Analysis of “The Dangerous Decade” article from an International

Relations Realist and Liberal perspective

Manuel A. Alvarez

International Programme in politics and economics, University West

IPA100: International Politics and Globalization

Dr. Tubina Inal

December 7, 2022

1
Realist International Relations (I.R.) Theory

Realism is an I.R. theory that regards the disruptions in the balance of power as the
primary causal factor for the existence of conflicts. According to realism, a balance in power
explains the existence of periods of peace, whereas an imbalance in power explains the
emergence of conflicts. Realism regards nation-states as the main actors in I.R. and considers
them compact units with a homogenous set of interests and preferences. Realism also posits that
the international scene is anarchical, where no overarching structure has the ability or the
legitimacy to enforce a set of norms upon the actors. Moreover, realists argue that anarchy gives
rise to a “war of all against all” situation where each nation-state must do everything within its
grasp to guarantee its survival. In this sense, realism can be described as a materialist I.R. theory,
where the state’s material situation and survival capacity are of paramount importance.

Liberal International Relations Theory

Liberalism is a political and economic I.R. theory that regards the proper function of
domestic and international institutions as the main causal explanation for peace and prosperity.
Liberalism regards individuals and social groups as the fundamental actors, who are rational
utility maximizers that can associate in all sorts of organizations and institutions that may
influence the political landscape. Liberals argue that the anarchical international scene does not
necessarily lead to a “war of all against all”; according to liberal I.R. theory, the existence of a
complex network of institutions may regulate the actions of states and facilitate cooperation by
reducing uncertainty and distrust. This institutional framework softens relations between states
and allows for peaceful commercial relations. More so, liberals argue that widespread trade
creates interdependence between nation-states, reducing the probability of war by substantially
increasing the costs that the conflict would entail (Economic Mutually Assured destruction).
Liberalism is also considered a materialist I.R. theory since it takes actors as self-interested
utility maximizers concerned primarily with their material sustenance.

Main arguments of the article

The article’s central thesis can be summarized in the following quote “old and new
threats that have begun to intersect at a moment the United States is ill positioned to contend
with them” (Haass, 2022, p. 1). In this sense, Haass points to several challenges the U.S. faces in

2
the process of developing an effective and stabilizing foreign policy: the situation in Ukraine and
the problem with Russian expansionism; China’s preeminence in the global markets as well as its
possible threats to the territorial sovereignty of Taiwan; Iran’s steps towards the development of
a nuclear program and the potential instability this could unleash in the Middle East; challenges
requiring a coordinated global action such as climate change and future pandemics; and finally,
the looming threat on internal stability in the U.S. due to the emerging distrust of democratic
institutions and the aggravation of social and economic problems. Also, the actions of recent
U.S. administrations on the global scene have debilitated their image among the international
community.

All these challenges amount to an incredibly complex and seemingly unsurmountable

situation. Nevertheless, Haass provides the reader with a series of measures the U.S. could
implement as a way through this crossroads: build strong alliances to deter Russian and Chinese
aggressions, as well as selective partnerships to address in a coordinated manner challenges such
as climate change and global pandemics; concentrating on promoting democracy in U.S. territory
before trying to spread democracy around the world; strategically rearrange the economic
relations with China, in order to reduce U.S.’ dependence on China’s imports, making it easier to
stand up to them; work to guarantee Ukraine’s territorial integrity providing extensive support to
the Ukrainian people; assert its determination to coordinate a forceful response in the event of
China moving against Taiwan. Haass offers these, among other measures, to redirect U.S.
foreign policy back to a stable and manageable world order.

Examples of Liberal arguments

(1) In the article, Haass mentions the period during the Gulf War when the international
community under the “aegis of the United Nations” (Haass, 2022, p. 2), including China
and Russia, coordinated a response to the aggression coming from the Iraqi government
and guaranteed the independence of Kuwait at a minimal cost. This event illustrates how
Liberalism conceptualizes the cooperation between nation-states within the institutional
framework of the U.N. in order to uphold peace and international security principles in
the context of an emerging conflict and a breach of international law, in this case by the
Iraqi government. This would represent the ideal response to such a situation according to
liberal foreign policymaking. However, in the Ukraine crisis, what unfolds is very

3
 different since the great powers have rivaling interests and desire conflicting outcomes
from the situation.

(2) According to the author, the U.S. should work to institute a ban on natural gas exports
from Russia to Europe, as a major economic sanction on Putin’s regime, while offering a
relief of such sanctions to a new regime that substitutes Putin in exchange for reducing or
ending Russian presence in Ukraine. This constitutes a Liberal approach to foreign policy
since this is a way of regulating Russia’s behavior within the institutional framework of
international treaties and coordinated sanctions to reduce the need for armed conflict and
deter Russia from its aggression. However, the author recognizes that this alone would
not be enough to guarantee the territorial integrity of Ukraine and that “extensive military
and economic support” (Haass, 2022, p. 7) is also required.

Examples of Realist arguments

(1) Haass states in the article: “a preference for democracy and human rights is one thing, but
a foreign policy based on such a preference in a world denned by geopolitics and global
challenges is unwise and unsustainable.” (Haass, 2022, p. 8). This can be considered a
realist argument since Realpolitik involves the primacy of the state’s interests over
considerations about morality or human rights. In this sense, a realist approach to foreign
policy would advise building alliances when convenient and obtaining natural resources
where possible, placing the positive humanitarian image of the state as a secondary
concern.

(2) Haass argues that, regarding the situation with Taiwan, the U.S. should assert its
determination to coordinate a forceful response in the event of China moving against
Taiwan. Otherwise, every American ally would start questioning their security
dependence on the U.S., leading them to band-wagon with China or develop nuclear
weapons to guarantee their autonomy, further debilitating U.S. preeminence. This is an
argument for a realist approach to foreign policy, where the state in question should
demonstrate that it is willing to use force, when necessary, in order to signal strength and
military readiness.

4
References

Haass, R. (2022). The Dangerous Decade [Electronic]. Foreign Affairs, vol. 101(5), pp. 25-38.
Available: Academic Search Premier [2022-03-12].