UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Towards realism in international political theory : a defense Griffiths, Martin 1990

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-UBC_1990_A1 G74.pdf [ 12.55MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0098753.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0098753-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0098753-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0098753-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0098753-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0098753-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0098753-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

TOWARDS REAL ISM  IN  INTERNATIONAL  A  By  B.Sc.f  The M.A.,  A  THESIS  POLITICAL  THEORY:  DEFENSE  Martin  Griffiths  London School The University  SUBMITTED  IN  Economics, 1984 Keele, 1995  PARTIAL  THE REQUIREMENTS DOCTOR  of of  FOR  OF  FULFILMENT  THE DEGREE  OF  PHILOSOPHY in  THE FACULTY  OF GRADUATE  (Department Me accept to  of this  the  Political thesis  Science) as  required  THE UNIVERSITY  ©Martin  conforming standard  OF BRITISH  January  STUDIES  1990 Griffiths  COLUMBIA  OF  In  presenting this  degree at the  thesis  in  University of  partial  fulfilment  of  of  department  this thesis for or  by  his  or  requirements  British Columbia, I agree that the  freely available for reference and study. I further copying  the  representatives.  an advanced  Library shall make  it  agree that permission for extensive  scholarly purposes may be her  for  It  is  granted  by the  understood  that  head of copying  my or  publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department  of  7%>£/ TSCrfd-  SCt£/^CQ  The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada  Date  DE-6 (2/88)  2/ , S??Q.  .  Abstract  In  the discipline  "realism" usage,  has been  of International severed  and is attributed  which  international  conflict  from  is essential  environment.  associated  with  this  approach  Waltz.  This  realism  is not a meaningless  redundant  argues,  as an attribute  politics.  I argue  that  two "grand  merit  Instead,  are  the label.  more appropriate!y  to Morgenthau of  case) the  complacent "Brotian"  case)  approach  more deserving  (London,  of the terms  Berki  1981).  argues  presupposes  that that  that  to the study  realism "reality"  nor is it  applied  concludes In  from  the  and  (in  to  does  not  that  they  contrast shortcomings Waltz's  what is referred  of international  based  "political  in Robert  Consistent  that  to as  politics  is  "realism."  is explicitly  ideal ism" contained  idealism  I argue  of the label  The argument the meaning  nostalgic  ideal ism,  wisdom,  as idealists.  whose work suffers  in an  Kenneth  whose approach  dissertation  of  international  inappropriately  characterised  and Waltz,  (in Morgenthau's  about  theorists"  this  and  in common parlance,  it has been  the work of these  realm  theorists  to conventional  of thought  to  among states  are Hans Morgenthau  term  ordinary  according  post-war  contrary  term  1y an asocial  and power  The two main  the with  of thought  for security  anarchical  thesis  its association  to a school  politics  and struggles  Relations,  real ism" and  Berki's with  on the interpretation  of  "political  book, On Political  the logic  is an attribute is the dialectical  of ordinary of thought interplay  Realism usage, which between  necessity in  and  contrast,  and  the reification are  evaluative  (the  "idealism  bifurcation In  light  stance  defended  of nostalgia  of imagination"). these  and  as a more realistic  provided  leading or  transcends  to  revolution  the  false  extremes.  politics  about  These  practice  and complacency, Realism  to international as a social  presupposition,  or freedom.  upon political  's analysis,  systematically that  imposed  Idealism,  of this  necessity  of Berki  heterogeneity  than  then  and opportunities. denial  of either  between  approach  constraints  is the ontological  abstractions an  freedom,  Bull's  - which  "rule-governed" starting-point  the source  by either  Hedley  Morgenthau  recognizes domain for  and nature or  theoretical  of order Waltz.  its - is  thinking among  states  o  iv  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS  Abstract Acknowledgements  ii v  1.  INTRODUCTION  1  2.  REALISM  VERSUS  3.  HANS  J.  MORGENTHAU:  THEORY  4.  HANS  J.  MORGENTHAU:  A CRITICAL  5.  KENNETH  N.  WALTZ:  THEORY  6.  KENNETH  N.  WALTZ:  A CRITICAL  7.  HEDLEY  BULL:  THEORY  8.  HEDLEY  BULL:  A CRITICAL  9.  CONCLUSIONS  BIBLIOGRAPHY  IDEALISMS:  AS  A FRAMEWORK  AS  AS  TRUTH ANALYSIS  SCIENCE ANALYSIS  FOR  ANALYSIS  19 46 83 Ill 149  TRADITION  193  ANALYSIS  232 .251 258  V  AcknowJedgements  I would like to acknowledge, with gratitude, the following people: Kal Holsti, my supervisor, for allowing me the freedom to roam far and wide in search of realism; Mark Zacher, whose support and encouragement never wavered, despite my own doubts; and Bob Jackson, for his consistently careful reading of the text and generous advice for improving it. On a more personal note, my thanks to Rodolfo, whose companionship and competitiveness enabled me to finish sooner than I had expected. To Kylie, a special thank you for putting up with me for the last year. And finally, to my parents, who made it all possible.  1  CHAPTER  ONE;  INTRODUCTION  We cannot discover what is meaningful to us by means of a "presuppositionless" investigation of empirical data. Rather, perception of its meaning fulness is the presupposition of its becoming an object of investigation. Max Weber Of course,  I should  The meaning  not dream  of quarrelling  of a word is its use in a  about  a term.  Karl  Popper  But...  language. Ludwig  Wittgenstein  Introduction Every  attempt  among states fatality. reflect  must struggle Students  reflects  is not  paradigm It  to deny  to which  separating  substitution  against the realm  the existence the domestic  to acknowledge  attempts of  analogy  the nature the impact  rarely  pause  to to  politics" of  is  words  to blur  the attribute  is an  as a  attached  "domestic"  of a tradition  politics  disguised  "international  as it is with  for comprehending  is merely  harmless  of  in the label  the phrase  prejudice  graced  relations"  implicit  The seemingly  boundary  "international,"  according  that  a traditional  conceptual  an assumption  of "international  subject-matter,  an oxymoron.  of the distinctiveness  against  on the presupposition,  their  This  to conceive  the  and  of real ism. of  thought  inappropriate  of international of an assumption  politics. which  2 continues study, the  to dominate I will  critically  assumption,  reasoning the  in order  think  that  This  politics  title  dissertation  hand, what  follows  international from in  the following  be  understood  Alan  James'  Realism,  manner.  actors)  rather terminology,  and their  realism,  therefore,  opposed  to idealism.  Based  apply  I refer  of and relationship  of states  it in a critical  these  of three  ought  about  to  the  of thought.  rather  than  In  large-r-  ontological (unitary  rational  politics).  of such  By  s  thought  is explicitly  or conceptual  analysis  "realism"  school  (power  to a quality  between  understood  and  of thought  to certain  The argument  of  I mean how realism  mode of association  on one interpretation,  meaning  "defence"  small-r—realism  the nature  On the one  in the study  a designated  refers  Thus the  ambiguous.  as an attribute  the latter  regarding  the terms  us  of  hand, it must be  By defence,  than  from  and I am  fruitful.  of realism  of  in predisposing  in the study  On the other I employ  process  politics,  is deliberately  and applied  where  assumptions  for realism  this  underlying  of realism  matter  international  is a defence  that  subject-matter,  labels  In  rationales  is not particulary  politics.  the outset  several  the attribute  ways about  what passes  in the field.*  it via a circuitous  is because  international of this  thinking  to disconnect  in certain  convinced  explore  and undermine  assumption.  to  mainstream  derivative.  analysis, terms, "grand  as  this  of the study  theorists"  will of  1. On this point, see John A. Vasquez, The Power of Power Politics (New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1983). 2. Alan James, "The realism of Realism: The State and the Study of International Relations, " Review of International Studies, Vol. 15, No. 3 (July 1989), pp~. 215-229.  3 international  politics  Hedley  Bull.  The  claim.  As  idealism,  Hence  through  and  utility  of  are  meaning less,  not  immediately and  Meaning  yet  and  Real ism,  perhaps  realism His  it has  Berki  3  and  goal  is  Feinberg's  to arrive,  effectively, appropriating  these  words, avoid  I refer  is not  concerned  or international been  ignored  provides  ideal ism  when we employ  to which which  politics why  relations.  and  part  to Socratic evaluative  realism.  are  in  These  meaning  terms  is  of common  not parlance  Language  international is  they  adopted  (in the  their  of  work as a  is simply  the heuristic  though  will  discourse.  The interpretation Political  My goal  the same time  I  a form  of realism  of political  at  even  Bull's  argument  critique,  or so  representing  Hedley  title.  interpretation  obvious  everyday  the  and  Morgenthau  Waltz  selected  a dialectical  of exegesis this  writers,  and  Waltz,  idealists,  to the interpretation  dissertation.  demonstrate  to these  I have  Kenneth  political  idealism  approximation  sense)  two are  nostalgic  complacent  this  first  a counterpoint  representing  closer  - Hans Morgenthau,  Berki's  a conceptual  terms,  and  of of  the  terms usage.  understanding  achieve  3. Robert Nandor Berki, On Political & Sons, 1981). 4. James Feinberg, Social Philosophy Prentice-Hal 1, 1973), p.2.  international  is ordinary  mean if we are  interpretation  which  on what is normal 1y meant  at a better  better  theory,  analysis  point  On  with  political  via reflecting  paradox,  either  by students  whose departure  "we had  is R. N. Berki's  general  and  (Englewood  communicate  coherence.  applying  Realism  to  of what, in  his  (London: Cliffs,  "•*  By  categories J.M.  Dent  N.J.:  4 to  international  terms  political  realism  consistent  and with  responsible  puts  it,  is "as  reformists  ism  how  they  the  terms'  for  (obfuscation  ideal  theory,  closer  were  to  stripe,  understand  the  world  as  foundation  Cor  rather,  wishing  which,  breakdown its  of  be  the to  the  his  historic  to  reiterates  international in  view  this  realism  and  "real,"  that  as  ideal is,  of  they  apply  existing  as  it  it  givens,  ideas."  thinking  upon  s  the the  end  of  who  has  been  proclaiming  1y  is,  and  it with  place...which  actual  1y  is  John when  behave  those  Relations,*  by  e  and  their  marks  nature."  who  and the  follows  actual take  as  "those  accept  Morgenthau,  understanding to  and  International  actually  intrinsic  of  tics  Smith  provides  and  poli  nature  common-sense ism  science,  in  As  they  all  of  politics its  that  impact  Hans  those  popularization  "the  A  by  discipline.  projects,  the  is  interpreted  for  a  which  optimists,  claim]  realism  human  the  in  study  understanding  international  processes  be  period."  be  say  this  with  of  of  "with  understand  ought  "Pope"  theory  concerned  is;  visionary  Utopian  as  presents  it  development  first  specifically  described  to  its  the  in  realists  realism  in  to  this  idealists,  rhetorical  identifies  in  and  mark)  Utopians,  every  Carr  used  intended  the  of  E.H.  be  (common)sense  introduction  to  opposed  will  the  who  he  tries and  as  it  Herz argues  according engage  that to  in  wishful  5. Michal Joseph Smith, Realist Thought from Weber to Kissinger (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1986), p.l. 6. E.H. Carr, The Twenty Years' Crisis (London: Macmillan Press, 1946), p.lO. 7. Stanley Hoffmann, "Realism and its Discontents," Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 256, No. 5 (November 1985), pp. 131-136. 8. Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, fifth ed., revised (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978), pp. 4, 15.  5 thinking.  One  phrases  similar  authors  identify  granted  the  themselves Berki  could to  fill  these.  the  terms  self-evident what  they  also  begins  tautologically  are  pages  with  vague  The  important  with  ordinary  point  of  the  obliged  to  think  ordinary  unreflective  is  usage,  meaning  with  and  hut  terms,  their  take  instead  when  usage,  that  they  for  of use  defining  asking them.  realism  as  the mode of conduct of a person who is said to be a "realist," and a realist is one whose actions are "realistic"...