Economy,
1979. Thus the possible
disappearance of state entities
would not m a k e the object
640
studied a dead letter, being just
one stage in the evolution of a
social system. While not denying
the danger of a reductionistic
approach seeing all international
relations merely in terms of state
entities, and therefore while
acknowledging the merits of a
systems approach of this kind
(see m y work Théorie des
systèmes et relations
internationales, 1977), I do not
think it possible—without
resorting to another form of
reductionism—to overlook the
fact that the state is a structuring
element in international affairs.
4. See Bedjaoui, 1979, on the
subject.
. Orders . . .', 1981, p. 129.
5. See Morin's comments in
Science avec conscience (1982,
p. 273).
6. See in this connection the
comments by McGranahan
(1974).
7. O n the paradigm concept,
see K u h n , 1972.
8. See, for example,
Morgenthau, 1955.
9. See Mitrany, 1946.
10. See Haas, 1964.
11. See Burton, 1969.
12. See Morse, 1969.
13. See, for example, the
Brandt Commission report, 1980.
14. See the work by Jalée, 1973.
O n the various theories of
imperialism, see Braillard and
de Sénarclens, 1981.
15. See, for example,
Wallerstein, 1974.
16. See in this connection the
highly pertinent comments by
Ralph Dahrendorf (1967,
p. 486), w h o stresses the
necessary complementarity of
the co-operative and conflictual
models in the study of society.
17. O n this fallacious argument,
Knorr and Rosenau, 1969, m a y
be consulted.
18. See on this point m y Théorie
des relations internationales,
1977, pp. 21-2.
19. cf. Piaget, 1970, p. 45.
20. See Habermas, 1976.
21. Cox speaks of 'problem-
solving theories'. See his study
'Social Forces, States and World
22. See Himmelstrand's
comments (1982, p. 542). It
m a y also be noted that in the
development of peace research
in Europe over the past twenty
years there has been, at the
instigation of Johan Galtung in
particular, an attempt to adopt a
genuine critical attitude, which
has strongly influenced the study
of international conflicts.
23. See m y work Théorie des
systèmes . . ., op. cit.,
pp. 99-101. This conservative
trend is not, however, in m y
view inherent in the system
concept itself.
24. See Burton, 1968, Chapters
VI and VII.
25. See Peccei, 1976, pp. 128-9.
26. See Peccei, 1975, p. 75.
27. See, in particular, M e a d o w s
et al., 1972; Mesarovic and
Pestel, 1974.
28. See m y work, L'imposture
du Club de Rome, 1982.
Philippe Braillard
29. See, for example, Singer
and Small, 1962.
30. See Snyder, Brück and
Sapin (eds.), 1962; Rosenau,
1971.
31. See Allison, 1971.
32. For example, the sociology
of conflicts as seen by Gaston
Bouthoul, w h o , in the final
analysis, reduces conflictual
interaction to population
dynamics (1970).
33. This is w h y the various
analyses made until n o w of the
stability of international systems
seen from the standpoint of their
polarity are so unconvincing.
See for example: Deutsch and
Singer, 1964; Waltz, 1964; Haas,
1970.
34. O n e of the attendant
dangers in trying to ascertain
such laws lies in adopting a
teleological approach whereby,
it is thought, an evolving process
can be explained and justified by
its outcome, as has often been
done by the advocates of
functionalistic analysis.
35. See on this subject the
highly pertinent comments by
Boudon and Bourricaud in their
Dictionnaire critique de la
sociologie, 1982, pp. 261-7.
36. See Preiswerk's comments
in 'La place des relations
interculturelles . . .', 1975. The
study of foreign policy is a field
that illustrates particularly well
this negation of the cultural
specificity of the societies
constituting the international
system. See on this subject
Korany's comments (1974).
The social sciences and the study of international relations
References
A L L I S O N , G . 1971. The Essence
of Decision. Explaining the
Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston,
Mass., Little B r o w n .
A R O N , R . 1962. Paix et guerre
entre les nations. Paris,
Calmann-Lévy.
B E D J A O U I , M . 1979. Pour un
nouvel ordre économique
international. Paris, Unesco.
B O U D O N , R . ; B O U R R I C A U D , F.
Dictionnaire critique de la
sociologie. 1982. Paris, Presses
Universitaires de France.
B O U T H O U L , G . 1970.
L'infanticide différé. Paris,
Hachette.
B R A I L L A R D , P . 1977. Théorie
des systèmes et relations
internationales. Brussels,
Bruylant.
. 1977. Théorie des relations
internationales. Paris, Presses
Universitaires de France.
(Thémis series.)
. 1982. L'imposture du Club
de Rome. Paris, Presses
Universitaires de France.
(Politique d'aujourd'hui
series.)
BRAILLARD, P.; SÉNARCLENS,
P. D E . 1981. L'impérialisme.
Paris, Presses Universitaires de
France. (Que sais-je?
N o . 1816.)
B R A N D T COMMISSION. 1980.
Nord-Sud? Un programme de
survie. Paris, Gallimard.
B U R T O N , J. 1968. Systems,
States, Diplomacy and Rules.
Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press.
. 1969. Conflict and
Communication. The Use of
Controlled Communication in
International Relations. L o n d o n ,
Macmillan.
C o x , R . 1981. Social Forces,
States and World Orders:
Beyond International Relations
Theory. Millennium, Vol. 10.
D A H R E N D O R F , R . 1967. Out of
Utopia. Toward a Reorientation
of Sociological Analysis. In:
N . J. Demerath III and
R . A . Peterson (eds.) Systems,
Change and Conflict. A Reader
on Contemporary Sociological
Theory and the Debate over
Functionalism. N e w York, Free
Press.
D E U T S C H , K . ; SINGER, J. D .
1964. Multipolar Power Systems
and International Stability.
World Politics, Vol. 16,
pp. 390-406.
H A A S , E . B . 1964. Beyond the
Nation-State. Functionalism and
International Organization.
Stanford, Calif., Stanford
University Press.
H A A S , M . 1970. International
Subsystem: Stability and
Polarity. American Political
Science Review, Vol. 64,
pp. 98-123.
H A B E R M A S , J. 1976.
Connaissance et intérêt. Paris,
Gallimard.
H I M M E L S T R A N D , U . 1982.
Ideology, Science and Policy
Impact: Thought on the Task
and Challenges of the Social
Sciences. International Social
Science Journal, Vol. X X X I V ,
N o . 3. 1982.
H O F F M A N N , S. (ed.) 1960.
Contemporary Theory in
International Relations.
Englewood Cliffs, N . J . ,
Prentice-Hall.
J A L E E , P . 1973. Le pillage du
Tiers Monde. Paris, Maspéro.
K N O R R , K ; R O S E N A U , J. (eds).
1969. Contending Approaches to des sciences de l'homme.
International Politics, Princeton, Gallimard.
641
N . J . , Princeton University
Press.
K O R A N Y , B . 1974. Foreign
Policy Models and Their
Empirical Relevance to Third-
World Actors: A Critique and
an Alternative. International
Social Science Journal,
Vol. X X V I , N o . 1,
pp. 70-94.
K U H N , T . 1972; La structure des
révolutions scientifiques. Paris,
Flammarion.
M C G R A N A H A N , D . V . 1974.
Notes on Development
Research by International
Organizations. International
Social Science Journal,
Vol. X X V I , N o . 3, p p . 519-20.
M E A D O W S , D . et al. 1972. Halte
à la croissance? Paris, Fayard.
M E S A R O V I C , M . ; PESTEL, E .
1974. Stratégie pour demain.
Paris, Seuil.
M I T R A N Y , D . 1946. A Working
Peace System, An Argument for
the Functional Development of
International Organization. 4th
ed. London, National Peace
Council.
MORGENTHAU, H . 1955. Politics
Among Nations. The Struggle
for Power and Peace. 2nd ed.
N e w York, Alfred A . Knopf.
M O R I N , E . 1982. Science avec
conscience. Paris, Fayard.
M O R S E , D . 1969. T h e Politics of
Interdependence. International
Organization, Vol. 2 3 ,
pp. 311-26.
P E C C E I , A . 1975. L'heure de la
vérité. Paris, Fayard.
. 1976. La qualité humaine.
Paris, Stock.
P I A G E T , J. 1970. Épistémologie
Paris,
642 Philippe Braillard

