an introduction to theories of
international relations
an introduction to pluralism
nicholson on pluralism
“Pluralists argue that international activity is not just
a matter of the behaviour of states but of other
actors too. Further, but logically separate, they
argue that states are not quite as security and
power conscious as the realists make out. For
example, economic issues are issues in their
own right” (p. 99)
basic tenets of pluralism
to repeat: states may be central actors, but they are not the only
significant actors in world politics
the struggle for power among states is a central process in world
affairs, but not the only important process: economics is equally
if not more important, but ideology, culture and religion are
also (potentially) very important
conflict and violence are key concerns in world affairs, but they do not
define world affairs: cooperation, positive-sum relations, and
peace (not built on a balance of power) are as important
basic tenets of pluralism: anarchy
key implication. if anarchy is relatively “weak,” the struggle for power
among states may become a secondary or even tertiary, rather than
overriding, concern
… and when the struggle for power becomes less important, the nature
of international relations is subject to significant change
on this point, consider the …
basic tenets of pluralism: anarchy
… the dynamics of the world today: there is no arms race among major
powers; there is no “balance of power” or significant rebalancing
taking place (we live in a unipolar system); and there is no constant
struggle for power among the major countries
basic tenets of pluralism: anarchy
realism (critics argue) has no logically consistent explanation …
basic tenets of pluralism
pluralists have always been skeptical of the overriding power attached
to anarchy; but, they have also been skeptical of the assumption of
state rationality and coherence; they
tell us that …
states are not monolithic and states
cannot be isolated from their societies; this
means other actors (within and outside the
state) have always played a role in
shaping international relations
Executive
Branch
Others
Social
classes
Congress
International
Relations
Various
state
agencies
TNCs
NGOs
Movements
INGOs
pluralism tells us that a range of
actors with varying interests
and degrees of power
plays different roles in
shaping state policies
and interstate relations
moreover, in this view, we
should expect that the
range, power, and roles
of various groups varies
depending on regime type—a key point
basic tenets of pluralism
pluralism is a generic concept: it simply tells us that multiple actors
play a role in shaping international relations
this is an important notion, but it is incomplete: we also need to
know something about the actors themselves …
are all actors motivated by the same basic set of interests?
do all actors exercise power in the same way?
in short, are all actors basically the same?
basic tenets of pluralism
the quick answer is no
in pluralism, there is an assumption of rationality—or self-interest–
among actors, but there is also an understanding that their selfinterests are not premised on the same overriding “national interest”
simply put, different actors have different interests what are the implications of this simple, yet
important assumption?
what are the implications of this simple, yet
important assumption?
actors compete to shape policy and influence the state; they compete
with one another, but also with the “state”
actors’ interests are not necessarily “national interests,” even when
framed as such; moreover, the concept of national interests becomes
open to interpretation
the competition to shape policy can create contradictions
and inconsistencies: international politics becomes much
more complex and complicated
basic tenets of pluralism: domestic politics
the existence of competing actors with divergent interests is the
basis for a tightly related approach in international relations
(discussed very briefly by walt): domestic politics
the domestic politics approach focuses on the interactions of a variety
of actors within and outside the state, but also considers the role of the
media, public opinion, decision-making processes with small groups
and larger organizations, cognitive factors, and so on this approach is not given much attention by IR scholars per se,
but is a focus of attention in foreign policy analysis shifting gears … pluralism does not stand alone
any discussion of pluralism invariably (not not necessarily) leads
us to a discussion of another theoretical perspective common
to international relations …
pluralism and liberalism pluralism did not develop in a theoretical vacuum
to a very large extent, its development has been premised on the
development of a closely related perspective: liberalism
basic tenets of liberalism
to put it in the simplest terms, liberalism is respect for and recognition of
individual rights, or as one scholar puts it, is a philosophy based on
a belief in the ultimate value of individual liberty
and the possibility of human progress
liberals contend that the recognition
of individual rights laid the groundwork
for genuine pluralism (thus the connection);
they also contend that liberal ideas
themselves are a profoundly powerful
force in the world, which have the potential
to reshape international politics in a
fundamental way: put simply, ideas matter
basic tenets of liberalism
liberalism tells us that the idea of individual rights—which is the
basis for democracy, human rights, and market capitalism—will
change international politics, for, like individuals, states have
different characteristics: some are bellicose and war-prone, some
are tolerant and peaceful. these characteristics, more importantly,
are systematically related to the underlying values of particular
political systems more formally, liberal theory treats the domestic circumstances of states
as crucial variables in explaining their international behavior: this is,
perhaps the key difference between liberalism and realism
international system
anarchic
domestic system
hierarchic
realists assume the line between the domestic and international can
never be crossed; liberals argue that it can be crossed, meaning that
the ideas that originated inside liberal states can be extended to the
international realm
liberals, in short, believe in the domestic analogy: what is true of the
domestic system, can be true of the international system
basic tenets of liberalism
consider the “liberal zone of peace”: based on the democratic peace
thesis, which posits that democracies don’t fight other democracies
(because of the values, principles and practices upon which
democracies operate)
this map shows democratic
and non-democratic regimes
in the world today: those in
blue and light blue constitute
the “zone of peace”
basic tenets of liberalism
there are many critics of the democratic peace thesis—kenneth waltz and
other realists are particularly skeptical. but, it is not just realists. some
liberals, too, question whether it is democracy that creates the basis
for peace: it could be wealth or economic interdependence or
something else …
whatever the precise factor,
it is important to understand
that liberalism is still premised
on an underlying rationality
of actors to avoid conflict
basic tenets of liberalism: additional implications
liberalism implies that rationality dictates, not just an individual
struggle for power and survival, but a collective or
transnational struggle as well liberalism, in other words, recognize that states understand the
need to work together--not just intermittently, but continually—
to achieve their goals these factors, in turn, have a particularly important and
concrete manifestation: international institutions and
organizations
basic tenets of liberalism: additional implications
unlike realism, liberalism argues that international organizations and
regimes are essential building blocks of international society
the united nations, world trade organization, the non-proliferation
treaty, the international convention against torture, the framework
convention on climate change, etc.: there are all concrete
manifestations of the need for and fundamental rationality of
international cooperation