[whichJ means being adequate in one's understanding of and relationship (active and passive) to reality. Adequacy connotes "goodness" in a circumscribed sense, as sufficiency, competence, ability to get on, utilize possibilities. i  His  goal  (i.e.  one  three  sides")  Only  by  is  that  doing  commendatory application points the  out word  is  to  transform  true  definition,  into  a synthetic  term  this  can  begin  function  the  "realism"  realism as  becoming in  by  this  an  attribute  arbitrary  and  following for  passage,  tautology, such with to of  or  analytic  term  "a  triangle  has  as  substantive fulfil  its  thought  polemical. in  0  which  content. approbatory without  As I  have  or  its  Kratochwil substituted  "good":  the commendatory function... stays the same despite a great variety of meanings conveyed by the second function, the descriptive meaning. It is the descriptive meaning, however, that supplies the reasons by virtue of which we call something [realistic!; and to that extent, the commendatory function of [realismJ is...restricted by the appropriateness of the reasons supplied in the descriptive meaning. XJ  9. John H. Herz, "Political Realism Revisited," International Studies Quarterly. Vol. 25, No. 2 (June 1981), p. 183. 10. Berki, op. cit., p. 3. 11. Friedrich V. Kratochwil, "On the Notion of "Interest" in International Relations," International Organization, Vol. 36, No. 2 (Winter 1982), p. 7.  6 Giving to,  and  and justifying  necessary  commendatory defence  for  manner.  of  their  the In  term  by  the logic  ideal ism  can  1952,  "propaganda  only  reasons"  "realism"  the absence  descriptive  to think  as  "appropriate  function,  thus  to be used  in a  of any  meanings  of ordinary  is  (i.e.  usage),  as Quincy  prior  presentation  and  what we are  obliged  the  Wright  terms  realism  wearily  noted  and in  terms"  according to which everyone sought to commend whatever policy he favoured by calling it "realistic." The terms do not...throw light on the policies, institutions, personalities, or theories which they are used to qualify but only on the attitudes toward them of the speaker and, it is hoped, of the 1istener. From this usage we learn that in the past two decades political propagandists have regarded "realism" as a plus term and "ideal ism" as a minus term. xs  Clearly, applied,  before  as attributes  politics,  their  independently out, use  "we cannot  thinking meaning  upon  initially)  that  language  as our  and  of  departure  charged  real  in large  us  point,  "  to take rather  Wright meaning  part  x:y:  can  be  international  explicated  As Moorhead express  terms  of  must be  things.  requires  highly  to theories  meaning  language  the nature  and  thought,  thought.  formulate so  about  of  vague  descriptive of such  of words,  these  has  painted  without  structures  our  The dependence the latter than  simply  the  of  (at  least  assume  we  12. Quincy Wright, "Real ism and Ideal ism in International Politics," World Politics. Vol. 5, No. 1 (October 1952), pp. 116129. For similar cries of exasperation regarding the arbitrary use of these terms, see Robert W. Tucker, "Professor Morgenthau's Theory of Political Realism," American Political Science Review, Vol. 46, No. 1 (March 1952); Robert L. Rothstein, "On the Costs of Realism," Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 87, No. 3 (Autumn 1972), pp. 347-362. 13. Moorhead Wright, "The Problem of Meaning in International Thought," in Michael Donelan, ed., The Reason of States (London: Allen & Unwin, 1978), p.92.  7 know what realism political the  science,  language  only  and  way  to adapt  life  ordinary  of  application,  sometimes  modify  hence  is  no  way  to proceed  of  international  experience."  consistent writers  This  as  analysis  of  such  "pure  depends another;  he notes,  Ba1dwin 's  of  clear  Berki  rules  used  of  that  dismiss  concepts  scholars seem  of  realism  - the  which  by  and  Baldwin  in  his  international  some would it as  deny  "mere  knowledge,  to communicate x<b  logic  advocated  in  to help. "  of  is  Machlup,  by David  The advancement of  "the  practice  practical  employs,  Fritz  There  and  approach  interdependence  and  concepts,  theory it,  to  their  or guidelines  "I am aware  an undertaking  the ability  and  area  Thomas Mai thus,  so effectively  logomachy." on  - that  its  x  puts  the is  meaning." "*  the  the methodological  will  the concept As  of  is  as  as Berki  in a certain  the semantic  diverse and  relations.  or  if you with  Oppenheim,  worth  expressed  ±a  of analysis,  is,  of  that  purposes,  reduce  in  use  he argues  their  if realism  politics  life  the use  Although  effectively  for analytic  their  and  usage.  "cannot  as it stands,"  governing  vagueness...  everyday  notes,  discourse  the rules  the criteria  other  mean in ordinary  as Oppenheim  of everyday  "make explicit sharpen  ideal ism  This  the  semantics" however,  with thesis  one echoes  sentiments.  14. Felix E. Oppenheim, "The Language of Political Inquiry: Problems of Clarification, " in Fred I. Greenstein and Nelson W. Polsby, eds., Handbook of Political Science: Vol. One (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1975), p. 283. 15. Berki, op. cit., p.2. 16. David A. Baldwin, "Interdependence and Power: A Conceptual Analysis," International Organization, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Autumn 1980), p. 472.  8 Chapter  Two presents  analysis,  which  following  chapters  has  been  of  thus  here,  Thought,  intent  (if  Morgenthau,  the  ought  to  neither  old  can  constitutive  are  been.  chapter,  nor  ideal  ism  ancient  extract  an  of  ideal  ism  Thus  their  other  is or  not a  Furthermore,  this are  as  This  dichotomous  attribution and J.  must  Claude, Vol. 25,  will  to be  2  they being (either/or)  particular  argued  Jr., No.  or  less"  the  through  of  they  in  of  will  J,  are  employed They  along  are  a  the  next opposite and of  always  thought. be  for.  "Comment," International (June 1981), p. 198.  from  international  realism  attributes writers  any  its  occupy  case,  study,  postmodern.'  manner  not  it  this  writing  of  clear  that  than  dichotomies.  do  to  for as  become  ideal-types  continuum. not  absolute  "more  even  statement  ism,  Herz,  "polemics  the  implications  ideal  with  abandoned  edifying  in  is  of  is  argument  (or  it  School  Carr,  thesis  less  modern  and  as  what  as  consistent  words,  the  From  tradition  been  embodied  and  in  abstract  to  the  defined  this  Claude's  's  realism,  such  have  unambiguous  terms,  each  of  that  Inis  that  writers  purpose  According  xy  relative  as  17. Inis Quarterly,  " '  theory.  parlance,  Debate"  Realism  to  contested  in  grand  historical  common  Berki  which  stipulatively  or  terms  theory.  continuum.  poles  of  a  of  characteristics  political  related  the  of  of  shell  repeating  to  to  or  yolk  bears  refer  with,  scholar,  one  the  achievement)  use  elements  framework  "Realist-Jdealist  have  particular  here,  not  Kennan,  the  realism  which  it  returning  association  made  far,  essential  paradigm,  not  and  rehabilitate their  with  doctrine, By  the  fill  does  speculation. the  provides  said  defended  the  Studies  9 The  Duality  of  Before  launching  important  to  invoking of  his  of  Relations. I  ways  in  poli  will  do  what  This  will  level  to  whose to  Holsti, to  and  explanation  Elsewhere,  Holsti  phenomena policy.  primarily a  device  as  suggests,  At  discrete  arms  races,  this  are  of  patterns nor  are  had  of they  to  two  the  manner  in  i1lustrate  the  as  formulate their  actions works  examinations  such  the  and  interactions."  such  with as of  as  these  the  and  conduct  theories,  than as  abstraction specific  historical  of  serves rather  diplomatic  18. Kalevi J. Holsti, "Retreat from Utopia: Relations Theory, 1945-1970, " Canadian Journal Science, Vol. 4, No. 2 (June 1971), p. 165. 19. Kalevi J. Holsti, International Politics: Analysis, fourth ed. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: 1983), p.9.  xe  examining  tested,  and  concerned  original  "theory  be  scope  those  objective  and  f i e l d . G r a n d  behaviour  an  with  level, to  to  international  politics  the  refers  of  abstract  by not  theory"  concerned  hypotheses  distinguished are  attributes  International  theories  to  state  are  the  They  is  in  as  in and  between  less of  ism  for,  terrain  international  organizing  subject-matter. or  in  it  employed  between  "grand  sought  have  which  a source  for  the  distinguishes  theories  ideal  reasons  term  "have and  he  theory"  grand  analysis,  interact.  map  authors  and  "grand  the  description  foreign  distinguishing  particular  field,  specific  by  the  Berki's will  realism  calls  the  middle-level  which  dimensions  attempts  tics,  this  of  of  clarify  on  these  exegesis  context  Holsti  focus  which  approach  the  will  According macro  an  interpretation I  dimensions  Theory  into  introduce  thought.  which  International  as  the  term  of  their  phenomena crises  or  events.  International of Political A Framework For Prentice-Hall,  10  Instead,  their  rather  than  phenomena  study of  politics nature. in  shares  not  all  agree  all  " '  by  the  members  international  of  what  theory,  the  of  Uestphalia  the  to  which  examined scope  and  international regarding  its  takes  formal  of  calls  according  the  of  the  into  writers  politics"  whose  col lapse  Holsti  world  regarding  "international  of  the  three  locus  plural political  differences  milieu, the  Treaty  the  considerable that  since  of  is  "the of  assumption -  will,  words,  Each  a?c  structured  you  fragmentation  basic  their  changed  symbolized  the  subject-matter  despite  They  a  if  Hoffmann's  units.  a distinctly  have  are  from  their -  variable,"  in  pol itical  this  domain  singular;  deriving  separate in  "dependent  place  characteristics  medieval 1648.  In  system, short,  "classical  they  tradition"  of  the proper focus of [International Relations] is the causes of war and the conditions of peace/security/order; the main units of analysis are the diplomatic—mi 1i tary behaviours of the only essential actors, states; and states operate in a system characterized by anarchy, the lack of central au thori ty. s  ±  20. Stanley Hoffmann, The State of Mar (New York: Frederick A. Prager, 1965), p.15. Holsti's distinction between grand and middle-level theory is equivalent to what Garnet calls general and partial theory, the former providing conceptual "maps" or organizational and hoiistic perspectives on the subject-matter. He notes that these two types of theory are written by and appeal to quite different intellectual personalities, in Isiah Berlin's terms, hedgehogs and foxes. The hedgehog is the general theorist who seeks a unified vision of international politics. He is interested in the shape and nature of the forest, not the trees. The fox, on the other hand, is the partial theorist more interested in the trees. He is concerned with details and specifics rather than big ideas and organizing gestalts. In this thesis, I will be looking at three hedgehogs who have tried to see the subject "whole." See John C. Garnett, Commonsense and The Theory of International Politics (London: Macmi1lan Press, 1984), Ch. 2. 21. Kalevi J. Allen & Unwin,  Holsti, 1985),  The Dividing p.lO.  Discipiine  (Boston,  Mass.:  11 Two Interdependent theory  can  another. and  I  be  identified  will  call  evaluation  provide to  organizing  specify  the  nature  international  analytically  distinguished  this  study,  of  realism  as  as  an  dimensions  which  critique  of  well  as  I  will  the  to  attribute  use  three  delimit  or  one  description),  these  categories and  from  (or  Together,  exegesis  in  political  ontology  ss  conceptual  the  examined  of  dimensions  prescription).  structure  theorists  and these  (or  the  both  dimensions  and  disposition  of  thought. The refers  first  to  essence  a  of  dimension theorist's  practice.  what  has  nature  of  called  as  basic beliefs  the  ultimate  are  philosophers  call  ontological  beliefs  which  assumptions  identifying domain  and of  social  or  describing  and  its  a  parameters.  Whether evokes  nature,  They  or  he  and  domain  of denote  the  most  constitutive fundamental  "essence"  provide  of  things.  the  It  basis  politics what  as  Aron of  They is  for a  calls the  distinct an  initial  subject-matter  out,  neatly expressed "The Concept of Presented to the (College militaire Paradigms p.16.  the  assumptions.  one speaks the language of the state of nature between  22. As Sigler has we do. John Sigler, Relations Theory," Military Neutrality April 1987). 23. Julienne Ford, Kegan Paul, 1975),  regarding  definition  points  and  presuppositions  our  provide  substantive As  discovery,  about  international  reality.  