Unit Two: Realist Theory and IPE

Dr. Russell Williams

Required Reading:

Cohn, Global Political Economy, Ch. 3.

Class Discussion Reading:

Susan Strange, The Future of the American

Empire, Journal of International Affairs, Fall 1988,
Vol. 42 Issue 1, pp. 1-17.

Outline:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Realism the Basics

Implications of Realism for State Behavior
Realist Approaches to IPE
Modern Realism and IPE - Hegemonic Stability
Theory
Conclusion
Further Reading

1) Realism the Basics:

Dominant approach to the study of IR, but less important in

IPE?

States are key actor

E.g. IOs and MNCs often only extensions of state
power

States are:
Unitary - Domestic politics and interests less important
Rational - States pursue predictable strategies based
on calculations of self interest
Survival
Power
Sovereignty - Internal and external
Global politics is a self help system states must look after
themselves

Politics more important than economics

Economics only important topic when it relates to state
power

Skepticism about international law, rules, regimes and

values
Rules are for the weak. . . .

Skepticism about cooperation

States only cooperate when then they gain more than
others
= little cooperation under normal circumstances?

Realism parsimonious
Has few variables and leads to clear predictions

Realist Theories of International Relations

(IR):
Avoid overgeneralization not one single
theory
i) Classical Realism: (Machiavelli to Morgenthau)
Human nature is bad - hard to trust others
Reject liberal views of human nature
Therefore, other states are an inherent threat

E.g. Hobbes State of nature

Makes a virtue of pursuit of power
Other theories seen as idealism (E.H. Carr)

ii) Structural Realism (1970-Present)

Waltz, Grieco and Mearsheimer

More scientific - explored where threats came

from
Three images
Human nature?
Domestic Politics?
International Structure lack of
Government?

= International Structure matters!!!

Global anarchy means states have to be
amoral in the pursuit of power
Only two independent variables:

Anarchy
Distribution of power in the interstate system

Large impact on policymakers in US

More role for economics . . . (E.g. Thucydides)

2) Implications for State Behavior:

a) The Security Dilemma: Security and
pursuit of power is a zero sum game

Any increase in my security or power means a

decrease for others . . .
= Cooperation unlikely

b) Relative gains more important then

absolute gains

States only cooperate to pursue relative

advantages over others
=E.g. IOs seen as tools of powerful states which hurt
the interests of weaker states

c) State policy driven by international structure

and position in the global balance of
power

Powerful states will pursue different strategies

from weak try to ensure the status quo
=E.g. Only economically powerful support free trade

Bottom Line:
Cooperation difficult
States unlikely to expose themselves
to interdependence

3) Realist Approaches to IPE

a) Proto-realism and economics:

Most classical realists integrated international

economics in their analysis.

Economics seen as a source of conflict and war

E.g. Imperialism

Economy important to state power

E.g. Thucydides and the Athenians

E.g. Machievelli

b) Mercantilism (16th to 18th Century)

Classical mercantilism:

States power dependent on treasure

Gold is key to power of emerging sovereign
states
States seek to increase their holdings of gold
and silver through:

Conquest and colonies

Increase exports, decrease imports

Problems?

c) Economic Nationalism and Neo

Mercantilism:

19th and 20th century and beyond . . .

Industrialization seen as key economic goal

Necessary to independence (sovereignty)

Essential to military power (security)

States need industrial development to survive

(Friedrich List)

States should:
Adopt high tariffs (protectionism)
Encourage development of national industries

4) Modern Realism and IPE:

Post War Period:

Liberal free trade collapsed prior to WWII Economic

nationalism

Post War Realists believed economic cooperation had to

be enforced by dominant states

Could reduce threats and conflict

Breton Woods system and free trade possible because:

US military and economic dominance
Threat of the Soviet Union = other states had no choice but to
cooperate

1970s - Post War System under stress:

Economic crises = Post War liberal economic order

under threat????
US

decline?
US economy relatively smaller
Economic success of Germany and Japan

OPEC
Global

economic slowdown

Financial

instability = end of dollar standard

Dtente decline of the cold war

Result: Realists begin to pay more attention to

economics
=Declining economic cooperation in north and era of
the new protectionism

Hegemonic Stability Theory (HST):

1980s realists argue, politics still dominant over economics

=Economic cooperation becoming more difficult because
of declining US power

Hegemony (in Realism): Leadership, or dominance, of

international system by single state

HST assumes:
Like liberalism, free trade and globalization good in
theory, but unlikely to occur because states mistrust one
another under conditions of anarchy

Free trade and economic cooperation seen as public

goods
Non excludible and non rival
=Free riders = collective action problems

Hegemonic Stability Theory (HST):

Hegemonic state can either:

Provide public goods itself - So dominant economically
that it is in its interest to do so . . . .
Force free riders to pay for public goods

Key claim: Hegemony = Liberal economic order

Problems:

What is hegemony????
Economic or military?
Soft Power or ideology?
How do we know when a state is hegemonic, or the world
is uni-polar?

Hegemonic Stability Theory (HST):

Problems:
1) Risk of tautology
Reading off the dependent variable
2) Empirical record?
If US had declined by 1980s, why globalisation?

Contemporary Realism:

Retreat to High Politics?

Post 9/11 return to emphasis on security and
military conflict
Economic issues have been securitized

Conclusions :
a) Strengths of Realism:
Parsimony (?)
Focus on distributional outcomes who gains
what . . . .
Rejection of idealistic prescriptions of how the
world should be

b) Weaknesses of Realism:
Domestic politics?
Under emphasis of importance of wealth and
economics?
Empirical problems?
There seems to be a lot more economic
cooperation then realists assumed likely . . . .

Does

HST overcome this problem?

Further Reading:

Samuel P. Huntington, The Lonely Superpower, Foreign

Affairs, 78-2 (March/April 1999), pp. 35-49.

Example of realist analysis of contemporary US challenges.

Joseph M. Grieco, Anarchy and the Limits of

Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal
Institutionalism, International Organization, 42-3
(Summer 1988), pp. 485-507.
John J. Mearsheimer, The False Promise of
International Institutions, International Security, 19-3
(Winter 1994/95), pp. 5-49.

Examples of realisms critiques of liberal challengers

For Next Time:

Unit Three: Thinking Liberally - Diversity
and Hegemony in IPE

Required Reading:

Cohn, Ch. 4.

Class Discussion Reading:

Eric Helleiner, Economic Liberalism and Its

Critics: The Past as Prologue?, Review of
International Political Economy, 10-4
(November 2003), pp. 685-696.