P R E I S W E R K , R . 1975. ' L a place Handbook. N e w York, Wiley. W A L L E R S T E I N , I. 1974. The

des relations interculturelles Modern World System. N e w
dans l'étude des relations SNYDER, R. C ; BRÜCK, H . W . ; York, Academic Press.
internationales', Cahiers de S A P I N , B . (eds.) 1962. Foreign
l'Institut d'Études du Policy Decision-making. An
Développement, 2, pp. 15-36. Approach to the Study of . 1979. The Capitalist World
International Politics. N e w Economy. N e w York,
R O S E N A U , J. N . 1971. The York, Free Press of Glencoe. Cambridge University Press.
Scientific Study of Foreign
Policy. N e w York, Free Press. T A Y L O R , T . (ed.) 1978.
Approaches and Theory in W A L T Z , K . 1964. 'The Stability
SINGER, D . ; SMALL, M . 1962. International Relations. London, of a Bi-polar World', Daedalus,
The Wages of War. A Statistical Longman. pp. 881-909.
T h e institutionalization
of sociology in France:
its social and political significance

Edmund Burke III

Introduction: consequences. M y argument is that the insti-

structures, discourses, crises tutionalization of a n e w discipline is not
simply the result of strong ideas, strong
personalities and money—to take a prevailing
H o w d o disciplines b e c o m e established, im- notion—but that it must be situated in its
pose their authority and decline? These particular political and intellectual context.
questions are central to the sociology of T h e results of reconstructing the origins of
knowledge, and have renewed relevance disciplines and schools of thought can often be
today. Perhaps because our o w n time is a surprising, as a consideration of the case of
m o m e n t of' intellectual openness and epis- the Durkheim school in France in the period
temological self-con- 1880-1914 m a k e s clear.
sciousness, in which T h e autonomous de-
the boundaries between Edmund Burke III is professor of velopment of colonial
disciplines are blurred history and director of the Compara- sociology in France in
tive and International Studies re- the same period points to
and the governing para- search activity at the University of
digms are being called California, Santa Cruz. H e is the a de facto division of
into question, concerns author of Prelude to Protectorate in labour within the field,
about the origins of the Morocco: Patterns of Protest and and constitutes our sec-
m o d e r n social sciences Resistance (1977) and (co-editor with ond topic of discussion.
Ira Lapidus) Islam and Social Move- Here I shall be particu-
and their impact upon ments (in press).
society are at the centre larly concerned with
of intellectual discussion. tracing the emergence
In this m o m e n t of open- of the field of the soci-
ness, the basic presuppo- ology of Islam. A n insig-
sitions of social thought nificant back eddy in the
stand revealed with onrushing stream of Pari-
special clarity, and it is possible to trace the sian science, the sociology of Islam was none
formation and crystallization of disciplines, the less tied into metropolitan politics in ways
and the discourses to which they have given that had a direct bearing upon the nature of
rise.1 its production. Ideologically saturated but
intellectually flabby, the discourse of the
Through an examination of the develop-
sociology of Islam was none the less politically
ment of the discipline of sociology in France
powerful. H o w authoritative discourses are
in the period 1880-1925 this article seeks to
generated, h o w they impose themselves, and
shed light o n s o m e of the more general
with what effect are all subjects that can be
processes at work in the institutionalization of
examined through the study of this case.
the social sciences, and its social and political