conceptualization,  or  "are  about  these  of  distinct  beliefs  thoughts what  a  assumptions  one's These  context  assumptions  politics These  reality.  a  underlying  international  political Ford  provides  the philosophers states, or the  it, what Neutrality Conference royal,  Fairy  Tales  and  is  real, and what do in International on Canada and St.-Jean, Que.,  (London:  Routledge  &  12 language of sociologists, and whether one evokes the system constituted by state, superstate, or substate actor, one will discover at one moment or another the characteristics of the diplomatic field or the  interstate  system.  According political an  to  Dessler,  theory,  explanatory  the  and  stressed  consists  not  the  "international  institutional  arrangements  The  relationship dimensions  of as  or  theory  for  thus  structured  of  processes  set  kinds  the  posited  by  should  of  of  theory  the for  and  entities.  It  but  things  also  addedJ"^^  establishes space  within  principles  of  which  and  correspond  one's  passive) to  of or  of  the  prescribing  conduct  international  theory in  implications  evaluating  analytically  adequate  (active  consists  of  explanations...it  conceptual  denotes  international  being  grand  area,  parameters  rationale  dimensions realism  the  and  referents  between them. [Emphasis of  dimension political  within  concrete  operates.  international  or  a  international  ontology  designated  politics" second  the  theory's is  certain  dimension  presuppositionally  to  the  or relations  ontological  The  in  to  of  entities)  ontology  of  context  theory's  (things,  an  only  of connections The  A  invoked  that  the  refers  discourse. structures  be  in  "ontology  real-world theory  a4  in  understanding to  "reality."  formal  regard  politics.  distinguishing inheres  with  between the  these  meaning of The  characteristics  of  and above of  24. Raymond Aron, "Theory and Theories in International Relations: A Conceptual Analysis," in Norman D. Palmer, ed., A Design For International Relations Research: Scope, Theory, Methods, and Relevance (Philadelphia, Penn.: American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1970), p.56. 25. David Dessler, "What's at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate?" International Organization, Vol. 43, No. 3 (Summer 1989), p. 445.  realism  as  meaning  requires  what is  the  domain?"  of  is  sense.  answer  is  an  provides  realizable.  Thus  and the  correspond  to  term.  must be  and  "idealism"  or  in  correct  analysis thought  is  case  distinguish be  meaning.  26.  Herz,  be  and  correct  However,  op.  and  cit.  the  any  "correct"  of  all  relevance,  is  simply  not  the  Herz's  as  offhand  terms  "realism"  Theory  it  is  analyses  what  to call  is  talking  a  it  are  would  realistic with  let case  that  If  it  available then  be and  it  to would  totally the  "realistic,"  alone  how  about.  theories,  case  be  multi-dimensional  the  criteria  former  advocating  comment i1lustrates  incorrect  in  first  to  or  how  This  domain  the  permissible  uncontested  conflating  it  is  in  theory  theories. on  the  whose  or  to rebuff  to  in  "realistic"  deemed  speaking,  SA  "distinct  international  to what he  although  term  conduct  order  it  a  answers  a hoiistic  one."  given  to characterize  latter  evaluating  depending  perhaps  First,  question,  for  applied  questions.  a distinct  one  "strictly  not  has  permissible,  the  that  clear  By  as in  a realistic  that  idealistic.  robs  realism  as  how  of  its  question  mean to be  of  explicating  as  evaluative  dimensions  but  Herz  an  basis  incorrect,  between  redundant,  is  emphasised  politics,  little  not  of  should  happens  the  those  core  politics  principles  two  remark  correct  it  upon  the  two  or  descriptive  what does  dependent  reforms  confusing  or  This  on  politics  to international  which  and  to  international  Second,  structural  either  answers  experience?  This  Elaborating  ontological  logically  question,  as  of  relationship practical  term.  persuasive  essence  This  deepest our  a synthetic  latter Herz  distinct clear  criteria  14 are  available  to  make  theories  of  international  relation  to  practice  is  the  case)  as  unproblematic  idealism  of theory "is  not  conceptual  action.  "  theory" its this  The  s e 3  ambit.  As  thesis  their  theory  tradition  as  term  and  practice  we shall  definition  As  and  between  his  of each  Gunnel the  vague  intellectual of  the  enterprise  and  has  meaning  but  is,  belief  rather,  and  term  "grand  status  within  considered  (Waltz), out,  or  correctly  a different  science pointed  terms.The  enterprises  writers in  this  relationship  Ball one  grand in  a given  a  Terence  instrumental  (Morgenthau),  of  stand that  why realism  appropriately  see, of  as  relation  variety  (Bull).  Archimedean  and  a wide  to  claim  presupposes  which,  and  not  may  understand  "realistic"  generic  do  authors  to  regard  as well as contestable  constitutive  Truth  they  which is exactly  the  conceives  with  For  instruments  a contingent  permits  hence  (although  mere  and  distinction  politics.  are both meaningful  between  a  above  "reality,"  attribution  notes,  the  there (as  in manner,  and can forms  be  no of  27. Berki makes this point by contrasting natural with social science. "The "realistic" physicist or biologist is simply the good physicist or biologist; even better, he is the physicist or biologist, with no further qualification or adjectival characterization required and, indeed, permitted. This is because - and there can be no other reason - the "reality" which we assume to be the subject-matter of the physicist (what makes him to be a physicist) we assume also to be an untroubled, coherent kind of reality (whether it is thought to be material or otherwise). The relationship to this reality is consequently also an untroubled one: i t connotes adequacy without the ambiguity which [exists] in the area of everyday conduct which also includes politics. In the latter case "reality," whatever other features it may also have, is inherently problematic. [Emphasis added]" Berki, op. cit., p.5. 28. Terence Theory," in Now? (Albany,  Ball, "Contradiction and Critique in Political John S. Nelson, ed., What Should Political Theory Be N.Y.: University of New York Press, 1987), p. 128.  15 knowledge) "grand  of  grand  theorists"  theory  stipulated  independently  of  what  do:  To describe, explain, or evaluate something is to appeal, at least implicitly, to an articulation of what kind of thing it is. This, quite simply, is what I mean by "theory." This is the way "theory" should be used in talking about any mode of inquiry. Theory is embedded in substantive claims. To say this is not to derive a definition of "theory" from some preferred epistemology, but to make a descriptive claim about the practice of inquiry...[grand theoriesJ do not explain anything. That is, they are not instruments for understanding given objects. They indicate what is to be explained and provide the criteria of explanation It for  is  and  a  grave  justify,  the  epistemological privileged the  error  international  the  in  this  conceptions  of  the  this  sciences, requires  natural What field  subject-matter  exercise  assume, a  to  evaluate  set from  doctrines  count  be  divorced  to  interpretive  be  as  to  some  allegedly  of  adequate  from  substantive  "explained." °  In  3  reason  from  theories  an  precedes  argue  of  borrowed  competing  to  logically of  than  standard  sciences) is  rather  of  example,  cannot  description an  which  (for  politics.  explanation  social  by  vantage-point of  simply  availability  criteria  philosophy  to  explanation, rather  the and  than  an  29. John Gunnel, "In Search of the Pol itical Object: Beyond. Methodology and Transcendentalism," in Nelson, Ibid., p.34. 30. On this point see Paul F. Kress, "Against Epistemology: Apostate Musings," Journal of Politics, Vol. 41, No. 2 (May 1979), pp. 526-542; Michael E. Kirn, "Behaviouralism, PostBehavioural ism, and the Philosophy of Science: Two Houses, One Plague," The Review of Politics. Vol. 39, No. 1 (January 1977), pp. 82-102; J. Donald Moon, "The Logic of Political Inquiry: A Synthesis of Opposed Perspectives," in Fred I. Greenstein and Nelson W. Polsby, eds., Handbook of Pol itical Science: Vol. One (Reading, M.A.:Addison-Wesley, 1975), pp. 131-228; William C. Havard, "The Philosophical Underpinnings of the Contemporary Controversy in American Political Science," Ch. 3 of William C. Havard, The Recovery of Political Theory (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1984) pp. 54-80; Philip H. Melanson, Political Science and Political Knowledge (Washington, D.C.: Public Affairs Press, 1975).  16 unreflective its  appeal  intersubjective  before  one  the  of  argument  ideally,  it  epistemol  ogy.  Grand delimit of  or  as  a nascent  central  task if  are  the of  for  sort  only of  on  -  begin  i.e.,  the  qua basis  of  a  concerning  able  to  about  respect  in  must  the  be  Thus  t  employed  consensus  we shall  this  3  itself  arrive  how,  ontology  high  interpretive politics  example, states,  the  tenuous  following  bring of  a  one  prescriptions In  be  variable,  is  that  primarily  respective  implicit,  at  some  international  and  interpretations pitched  to  addresses  "it  is  involved.  of  precedes  r  self-contained  by  dependent  out,  studied.  action,  suggested  and,  3  identify  political  between  3  actors  adequacy  theory  to  independent  phenomena,  methodological  theories  and  which  points  be  the of  the  politics]  should "  as  leading  intelligible  reality  political  to  Spegele  by  criteria  latter  [international  any  the  practices As  discursive what  "abjective"  international  explanans.  at  debate  explicating  ensemble  some  constitution  can  understanding by  to  to  of  as  a naked  as  a highly to  scholars  examined  light  the  is  logic  politics,  metaphysical  a distinct  domain  struggle  structured  invoke  to  They  power  society,  study  international level  or  as  constructs.  the in  three  this  critically of which  system, images  thesis.  A  examine,  these are  necessarily  abstraction.  31. Interpretation can be defined as an attempt "to make sense of an object of study. This object...is confused, incomplete, cloudy, seemingly contradictory in one way or another. The interpretation aims to bring to light an underlying coherence or sense." Charles Taylor, "Interpretation and the Sciences of Man," Review of Metaphysics, Vol. 25., No. 3 (September 1971), p.3. 32. Roger D. Spegele, "From the Incoherence of Systems Theory to a Philosophy of International Relations, " Review of Politics, Vol. 44, No. 4 (October 1982), p. 584.  17 Conclusion  with  Political  realism,  ordinary  language  descriptive  politics,  multidimensional summary  are primarily  are  provides  reifies the  analysis,  the past,  early  evaluates American bipolar  post-1945 foreign system  international defending  policy. as the best  Their  a  grand  "realist"  their  that  work. which  then  Waltz of  ism.  He  statecraft  and  which  the conduct reifies  for maintaining  of these  next  On the  and  ideal  against  in contrast,  will  two forms  diplomatic  politics  The  here.  Morgenthau  as the "ideal"  Neither  among  two of whom are  a nostalgic  guarantee  politics,  Three  work expresses  Waltz,  dimensions  of interaction  's analysis,  European  brief  positing  through  argue  international  his position.  as  anarchy.  work reflects  century  politics.  dimensions  to be examined  their  presenting  nineteenth  in a  to embody and express  but that  Morgenthau's  chapter,  These  process  for examination,  I will  about  of international  of structural  theorists  as a  synthetic,  constructs,  a summary of Berki  not realists,  idealism.  theories  as a distinct  to the three  of this  these  connection  function  in  introductory  politics  any  of thought  or prescription.  to international  applied  basis  politics  acknowledged  approach  its dual  identified  interpretive  are presented  universally  chapter  In this  of grand  in a condition  theorists  serve  attribute  I have  to those  international  be  terms.  and evaluation  correspond  states  thus  is to retain  must be explicated  fashion,  description  which  and  and commendatory  international  and  if the term  writers  work is characterized  the  of he of present  order  in  succeeds  in  by  severe  18 self-contradictions, of  the  both  subject-matter,  presuppositions the  of  Bull's  political  their  evaluative  of  these  "phony  realism the  recognizes  reality  unitary  evaluative  referent  as  argument, as  and  static.  stances  of  "utopianism"), for  between  work reflects  anticipate  than  and  their  and  shortcomings  Hedley  within  each reali  of ty.  description  their  realism  realists,"  in  the  is  an  attribute  Prescriptively, nostalgia, which  next  to  that  the  meaning  chapter. of  realism  an  revealed  To  thought  self-contradictory  complacency,  reifies  argue  approximation  and  essence  Having  I will  out  heterogenous  the  ontological  judgements.  a closer  spelled  of  and  autonomous  which rather  avoids  the  revolution abstract  (or  19  CHAPTER  REALISM  VERSUS IDEALISMS;  TWO  A FRAMEWORK FOR  ANALYSIS  Introduction Faced select  another  reality to  as  the  the  reality  as  is  is  referent  that  a concrete  imagination  of  judgements  philosophical realism (matter) For  and and  another,  descriptive  order,  which  recognition  regarding  ideal ism  meaning  is never form  of  does  not  real  (mind)  from  political  society,  only  such,"  in  it  should  is  a  people first  of be  reality chapter,  to be  but  the  noted,  regarding  of  as  the  to which  critique  previous  realism  as  the  meanings  the  "inasmuch  to insulate  conceptions in  of  existence...  exist  us  barrier  the nature  and  according  permits  designated  emphasised of  but  of  one  notes,  social  to  For  "existence  In philosophy,  s  have  ideational was  the  is not  history  tempted  is no  idealism.  Mannheim in  individuals  scepticism.  as  him  historical  This  As  is  the nature  which  and  realism  primarily  certain  act."*  realism  whole.  one  Thankfully,  for political  surrounds  reality?"  question  political  living  social  order  topic.  a metaphysical  functioning  really  "what is  a philosophical of  a creature  always  question  dissertation  such  "existence" is  the  explication  thing,  man  with  material as  such. the  explicated  from  the departure point of ordinary usage. Berki is concerned with 1. Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1936), pp. 193-4. 2. On the relationship between common sense and philosophy, see M. F. Burnyeat, "The Sceptic in his Time and Place," in Richard Rorty, J.B. Schneewind and Ouentin Skinner, eds., Philosophy in History (Cambridge University Press, 1984), pp. 225-254.  2 0  what we  are  attributes we may  obliged of  conduct  freely  armchair.  This analysis,  provides  discipline  framework  of  contrasting chapter  analysis  divided  into  extrapolates  take  two  the  present),  the  type  conceptual  poles  Reality:  are  tautology in  step  by  in  usage.  two  conceptual drawn provides  The two  of  and chapters.  first  two  dimensions  of  The  section  third  ideal ism,  reification  reification  of of  Realism,  forms  which  may  the  past  the  future,  argues  Berki,  whose opposite of  a  ideal  ideal-  ism.  Homoqeneity  explicating  adjectival  the  be  part.  subsequent  a continuum  these  a  examining  prescription.  (the  cannot  which  sections.  thought).*  Versus in  in  what  proverbial  i1 lustrations  evaluative  chiliastic  occupied  its  ordinary  (the  the  's  for  of  not  practical is  characteristics  "middle,"  first of  and  imagination  Heteroqeneity The  real  of  criteria  three  description  and  and  with  as  accepted  Relations,  analysis  nostalgia  a characteristic is  Berki's  the main  forms,  life  discussed  terms  common sense  politics"  of  is  then  or  set to be  namely,  of  the  arguments  these  viewpoints,  a summary of Berki  writers  real ism,  that  International or  to  comfort  transcends  the  summarize  is  everyday  his  of  sections  the  "international  supplementing  the  this  of  resort  accompanying from  which  which  chapter  their  of  framework of  when we  about  by philosophy,  experience,  This  and  corollary  spatiotemporal  from  think  speculate  The  refuted  to  form This,  realism to identify  Berki  3. In differentiating Morgenthau between nostalgia and complacency of ideal ism. Berki does not do apart.  argues,  is  to go  the  beyond  referent  is not  singular  the  for  the but  from Waltz, I will distinguish as analytically separate forms this, but they should be kept  21 plural, first an  and  that  point  relationship  is dictated  "adeguate"  recognize  their  by  relationship  by  this  the  is a dialectical  logic  of  one.  the appeal  to reality.  What are  The  to realism we  as  obliged  to  appeal?  Being "adeguate" to reality is without doubt a goad thing, to be approved. But it is not to be unreservedly praised or extolled. Why? Because being adequate to reality means being "inadequate" to something else?...What can there be which is not reality? Something to be called "ideal?" But is the "ideal" to be considered unreal? This would be very' strange indeed, and the charge that the real is tic person is inadequate to an unreal "ideal" realm rings hollow and pointless. The "ideal," if it is to have any relevance and any effect, must also be considered "real." So then is it meaningful to assert that the realistic person's conduct is adeguate to reality in one way or sense, and inadequate in another way or sense? But if we thus distinguish between ways or senses (or appearances, aspects, manifestations) of reality itself, then we are already on the way towards accepting the ambiguity or disunity or internal discrepancy of reality.* Berki for  distinguishes  reality  to be  differentiated  These  substitute cannot  terms  exhaust  the site necessity  found  from  profundity.  between  another  referents "the  the nature  of a dialectical and  in ordinary  one  for  three  are real" of  in  interplay  of each  as an autonomous  4. Robert N. Berki, Sons, 1981), p. 4.  as  of appropriate  namely,  opportunism,  On Political  qua  depth  between  each  Truth,  of  The  which  latter  the constraints emancipatory  the argument referent  stance  resignation, (London:  is of  purposes  proceeds.  is revealed  evaluative  Realism  and  and  practice.  to realize  inadequacy  referent,  their  usage,  become clear  each  of  referents  are  in ordinary  as will  form  terms  which  or  necessity,  or ideals,  corresponding  usage,  aspects  immediacy,  reality  the opportunities  such  The in  the  attached  to  and J.M.  revolution. Dent  &  22 As  we shall  "the  see,  real,"  a cry  diametrically Reality  as  possibilities, frustration."  as  actions  whose  this  by  objective the  lead  and  contingencies  in  no  actors  we seek  form  of  political  with  no  novelist at  all. light,  lessons Milan  to  this  is as  a  in  light  feather,  5. Ibid., p.7. 6. Charles Reynolds, "Deterrence," Studies, Vol. 15, No. 1 (January Reynolds, Theory and Explanation (London: Martin Robertson, 1973),  the  finds  its  "might  perceptions thus,  thus  as  individual  as  dust  well  See  in  the  or past  and  but  once,"  not human  swirling  of  return  focus  the  happens  as  Review of 1989), p.74. in International Ch. 4.  and  surviving of  the  motives  "Me  "What  on  constituted  of.  of  at  description  a narrative  writes, as  terms  future.  switches  ascertainable  that  realm  understanding,  of  sense  of the  or  a world  the  make  is  the  Kundera  History light  with  actors  for  of  between  In  and  conduct  newspaper  explanation  But  A  the  independent  involved.  limited  fulfilments  terms  dichotomy  reality  behaviour  the  the  of  of  untheorizable, In  for  sharp  a world  immediacy,  Fortuna.  empathising  evidence."  unbearably  as  can  desires,  definition,  means  available  happened  of  reaches  no  of  the  is,  one  reasoning  as  level  calls  historical  present  exigencies  immediate  is  of  the  of  There  understanding  the  privileged  directions.'  a welter  Machiavel1i  explanation,  to  is  action  "down-to-earth"...  initially,  those  in  is  actors  television.  and  referent  "Reality  At  a  least  "realism"  denotes  life.  statesmen  which  Immediacy referent  everyday  what  for  on  opposed  This  of  depending  into  have life, the  International also Charles Poli tics  23 air,  as  whatever  character  of  constituted event  is  is  Haas  a new  again,  ad  these  In  It somewhat  this  through his  feet  political  process. that  will  and  on  has  "ist"  structure  that At  equally,  whoever  he  in  mind  in  his  ism"  in  at  to  some consisting  "The engages  step,  must  seeks  of  behaviour.  each  and world.'"''  who  explanatory  such  natural  Marxists,  an  of  over in  "epiphenomenal  outcome  laws  all  a  the  against  potential  perilously. but  calls  effects  perceptual  a necessary  "is  way;  than  Minogue  gripe  perceptions  described  rather the  What  perceived  politics,  he  do.  these  as  general  becoming.  events;  from  Every  actors'  be  is  qua  governments  bestow  what  world.  Reality  then  Kenneth  other  via  declares,  a snowscape  shape  ...actors  on  the  general  sense,  of  The  results  that  to  what  The  existential  process  conventional  reality  give  "is  "it  any  feature  may  sum of  a sustained and  he  the  impact  attack  conditions  politics,"  dynamic  that  studies,  environmental initial  words,  an  contingent.  and  a  referent  behaviouralists, explain  in  tomorrow."^  responses  International  0  polemical  political  in  and  whose  structures is  politics,  policies  given  Herz's  conceptual  it,  in  infinitum." is  is  puts  reality  terms,  sense.  tics  result  create  exist  unpredictable,  poli  reality  longer  human  a continuous  International as  no  imaginative  unique,  matters,  will  international by  immediacy  of  is  the times  of  reality in  ground make  it  of walks under wild  7. Mi 1 an Kundera, The Unbearable Lightness of Being (New York: Harper & Row, 1984), p. 223. 8. Ernst B. Haas, "Words Can Hurt You; Or, Who Said What to Whom about Regimes," International Organization, Vol. 36, No. 2 (Spring 1982), p.241. 9. John H. Herz, "Political Realism Revisited," International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 2 (June 1981), p. 185.  24 leaps  to  onto  have  the  Yet politics terms  of  matter  places  solidity referent  that  can  conduct  of  "what  of  associated  of  a  action,  completed  The  action  consequences. Falkland  which  For  Islands,  within  months,  followed  Buenos  Aires.  General  group one  of call  opportunists, them  circumscribed those  whose  realists. success  aim  its  be  clearly  with,"  the  sole  any  of  no  regard  the  but  by  no  Closely refers went  for  to  his  stretch related, that  beyond  the  value  action  is  of  other  "an  action  a  completed  performed  semblematic,  success its  is  of their  10. Kenneth R. Minogue, "Epiphenomenalism for Political Reality," Political Studies, (December 1972), p. 465. 11. Berki, op. cit., p.11.  back of  that  of  a  long-term  "successfully" them  and  a  circumscribed,  col lapse  Galtieri  is  ephemeral  surrender  by  it  ephemeral,  which  the  fallacies  is  of  relevance  all,  as  or  discussion  the  because  himself  This  within  in  a  opportunism  criterion.  of  realism  Minogue  pitfalls  Argentina  to  as  to  opportunism,  noting  After  fallacy has  mere  constraints  simply  example, only  with  since  of  practice.  may  prove  relationship  adequate,  presupposing  action,  unpredictable.  by  the  sometimes  inadequacy  absence  or  factors  Success  ±x  the  political  successful  action." and  for  the  as  will  a practical  called  away  realism  in  to  synonymous  "success"  both  referents  be  can...get  but  i 0  lead  i1lustrates  notion  undertaken,  is  reasonably  you  with  purpose  cannot  political  meaningless  unpromising  ice."  becomes  Berki  hallmark  seem  of  this  concedes.  or  that  invaded  to  the  the  of  the  the action  British  military  tyrannical  the  regime  junta  were  imagination  fallacy undertaken  achievement. in Politics: Vol. 20, No.  in a could  of by The The 4  Quest  25 semblance  of  ulterior into  purpose, a path  reveals  of  as  than has  makes  which  to  in  the  its  attribute  appal  s  the  to  becomes  1ing  odds.  have is  as  his  would  the  but a  action.  criterion  by  on any  terms. successful  when not  state  they  were  reasonably  government  communist  of  always of  States,  one  "the  success,  spectacularly  United  and  a united  not  who "succeed"  Yet  Minh  whereby  an expression  success  were  no  opportunism  realism,  guide  with  degenerates  unpredictabi1ity  those  the  power  sense, of  unreliable  against  of  this  Finally,  s  to  to Ho Chi  pursuit  x  of  possible"  He does  Vietnamese  war  realism  singleminded  "  due  North  the  reality...  maker.  realism  against  of  caricature  a highly  the  achievement  In  into  active  prolonged  fighting  "art  inverse  melts  success  example,  the  resistance.  attribute  their  the  judgement  This  to  him as a slave.  retrospective  For  where  simply  rather  success  refers  least  itself  opportunist it,  success  in prior  their to  its  achievement. Thus  the  Indeed,  on its  Reality  as The  usage  is  that  would 12. 13.  of  which  mind  nor  Ibid., Ibid.,  is  found  wanting.  meaningless.  x  is  be  :  of  it  this  12. 7-8.  real  as  revealed  "Accommodation  a world  mediated  "real."  p. pp.  the  beyond...our At  s  for  necessity.  lies "  not  is  referent  respect  necessities. of  it  immediacy,  Necessity  in  that  referent,  own,  second  achieved is  first  level,  that  merely the  reality  is  realm  perception of  ordinary  and adeguacy  reach...  by our  Now the  is  by  are  immediate. realm  of  neither of  immediacy,  Reality hard  the it. with  not  creation  Otherwise, its  it short-  26 term as  contingencies  mere  appearance,  control  of  their disbelief  to  in  whose this  the  for Regular  must  time.  These  patterns  of  objectified  and  reality  actors  no  control.  is  best  conceived  in  expressed  be  subject  in  not  as  conduct  independently  those  of  nominally of  result  to  drama  conceived  (note:  laws  a  described  foreign  from  material  as  of  are in  implementation may  of  According  can  of  the  suspension  described  purposes  beyond  performing  States  and  and  when  the  background  regardless  theatre,  and  behaviour  be  to  that  have  the  forces  movements  observed  of  may  the  terms. their  (now  of  politics  organic  into  conform  of  they  formulation  states  a world  script,  resolution  patterns  of  the  terms) between  specifiable  over variables initial  Hons. Consequently,  consistent  with  properties  is  between As  a  reasons  the  fades  understood  with  choice)  interaction  condi  is  balls;  motives,  responsible  an  it  than  presupposes  policy.  analogy  bil1iard  actual  to  international  rather  hard-shelled  way  the  accordance  referent,  change,  they  when  and  and  which  Invoking  plot  mechanical  which  giving  ceases  behaving  flux  statesmen,  wishes.  over  of  the  Rosenau  the  a reality  boldly  and  epistemological  characterized  by  one.  distinction  is  in  of  a positivistic  natural  appropriate  social  No  sciences  these  terms  stance ontological necessary methodology.  proclaims:  As a focus of study, the nation-state is no. different from the atom or the single cell organism. Its patterns of behaviour, idiosyncratic traits, and internal structure are as amenable to the process of formulating and testing hypotheses as are the characteristics of the electron or the molecule... In  27 terms of analysis] There between  is,  of  via  "balance  of  tests  -  search  mainly of  The  determine  resignation that  may  this  is  as  Yet,  the  study  as  for  reality  referent,  the  on  through  uncover  the  in  according  of  the  now  as  various  the  data  to  test  in  a process  laws  his  the a  and  of  which  govern  the  he  appears  of  as  necessity in of  partially  a  14. James N. Rosenau, The Scientific (London: Francis Pinter, 1980), 15. Berki, op. cit., pp. 7-8.  fatal  p.32.  In  contrast could  wakeful  immediacy  as but  ism  also  Study  of  to be  who  limiting a  course,  and  fanatic  corrected, of  of  referent  i.e. whatever  power  system.  first  reveries  inaction,  unchangeable,  elements  to  is  politics,  self-help  incoherence  inadeguacy  action  international  inexorable  is  in  inevitable of  states  continuing] just  to  realism  with  dreamer,  unmindful [and  referent  a  is  done,  either  them  the  measured is  performed  variables,  then  of  the  who  be  example,  empirically this  into  behaviour.  face  among  may  to  "processing" For  Once  the  according  their  and  discover  aim  identified  idealist,  action  to  reality,  In  often  forward,  this  is  be.  described  or  ultimate  in  competition the  between  state  this  described  statistical  hypotheses  induction.  and  capabilities."  correlations  deductive  If  be  involves  catergorised  selection)  policy  dichotomy  former  operationalisation.  may of  foreign  a profound The  "facts"  stipulative  "distribution  view,  explanation.  of  power"  [physics and the same.**  this  (observed  criteria  variables  hod,  to  and  data  specifiable  or  according  description  amassing  the  science-as-met are essentially  his  "charges sphere  state." the also  reveals Foreign  of  s s  sole negated, the Policy  by  28 insufficiency real.  or  For  if  purposive never  partiality  of  determinism  action.  is  The art  be ascertained  true,  of  without  fies  knowlege  mark  of  this  knowledge..makes  Reality  probing  The absolute  J  The Primacy  Truth.  "Here  existing, a more of  politics  in  to  politics.  peace political  the  nature  of  notes,  defences  that  the  the  reality,  of  real  and  "can  the  is  cannot  real  the  all  as Berki  necessary  simply  is  necessary,  at  most  Transcendental  constitutive  real  is  actual realm  it  be a then makes  is  Truth  political from  philosophy, of  the  seen  itself  may be expressed  resulting  context  that  go beyond  of  Meaning  to  good  of  reside  institutions  Reality  purpose  perpetual  discover  the  concealed  Truth  of  or  one must  essential  purpose  precludes  knowledge  that  for  7  referent,  transcendental of  us equal  third  existence  or  and  referent  "-'  positively  about  real,  the  this  the  view  we know  Pts Truth:  in  the  inferiority...if  superior.  but  of  as  possible,  "the  signi  ty  then  the  impossible.Furthermore,  us  necessi  meaning,  not  and  politics."  i  for  to  find  e  This  such  a civil  union  according  to  of Leo  the  the  Truth underlying  as an overriding practice,  the  relationships,  accounts and  in  is  ideal as  or  Kant's  idea  mankind. Strauss,  The is  life:  Political philosophy [is] the attempt to replace opinion about the nature of political things by knowledge of the nature of political things [which are] subject to approval and disapproval, to choice and rejection, to praise and blame...To judge soundly one must know the true standards. If political philosophy wishes to do justice to its subject matter, it must strive for genuine knowledge of these standards. 16. 17. IB.  Ibid., Ibid., Ibid.  p. 19. p. 9.  to  29 Political philosophy is the nature of political political order.*' '  the attempt things and  truly to know both the right, or good,  7  Thus in contingent,  contrast or  third  referent  these  master  mankind  as  One  way  of  in  which  it  exist.  In  separation  -  the  justification  there  is  that  what idealists  representations  an  call (which  In short,  in  is the  within  good  terms  as  which  life  the  view  that  for  than  representations,  is  reality those  realism, reality reality be  philosophical  or  matter  which  ideas, in  we  the  true  or  ideal ism  and  have that  hold  since  object  have  may  of  and  we of  any  appearances is of  of  the  our  appearance,  false)  only  idealists  contrast,  only  view,  thesis  (the  independent is  this  else  - the  to mental  body  distinction  can  anything  dualism  of  to we  the  their  no  According  rather  the  of  a branch  - philosophical  only  may  real  to consider  matter  to  objective  is  work of Descartes,  and  Philosophical  that  is  Cartesian  the  the  Truth  reality.  minds  in assuming  themselves.  19. Leo Political Political  the  access  representation),  as  referents  and  confined  direct  real  ideal ism  mind  order  and  the  necessity,  political  of metaphysics  of  which  achieved.  three  own  at  denotes  justice,  the  history  context  is  "true"  be  the  with  between  have  the  peace,  - may  to our  reality  exists.  to  appearance  associated access  such  at  conceiving  the  between  not  second  Subjective  direct  do  level,  between  philosophy.  that  first  refers  a whole  reification  closely  the  ideals  relationship  exists  the  to  what  realism  thesis  minds,  and  or really both  Strauss, "What is Political Philosophy? The Problem Philosophy," in Heinz Eulau, ed., Behavioural ism Science (New York: Atherton Press, 1969), p.95.  start  of in  30 with  Cartesian  opposite  dualism,  extremes.  two metaphysical attempts  it.  positions  This  dichotomous  "resolve"  the  The philosophical  to sidestep  denying  but  two  elemental  is done  by  by  distinction  reflect  the  antinomy  between  totally  to  these  incompatible  ambiguity  forcing  fleeing  of  a choice  reality  by  between  two  options:  The key ontological question, classically posed, is whether the mind controls the body Cor] the body controls the mind...If all of reality is basically matter (that is, material substances of one kind or another), then the body is dominant over the mind and attitudes are reducible to material substances... If ideas and perceptions are the irreducible components of reality, then mind dominates body and material substances have no independent role to play in a causal sys tern. The  third  capital  power the  Plato world, Being  of  "reali  also  been  reified  in  course  with  Plato.  Transcendental  because of  it  reason  realm  dualism  of  T, has  beginning called  aspect  of  transcends  to grasp  the  senses  divides  into  the  consigned  both  these  and  ascribed  or Form,  What Parekh transcendental  calls  the  the  history  dualism  realm  component elements  of  of Being - the  elements to  the  primacy  to  knowledge  hierarchical  ideal ism  word),  appearance  ontological  the object  (the  Cartesian  a pure or  ty"  as  Truth of  with  philosophy,  idealism  is  in asserting above  realm  and  that  so-called  the beyond  matter. sensible  the more pure opposed  so-  Cartesian  of mind and  ontological  a  to  dualism  realm  of  belief. of  creates  20. Michael Haas, "Metaphysics of Paradigms in Political Science," The Review of Politics, Vol. 48, No. 4 (Fall 1986), p.523. The history of the struggle between philosophical realism and ideal ism is a long and complex one. For an accessible and inspiring introduction to the issues at stake, see William Barrett, Death of The Soul (New York: Doubleday, 1986).  31 an unbridgable gap between experience and reality in the sense that the world in which we live is not real, and the real world is not one in which we can live, and generates a profound feeling of worldand selfalienation. Since the world of appearances is regarded as unreal, it is deemed incapable of lasting satisfaction. One yearns to live permanently in the world of Being... sx  The is,  as  equivalent  Strauss  of  puts  it,  state.  Since  international  Martin  Might  has  exists.  It  is  be  (potentially)  life  to  global interests  as  The  latter,  however,  the  ashes  not  of  Wight  why to  points  thought  to  division  of the  he  that calls  a Platonic in  the  good  takes  take  place  to  be  there  of  the  medieval  by  always  "revolutionism") conception sensible  world  of  will  a new  global a  appearance  a  the state. arose  sss  from  the  There  is  no  a  1ikewise order.  tradition  of  adherents  a world-society of  to  human  which  whose of  opposed  system  existed  good  separate  Europe.  replaced  has  the  kind  the  within  col lapse  states  this  emancipatory  phenomenon  and  states,  of  as  historical  contemporary  theory  states  only  ideal  between  within of  theory the  progress,  can  in  or  than  pursuit  Rome  life  place  parameters an  political  rather  the  Christendom  history,  out  (which  subscribe whose  is  the  in  international  survival  or  Truth  of  fulfilled  Western  reason  calls  tics  no  institutional  authority  succumb  of  justice,  and  priori  that  theory  territorial  political  poli  Progress,  such  Berki  knowledge  argued  a  state.  what  of is  mankind,  an  21. Bhikhu Parekh, "Does Traditional Philosophy Rest On A Mistake?" Political Studies. Vol. 27, No. 2 (Summer 1979), p.297. For an excel lent, because accessible, analysis of these schools of ontology, see D.W. Hamlyn, Metaphysics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984). 22. Martin Wight, "Why Is There No International Theory?" in Herbert Butterfield and Martin Wight, eds., Diplomatic Investiqations (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1966), pp. 17-34.  32 aberration. is  International  epiphenomena  derivative,  and  evaluated  and  points  mechanisms inimical  to  the  traditional  system The  First,  presuppossing necessary  of  be  and qua it  negates  a mark  and  power  the  and  from  practical  "the  change Second,  first  world  a  reality  level,  appears  the  as  is  If  of  of  second  and  to the  manner.  two  level  whilst  "real"  is  knowledge  words,  in  light  of  be  interpretation  prior  the  be the  was  an  other  virtually  may  graphic  In  scope  the  one war,  the  level  as  sustained  dynamics  real,  third  the  ty, But  order,  that  although  constraints  morali  provides  the "+  the  of  a particularly  view  of  association  a whole. this  at  inferiority.  to  as  transcends  realism  knowledge  purposes.  releasing  that  of  33  order  be  interests  commutative.  referent  Logically,  of  in  is  human  dysfunctional  revealed  referent,  must  whose  sustaining  ultimate,  the  ties  and  the  states  purposive  mankind  evaluation  it.  the  for  be  of  enti  this  maintenance  international  weapons,  rehabilitates  "the  reciprocal  signifies  implies goals  is  interests  third,  "realism"  simply  nominal  would  its  a postulated  than  which  nuclear  of  to  separate  yardstick  -  instruments  with  levels.  moral  order  through  of  conditions  out,  according  experience  the  rather  Jackson  of  the  world  individuals  states  The  against  mankind  waged  1.  politics,  cannot  knowledge transcendent  simultaneously  this of  time  accentuating  opportunities.  unlimited,  an  Now infinite  23. Robert H. Jackson, "Inverted Rationalism: Martin Might, International Theory and The Good Life," paper presented at the joint meeting of the International Studies Association and the British International Studies Association (London, April 1989); for a condensed survey of the evolution of this tradition, see Kalevi J. Holsti, The Dividing Piscipiine (Boston: Allen & Unwin, 1985), Ch. 3. 24. Berki, op. cit., p. 9.  33 and  massive  receptacle  self-conscious  power  Consequently, dichotomy  of human designs, and unremitting  at the level  between  and "adequacy"  sel f-assertion.  of transcendental  "realism"  and "idealism"  "  to it as  S S i  meaning,  the  may be expressed  as  follows: The realist is the knower and informed actor, the brave person who defies necessity and eliminates obstacles. The idealist is not the dreamer or the fanatic, but the dupe who acquiesces meekly in being led, being hemmed in by circumstances outside. SA  The  Dialectical Having  real,"  Nature distinguished  and having the form  reality  qua practice  interpenetration  or  each  opposed  of which  "concepts  are dialectically  attention  implicitly  denied  [discovery  here  25. 26.  Ibid. Ibid.  to the other  argues  referents  of tension  transcendent  for not  to its practical  homogenous,  As Deising  explains,  when the elaboration  by the first;  as an active'  concept  that  when one  process  of  ideals of the  by reference  Reality,  dialectical.  between - the  are aspects  be understood  that  Immediacy  - and Truth  as an opposed  or excluded understood  realm  and realize  related  then  each  of the  as heterogenous,  and hence  of  two referents.  counterpart.  must be understood  self-contradictory  draws  can only  (but presupposed)  purposes,  to, Berki  of constraints  The latter  for "the  or partiality  is a dynamic  to pursue  referents  is the site  the latter  politics")  or purposes.  broad  it leads  or immediacy  of freedom  goals  whole,  of "realism"  - the abstraction  abstraction  three  the inadequacy  between  ("international  Reality between  shown  through  necessity  of  of one has been discovers  thinking  34 rather  than  a passive  the  opposite  and  applicability  concept  of The  who may  or  the  of  the  arises  from  of  reification freedom,  its  But make  separated knowledge.  of the  on  They  both to  by  of  conduct, recognition  which  between its  and  a  either  is  of is  autonomy  and or  superimposed  necessity cannot  of  self-  turn,  necessity  then  upon  nor  be  neatly  experience  and  other."  SB  27. Paul Diesing, Patterns (Chicago: A1 dine, 1971), 28. Berki, op. cit., p.  for  and for  in  in  in  the  that  freedom  realism terms  limits  of Discovery p. 212. 96.  not  between  necessity  characterises respect  (note:  relationship  implications  Berki of  the  interpenetration  denotes  linked)  noting  practice  Prescription  which but  therefore  in  they  each  substantive  idealism,  "neither  modes  presuppose  presupposition  separate  distinct  are  awareness  are  and  slaves  conscious  -  and  "not-master"  world  presupposing  own,  masters  a  the  famous  a  qua  the  referent  their to  of  reality  out,  validity  and  in  political  points  assigned  interdependence  elucidated  Berki  is  masters  which  the  Hegel's  a master  is  abstractions  as  Description The  a given;  ontological  sense  and  realism  that  between  view that  "there"J for  a contradiction,  heterogeneity,  one-sided  immediacy.  From  such  is  example,  However,  A dialectical  as  of  of  slave.  Political  denial  freedom  a  what  contradiction  each  heterogeneity  the  For  presupposition  contradictory.  is  be  other.  the  first.  contradition  not  of  (presupposed)  relational  opposites,  sense,  required  the  logical  may  relational  this  is  of  i1 lustration slaves.  acknowledgement  as of  which  can an  attribute  moderation  terms  Social  of  be  ends  and and  Sciences  35  the or  means dumb  to  surrender  celebration  of  Necessity of  achieve to  freedom  mutual  On  the  morality  the  freedom  and  their  them.  Realism  is  abstraction  to  realize  are  neither  of  the  glorification  necessity,  putative  abstractions,  nor  is  it  transcendent practice  the  the  purposes. dynamic  site  the  of  penetration.  one  hand,  or  freedom  permeates  necessity  in  form  self-determination:  A person cannot be free if he is "determined," whether the putative determinant be defined in terms of political oppression or instinctual impulse. But he cannot be called free either if he is to be seen as completely undetermined; pure indeterminacy is just as impossible to entertain in practical thought as complete determination. So freedom, correctly understood, can only mean self-determination or, in other words, the mutual interpenetration of determination by indeterminacy (the person being, as it were, lifted out of the world of forces oppressing him) and indeterminacy by determination (the person, by his will, purpose, conscious act or whatever, arrests the chaotic void which the complete lack of determination would place him in). * s<  This repays  rather  careful  freedom of  is  is  study.  to  Skinner  concept  but  any  freedom  also  more  has as  disc  loses  than  saying  simply  from),  recently  argued,  an  "exercise" and  sense. not  is  freedom  undetermined  meaningful  passage  Berki  (i.e.  Ouentin  in  mean  contraints  completely  a difficult  just  an  that  then  it  not concept  the  digest  quickly,  unless  the  indeterminacy,  without  Thus  to  must  just  as  abstract  be  the  of absence  construed,  as  "opportunity"  to).  To  30  is  not  open-ended  possibi1ity  realm  an  (freedom  constraints ultimately  or  and  to  be  nature  be free of  of  29. Ibid., p. 76. JO. See Ouentin Skinner, "The Idea of Negative Liberty: Philosophical and Historical Perspectives," in Richard Rorty et al., eds., Philosophy in History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), pp". 193-224 ~  36 subjectively the  "desired"  "necessity"  of  or  "preferred"  action  informed  by  states  of  affairs,  but  moral  commands:  also  Change and action with a view to improvement are not only possible, but morally obiigatory in politics... this is what recognition of the reality of resistance means: unless we understand resistance as resistance and obstacles as obstacles, we are not realists, but conservative defenders of Realpolitik. The proper understanding of "resistance," that is to say, implies that we should continually seek to overcome i t . . . t h e constraint or necessity of morality is what makes us "free," actively and relevantly, in the midst of the conceptual realm of necessity confronting us in the reality of practice. s±  Morality channels life)  the and  may  realm  away  be.  The  morality, in  realm  realm  of  action  no  guarantee  of  the  complete  which  form  necessity  or  the  notion  31. 32.  Berki, Ibid.,  restraining  op. p.  cit., 152.  of  it  pp.  ends  with  realm  and  (the  good  these the  of  ends  realm  of  necessity.  a natural  sense,  s  also  understands  indeed  demands  of  s  good  "reason" infinite  our "  free For  or  only  just  as  constraints  from  27,  total  152.  realization.  that  embodies  the  freedom  penetrates  or  metaphysical  by  and  the  "intentions"  a  will...set  that  purposeful  "future"  self-determination of  limits  whatever  in  heaven  human  of  the  life),  the  and  perfect,  in  certain  synonymous  realist  supreme  necessity  also  sense.  sublime  morality.  but  accepted  permits  bright,  of  be  the  realization  consciousness  freedom,  to  hand,  of  a  is  permeates  "isolated,  world  bad  "realistic")  other  unsul1ied  (the  realm  (or  choice,  towards  freedom  has  freedom  is  others  politics  the  human  freedom  of  this  a practical On  of  from  and  Nothing in  presupposes  penetrates morality, the The  realm  of  realist,  an  37 remember, given,  accepts whose  some  date.  First,  for  in  Michael  Oakeshott,  or  to  be  to  be  argues,  the  attending  to  moreover  what  accustomed  like  a  intimated exactly the  of  is  in the  (practical)  arrangements  of  our  is  affairs."  independently  a concrete point  manner in  recognition  is  of  of  philosopher education,  argues  appropriate  as  a  scientific  or  between  of  how we  of  "freedom  which  "ideal"  or  which "  3 3 r  with of  a  he  a manner  something  limits  that  what we do,  creature  realism  the  is  enterprises,  of  behaving.  equating  ways.  established,"  premeditated it  main  "Political  Thus  at  political  scientist,  be  a  political  society;  the  freedom  of  advance  a  of  practice  to  in  hypothesis,  same  a  cooking.  want to do,  an  scientific  being  two  regarding  to  as  disappear  in  He  complex  relation  politics  English  on  principles  premeditated  conduct  not  practice.  arrangements  we  the  existing  of  the  what essay  of  activity  the  to  ty  realm  bri11iant  same  activi  be  the  a given  not  freedom  by  abstract  the  pursued,  "cannot  pursued  his  within  the  and  to  content  in  sets  have  hypothesis  ends  its in  pursued  organization,  cookbook  of  of  will  restrains purposes,  "intimation"  ideologies, ends  Necessity  terms  heterogeneity  characteristics  practical  limited  its  dialectical  ontological  future  calls  the  and are can a  is  Berki  is  dream; already  makes  moderation  what  be  and possible:  To get from A to B the nature of A has to be taken into consideration, and furthermore the nature of B cannot be conceived as being wholly different from that of A. If it were that radically different, then we could never reach i t and could never even conceive it. From which it follows that the concrete ends of political action must always be limited, circumscribed ends...the 33. Michael Books, 1962),  Oakeshott, Rational pp. 120-121.  ism  in  Politics  (New  York:  Basic  38 basic and irreducible discrepancy between what intended and what is attained must be recognized exist and expected to go on existing...** Second, Despite  Leo  philosophy course  in  of  "the  freedom  competing  belief  Not  of  action  others,  and  this  of  likely  requires  reflected and  pursuit  of  must ends  in  between other  be  but  As  Van  also  when a  may  an  impede  enforcement  Dyke observes, Rather,  the  meaning  may the  which  a choice of  the  "values different  some of  heterogeneity  the means  even  importance.  exists,  for  systems  within  as  chains,  that  The  manifested  values  chain.  over  of  content.  but  values  well  whose pursuit implies  is  between  certain  a conflict the  there  ideological  be  realist,  likely  realm of  are  is of  its  injurious  to achieve  Political means in the realist perspective fashioned so as to combat the "resistance" that hinder ideals, which means to enter is played imperfectly in politics, with 34. Berki, op. 35. Vernon Van Science Review.  or  relative  as  different  disagreement  values  of  their  trade-offs  Thus  9  values,  limited  to  political  life,  and  to enhance  where  of  heterogenous,  meaning  same means-ends  to be made."*  content  as  on  good  communities,  implementation. the  purpose  meaning  itself  and the  designed  values...belong  freedom,  the  to  differentiated.  incommensurability  cultures  to intersect...  to have  of  is  there  arises  f i t on  the  formulations  is  to insure  itself  substantive  regarding  Courses  all  nature  its  is  about  morality  across  conflict  sorts  on  only  community,  do not  rhetoric  and  exists  mechanism  freedom  philosophical  and  agreement  of  true"  consensus  movements. of  realm  Strauss's and  no  realm  the  is  to not  the  only  them:  must be of forces the game that imperfect  cit., p. 28. Dyke, "Values and Interests," American Vol. 56, No. 3 (September 1962), p. 568.  Political  39 rules. The promised land lies perpetually horizon, and imagined means which derive and value from this promised land., are Realism  Versus  Ideal  Political  for  as action  and  It  may  will  take  also  the  forms  with  regard  privileged.  its  rejection  the  abstracted  as  This  a  can  of  which  only  the main  and  Ideal  and  moral)  and  sustain  the  the  attempt  to  36.  Berki,  op.  "real" is dual  condemned autonomy reify  cit.,  the  but  then the  from  proceeding  ism,  whereby  the  unless  it  of  privileged  the  necessity  29.  ideal  can  be  or  per  se  of unitary  either  referent  its  to  essence. dialectical  label  the  remainder  prescriptive  somehow (or  unabstracted harnessed  are  reification  the  dimension to  referent. freedom,  and  after  of as  I  forms  ism  the  unabstracted and  plural.  autonomous  striving  autonomy  descriptive  either  p.  the  abstracting  and a  is  as  and  reality,  practice  is  ism  political  of  result  of  of  but  These  select  and  although  nostalgia.  the  this  meaning  imagination,  they  and  usage  singular  heterogeneity  by  The  of  ordinary  not  characteristics  achieved  "unreal."  is  referent  be  referent  politics  variant  with  concomitant  and  presupposes of  abstracted  the  argues  dialectical  dimension  cognitive  a  of  necessity  reality  Consistent  nostalgia  referent.  heterogeneity  of  to The  understanding, not  as  between  political  conventions  he  of  complacency  for  Imagination  and  dichotomy  discusses  which  and  descriptively  posited  the  then  idealism,  add  differ  Berki  both  evaluation.  on  3,6  Complacency  referents  its  based  sense,  political  any  autonomous  understanding, common  then,  eschews  freedom  basis  Nostalgia,  realism,  prescriptively, and  isms:  over the their meaning unsuitable.  preserve  Idealism and  is  not  is  40 confined  to  since  it  reification  enables  idealist of  ideal in  In  ism  Berki's  or  terms, contrasts  phrase  as  this  of  the  considered  in  understood, approx  two  i ma Hons: The  be  be  in  study.  forms  is  International  ism  ideal  ideal  ism  demonstrate, international  the  with  of  of  nostalgia,  nicely  fits  theory  realism, of  as Relations,  the the  unity  of  selected  associated  Political  synthetic  important,  commonly  called  will  is  between  referent of  with  This  made  which  is  this  thesis  "the  latter.  history  "realists"  this  is  the  may  He  first  on  utopianism  imagination. that,  the to  depending  departure.  political  of  a distinction  thinking,  point  what,  the  to  a the  be  properly  these...  partial  "  relationship  which gives rise to the stance of is an ideal ism that is revealed as the attempted idealization of the past [in the context of this study, I will argue, Hans Morgenthau] and the present [Kenneth Waltz, whom I will label as a complacent idealist], the assertion of the supreme value of a "political" realm with its own rules, laws, moral commands and law-enforcement through power. I shall call this partial arrest the idealism of nostalgia. And the relationship to reality whose typical expression is [utopianism] receives its seeming coherence through its idealization of a future, the value placed in an abstract possibi1ity of eliminating a pernicious and contingent present and building instead a world that is proper to man's "natural" being. The term I propose to use in characterizing this position is the idealism of imagination.37.  Realpolitik  Nostalgia deviations is  from  so-called  dominant  and  imagination,  realism  because referent  the  existing  37.  Ibid.,  status  pp.  in  argues thought  and  its  reification  through  for  reality,  quo  30-31.  Berki,  (which  it I  finds will  are  action.  two  Nostalgic of  itself refer  the  necessity either  to  as  main ideal as reifying  complacency  ism the  41  rather in  than  nostalgia)  practice  and  ought  distant the  by to  relevant is  and two,  past  experience  held,  to  of  and  conduct  Morgenthau  combat  in  of  by  guarantee  for  resonates  with  appointed  mission  with  ideal  ism  structural politics) the  38.  the  of  Ibid.,  educate  he  and the  and  seeks  realm  only  199.  hope  the  For  the  him,  the  we  of  the  theory  shall  see,  to  In  over  order  and  contrast, a  Union  world as  the  best  Morgenthau's  some  the  "realism"  of  pernicious  In  quo  quo.  Waltz  nineteenth-century  Waltz's  (indeed  Kenneth  international  New World  freedom  prescriptive  "nostalgic"  Soviet  justify  of  past  international  on  can  "imperfection"  by  Whilst  status  of  very  of  for  a writer  change form  not  As  status  and  to  of  some  politics.  the  static  idealist.  p.  form  politics,  procedural  the  imaginative  to  more as  stability. of  "good"  and  policy.  the  States  urgency  as  reifies  is  United  "the  a given  inter—war  existing  international  bipolar  in  dominated  that  argue,  the  international the  the  ism  best  international  complacency  allegedly  the  will  itself  the  with  interpreted  in  as  that it  is  the  reifies  dominated  I  foreign  past  to  is  evaluative  American  post-1945  Waltz  realities"  returning [and]  he  ideal  guo  arguing  comparing  what  imaginative  diplomacy  stability  by  Morgenthau  reifies  European  ism,  respectively  Morgenthau.  effects  Kenneth  in  status  distinguishable  trying  the  ideal only  revealed  are  Hans  this  created  standard.These positions  if  imaginative  be  present  or,  kind  of  self-  the  "harsh  work  fairly  oozes  perpetuation  of  contrast,  reinvention  that  makes  heterogeneity  an  imaginative  necessity, a  work  and  radical  of any  sense of  to  42 International need  not  politics, and  will  unproblematic  whilst  not  sully  his  desirability  interests"  or  community  "basic  somehow  may  on  of  mankind  it  characterize  preferred  based  needs"  endows  it  with  world,  the  world,  whose  transparent as  the  this  allegedly "real  a posited  authority  purposive  of  a  Kantian  moral  imperative. Real ism,  argues  opposed  attributes  stances  conceal  need  to  these  of  forms  international of  E.  Years'  Crisis  correct,  the  argument  "realism" the  split  "realism" fails  detail  ideal  ism  labels terms  and to  of  all  of  wrong.  Instead,  nostalgic  discussion  and  of  in  the  the  and  "Utopia"  his  posited  it  he  not  have  and  and may  be  couched therefore  dichotomy  refers  idealism.  such  cannot  realist  judgement  dividing  transcend  because  the  should  within  second  "undoubtedly  Carr  "idealism"  of  Twenty  the  imaginative  of  The  The  political  no  nature  the  field,  separate  fact  the  to  as  issues  in  students  turn  analysis."*°  "reality"  "idealism."  only  is of  of  described that  prescriptive  There  work  issues  these  dialectical  benefit  need  been  modes  between his  has  are  the  analysis  the  classic  the  Utopian  for  for  between  dichotomous  Berki's  They  Carr's  way  politics.  in  of  in  and  conducting  Carr  H.  formulation or  to  of  middle  whose  international  » w h i c h  idealist,  the  disregard  relations.  chapter  his  is  thought,  shared  regurgitate  two  best  of a  heterogeneity  Berki,  By  political a  give  sharp voice  dichotomy, to  any  39. E.H. Carr, The Twenty Years' Crisis (London: Macmi 1 lan Press, 1946). 40. R.B.J. Walker, Political Theory and The Transformation of World Politics (World Order Studies Program Occasional Paper No. 8: Princeton University Press, 1980), p.24.  43 transcendent does  not  position know  how.  which For  is,  in  fact,  what  he wants  to  do,  but  Carr,  The antithesis of Utopia and reality - a balance always swinging towards and away from equi1ibrium and never completely attaining i t - is a fundamental antithesis revealing itself in many forms of thought. The two methods of approach - the inclination to ignore what was and what is in contemplation of what should be, and the inclination to deduce what should be from what was and what is - determine opposite attitudes towards every political problem.** This with  antithesis,  a series  of  he argues, dichotomies  determinism,  the  intellectual  versus  ethics necessity  and  dichotomy  of  is Carr  is  "realism"  is  of  not of  real  a  ism.  bureaucrat,  and  by Carr  and  "morality,"  which  realistic.*  transcendent For  even s  "power" though At  viewpoint  free  will  versus the  relationship  what  col lapsed  "realist" very  the  between  on  as  identified  and practice,  is  and dependent  a reluctant  possibility label  to  theory  The antinomy  "power"  be analogously  he posits  between  the  freedom  subordinate  which  relation  and politics.  can  into  between  Berki  calls  an  apparent  he ultimately to  have  he seems  times which  concedes  any to  think  he suggests surely  effect. that  the  deserves  the  example:  Immature thought is predominantly purposive and Utopian. Thought which rejects purpose altogether is the thought of old age. Mature thought combines purpose with observation and analysis. Utopia and reality are thus the two facets of political science. Sound political thought and sound political life will be found only where both have their place.* 3  41. Carr, op. c i t . , p.11. 42. "Consistent realism excludes four things which appear to essential ingredients of all effective political thinking: a finite goal, an emotional appeal, a right of moral judgement, a ground for action." Ibid., p. 89. In short, the realm of freedom. 43. Ibid., p.10.  be and  44 Yet other  Carr  suggestive  implications their  author.  use  the  manifestly  "is  thought  unable  in  any  of  transcendence  is  presupposition belong this  to  and  "corrective"  be  transcended  between when one  of  informing foreign the  However, mislabel no  two  the  to  the  in  thought. the  are  both But All  strengths to be  Carr's  book is  led  as  "realism" from Berki, that  R.B.J. Walker, E.H. Carr, op.  that and it  they  each  the  p. 93.  -  meet. '"*  Given  SI  to  achieve. and  each  seems,  to is  the  conduct  of  great  as  and  dichotomy was  a  Carr,  see-saw  power  "classic"  rightly  in  so.  between  what  he  transcended,  and  goal  study  of  is  other  in  the modest  27.  reality  hand  regarded  "idealism" is  and  according it  for  metaphysical  upper  Relations, Carr's  elements  potential  to attack  the  and  still  do,  Carr  both  doctrines,  cannot,  can  of  task. op. cit., cit., p.  never  unsound  "mature"  Carr's  impossible  getting  International time  is  one  diplomacy  high  to begin  media  other.  is  help  via  by  his  notes,  to have  can  politics,"  and  Walker  - Utopia  which  "constant  of  implied  elements  planes  it  little  least 44. 45.  "the  "idealism"  of  as  1y defeated  escape  contradicts  polarities,the  international  discipline  it  the  "sound"  is possible  them appears  policy.  about  many  whose  stuff  flatly  how  different  them, using  the  and  completely  that  is  Because,  frustrating  that  two  forces  practice.  of  presupposition,  "Realism" a  pairs  observation  statements  to establish his  his  these  insight theory  "irreconcilable"  and  despite  political  irreconcilable term  goods,  a dialectical  international  "realistic"  political  the  of  Thus despite of  of  to deliver  passages  for  interaction the  fails  this  with at  45 The  central  ontological  question  conceptualization  deserves  the  attribute  perspective  provided  his  the  mentor,  clues  as  politics reality  how one  as  a distinct  necessary  poli  to  argue,  are  flow  in  idealists. albeit  intellectual  the  the  theory  politics,  that  withdraw  can  subject-matter.  I  Bull,  will  (note: But the most the  argue  Martin  not  label  this from  influential post-war  era.  the  are  woefully  done,  via  prescriptive  first  two  inadequate  is  and  Kenneth international  writers, of  very  I  will  international different  evaluative to  social it  in  and  of powerful  of  Morgenthau  These  at  insights  international  realm  descriptions  arrived  the  about  is Hans  the  provides  "realists"  shared  and  by  autonomous)  before  that  Might, think  or  politics"  informed  realistically  deductively  them,  ism?  Hedley  Their  routes, from  real  characterization,  "international  historian  states.  arguably tical  by  What  of  of  English  to  among  Waltz,  remains.  the  stances  complexity  of  46  CHAPTER  THREE  HANS MORGENTHAU;  THEORY  AS  TRUTH  IntroducHon The  upshot  descriptive  of  attribute  presupposition grasped  is  as  but  might  about  argue  that  which  I  order  provides  politics an  in  attempt  unitary,  tendency  reality  as  to  simplify  can  only  be  in  the  this grasped  to  a  be  Eight,  ism  view  "signifies  to  gaining  involves and  and  nature  a  self-  explanation  (London:  the reading  The  only  a the  also  abstraction,  as  in  international  endeavour  done.  how  international  ideal  with  own  thereby,  Realism  Just  Chapter  reality,  one's  the  be  inexorable  on  contrast,  this  cannot  to  conceptualising  political  in  194.  left  dialectically,  subject  On Political 228,  "has  x  task  picture;  in  ontological  improvement."  reality  from  the  whose  perspective  political  self-contradiction  1. R.N. Berki, 1981), p. 256. 2. Ibid., pp.  a  In  arrested  whole...but  is  manner.  is  with  limited  for  abstracting  the  action  to  point  coherent  remain  realism  politics]  Bull's  a starting  contradiction escape  this  Hedley  to  and  that  self-contradictory,  doing  realistic  is  [international  pointers  a  of  chapter  thought  [and]  seemingly  necessity  this  that  also  go  last of  dynamic  oppositions one  the  of  thereby,  we  offered."  s  J.M.  Dent  &  Sons,  47 In  the  allegedly  the  better this  next  "Pope"  characterized by  highlighting  description  of  description  and  dimension "the  chapter,  of  golden  politics  of  subtle  his  his  the  eighteenth of  international  politics  this,  subsequent chapter  power  is  and  respect.  "•*  complete  description,  to  divided  into  based  simply be  three  of  in  rules  the the  governing are  to  The  as  to  construct  an demonstrating  Four. first  a  the  groundwork  Chapter  of  fails  Before the  the  dialectic subject  Morgenthau  it.  the  exaggerates  attempt  prepares  power  when  the  vastly  upon  sections.  restrained  grasp  image  Yet  undertaken  called  contradictions  to  which  his  prescriptive  recently  the  and  These  static  despite  chapter  -  this  the  has  power  freedom.  theory  critique  a  his  centuries...  failure  states,  over  writer  in  is  demonstrate  between -  nineteenth  in  necessity  present  one  of  among  and  will in  diplomacy  within  Relations*, /  reification what  Morgenthau,  International  politics,  of  Hans  contradictions  balance  held  that  idealist.  the  "empirical" the  in  international  Morgenthau's  allegedly  -  of  of  this  a nostalgic  age  result  justify  as  work  were  of  "realism"  nostalgic  system  dominance  argue  of  international  that  for  will  fundamental  manoeuvres  struggle  I  section  for  the  This traces  3. Stanley Hoffmann, "Realism and Its Discontents," Atlantic Monthly. Vol.256, No. 5 (November, 1985), pp.131-136. 4. Jaap W. Nobel, "Morgenthau's Theory and Practice: A Response to Peter Gel 1 man," Review of International Studies, Vol. 15, No. 3 (July 1989), p. 266. This characterization is entirely consistent with Berki's use of the term nostalgia to refer "to a writer's moral and valuational anchorage in some definite, wellknown and not too remote historical experience, an abstracted form of past political reality. It is this past or nostalgic concentration which is distinctive about the kind of idealism we are discussing here: what is held up for admiration... is something that has already happened in the past." Berki, op. cit., p. 199.  48 the  logic  behind  politics  is  a  realm  atomistically presents the  the  main  of  and  The  the  the  to  "rational  liberalism,"  for  mainstream  and  the  the  of  international  Hoffmann, fellow  difficulty pressures, "to  and  condeming  and  practice great the  executive  educate  the  Morgenthau  7  and  relative  academic  tics the Morgenthau of  conseguences politics  not also  and  the  sel  Hence  the  words  United towards  policy of  joust  views  from  Stanley with  f-proclaimed his  the  the  foreign  merely... a  of antipathy  American  called  throughout  power,  in  he  international  cultural  tried,  was  what  alleged  diplomacy  political  outsider.  self-styled  inexperience its  was  prescriptive theory.  basis  power  heathen,  Finally,  central  Hans  about  section  g  among  its  among  next  "empirical"  insulating  Morgenthau  literati." "  a political  intellectual  power  Nations.  Poli  the  of  the  years,  diplomacy,  of  of  theorist  Given  A  concentration  domestic  summary  The  Among  International  western  period.  consequent  and  destroying  conduct  in  a  international  for  states.  Politics  post-war  that  a struggle  of  political  thought  -  avowedly  of  early  premise  asocial  Morgenthau's  committed  States  with  Autonomy  in  inter—war  necessity  elements  leading  "realists"  basic  and  concludes  implications  As  of  conceived  chapter  Power  Morgenthau''s  his rebel,  on  what  5. Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, fifth ed., revised (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978). All page references in the text refer to this edition. 6. It should be pointed out that Morgenthau arrived at his most important ideas on the nature of international politics during the 1930s. For an interesting analysis of the evolution of his pre-war writing, see Niels Amstrup, "The Early Morgenthau. A Comment on the Intellectual Origins of Realism," Cooperation and Conflict. Vol. 13 (1978), pp. 163-175. 7. Stanley Hoffmann, "An American Social Science: International Relations," Daedalus. Vol.106, No.3 (Summer, 1977), p.44.  49 "realism,  " means  political  theory  sufficiently E.H.  grave  doubt  a way  views  of  remained  theory  from  of  over  reason  for  change  with the  five  Among  times,  publication  of  In  of  from  decline either  and his  the  Nations  editions  Morgenthau's the  out  in  death  the  of  in  its  to  his and policy  1980.*  factually  up  substantially  was  Indeed, his  or The  role  July  keep  1978.  field  era,  foreign  in  to  term  although  the  remained  politically Defence  of  American  need  1948  the  thought  politics,  until  cast  Nonetheless,  3  international  arising  of  of  John  to  utility  a product  it,  is  (e.g.  Kennan)  school  terms.  understanding  Politics  George  obviously  unaltered  changes  his  unaltered  After  in  is  practice,  descriptive  vague  international  "realists"  and  or  of  diplomatic  a particular  work  "essence"  terms  post-war  Neibuhr,  rather  essentially  date,  other  analytical  than  in  American  characterizing  the  of  both  as  with  Morgenthau's  on  Apart  well  Reinhold the  other  nature  to  on  entails,  odds  Carr,  of  anything much  as  at  Herz,  as  and  one  refusal  to  intellectually. National  Interest,  in  8. As Gel 1 man has recently put it, beyond a shared purpose among these and other scholars to repudiate "unfounded hopes for a new world [in Berki's terms, imaginative idealismj... the diversity of theoretical priorities among "Realists" limits the utility of realism as a word that can either describe or enlighten." Peter GelIman, "Hans J. Morgenthau and the Legacy of Political Realism," Review of International Studies, Vol. 14, No. 4 (October 1988), p. 248. Whilst I agree with the first part of this judgement, this study is obviously undertaken in the belief that the second part is unfounded. For an incisive comparison between Carr, Kennan, Niebuhr and Morgenthau, see Michael J. Smith, Realist Thought From Weber to Kissinger (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1986.) 9. For example, one of the last scholarly events Morgenthau attended was a session of the International Studies Association convention in Los Angeles. It was entitled "Political Realism Revisited" and Morgenthau's opening remark was "Why revisited? I never left it." See John Herz, "Political Realism Revisited," International Studies Quarterly, Vol.25, No.2 (June, 1981), p. 182.  5 0  1951,  Morgenthau  turned  American  foreign  Vietnam,  which  to write  voluminously  increasingly world,  including  he apposed  from  until  the general  principles political  or tenets realism."  systematic essential  essentially  of such  Thus in order  relations  to understand  to begin  with  However,  even  domestic  and international  "relations"  if one accepts  are subordinate  nations  the behaviour  his most therefore  the heroic  are not individuals;  on a wider of states  and  of state  scale."  xx  it is  as the  assumption  of social  determinants  between In  between  behaviour  generic  of  and is  individuals  contexts  to  on the  theory.  between  individual  academic  on the relationship  the relations  between  attempt  "the philosophy  political  "the relations  views  o  poli tics  a philosophy,  continued  the  book represents  his views  from  x  his  of in  he  than  by his explicit  [p.4] His first  different  are only  1y innovative.  and international view,  Although  rather  of international  to understanding  Morgenthau's  public  issues  involvement  he directed  of what he calls  exposition  philosophy  necessary  theory  its growing  the outset.  is distinguished  a grand  to contemporary  his death,  and was not theoretical  construct  they  policy,  towards  Morgenthau  this  his attention  explanandum.  that  the  institutional behaviour  10. Morgenthau's articles have been published in three volumes by the University of Chicago Press (1962), entitled The Decline of Democratic Politics, The Impasse of American Foreign Policy, and The Restoration of American Politics. 11. Scientific Man Versus Power Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946), p.43. Consequently, "a theory of international politics is but a specific instance of a general theory of politics," applied to one spatial domain. "The Nature and Limits of a Theory of International Relations," in William T.R. Fox, ed., Theoretical Aspects of International Relations (Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1959), p. 15.  51 (necessary state),  to on  posit  what  basis  character!zation As  of  the  cannot  logical  construct that  invocation  an  example,  view  are  to  Passion of  men  depends  on  authority very  the  of  the  can  in  a  and  nature  of the  ineguality transition Thus  for  Rousseau  is  of an  and  an  invoking  in on  promotes  rather and from Hobbes,  the  needs. a x  contract, a  In  state the  of  state  therefore  supreme  Rousseau  For a  nature is  condition rivalry  by  scarcity.  an  human  a  a  contrast,  interdependence, a  hand,  order of  on These  and  characterized than  rests  other,  Social  its  For  one  competition  basic  nature,  on  and  absence.  the  or  simple  fiction,  its  the  image  the  Leviathan  chaos  and  peace.  for  reconstruction.  between,  via  the  nature,"  all-powerful of  demonstrates,  historical  imaginative  their  abundance  man  particular  by  "state  sources  of  and  resolved  which  state  a  Hobbes  of  enforce  between  nature?"  establishment,  different  society.  justify  ambition)  satisfy  which  result  one  interaction  greed,  to  accompanies civil  of  defence  the  the  compassion is  of  scarcity  amongst  a  state  (anger,  resource  man  exercise  ambivalent  isomorphism  empirically of  Hobbes'  traced  can  between  be  the  essential  "human  dispute  problem  reason  an  posits  human him,  violence  condition to  necessary  a  de to  that facto ensure  12. The initial ambivalence is reflected in Hobbes' prescriptions for social order. As several commentators have observed, Hobbes believed that a monopooly of force, though necessary, was not sufficient to maintain order. He also stressed the educative role of the state in changing human nature. For particularly good analyses of this point, see Donald U. Hanson, "Thomas Hobbes's Highway to Peace," International Organization, Vol.38, No.2 (Spring 1984), pp. 329-354, and Charles D. Tarleton, "The Creation and Maintenance of Government: A Neglected Dimension of Leviathan," Political Studies, Vol.26, No.3 (Autumn 1978), pp. 307-327.  52  peace,  defined  positive the  a  state  of  states.  because  of  tics  is  roots  between  poli  the  function  tackle in  as  is  between  the  possibi1ity  is  greater  due  to  intensity.*  on  philosophers neither  image  of  relations  13. see pp. 14.  differences  the  invokes which  insatiable  nature"  states,  apparently  interdependence greater  and  two  "state  between nor  scope  these  a mythical  of  the  guarantees  how  to  man dominate  is  he  a  the  consistent,  of  politics  problem?  a  others.  Man  a  selfish is  of  Hobbes  is  innately  For an excel lent comparison between Stanley Hoffmann, The State of Mar 56-77. See Scientific Man, pp. 196-202.  the  First, "fallen  by  fiat.  struggle  for  creature  necessarily  these two (New York:  of  analysing  conception  ambiguity  all  importance  to  resolve  religious the  that  on  a precondition  does  and  asserts  insistence  as  avoids  political urge  to  motivation  dogmatic  a metaphysical  because  its  for  politics.  "human  simply  appeal  states  possibilities  between  distinguishing  individual  Morgenthau's  among  Morgenthau  an  extreme  state  self-defence.  and by  that  among  for the  accentuated  international  understanding  power  inequality  faci1itates of  Given  man"  from  peace  a postulated  capabilities  arising  life  international  coexistence  seeing  to  of  arguing  in  case,  scale,  the  peaceful  state  for  between  opposite  global  the  implications optimistic,  enhanced  illustrate,  determinants  he  a As  3  nature"  the  of  this  conceptions  individuals  of  their  violence  magnified  contrasting  dissimilarity  relations  Rousseau,  inability  different  relatively  structural  nature,  inter—state  to  For  the  These  lead  Hobbes  argues  violence. by  violence.  of  Rousseau  of  outweighted  nature  the  and  of  absence  with evil.**  philosophers, Praeger, 1965),  53  However,  this  Secondly,  does  not  therefore,  proposition  by  intellectual  resolve  he justifies  its  heuristic  poverty  the  for  a ful1-blown  The  latter,  the  context  of  subjective Instead,  an  empirical  and  power,  optimistic  does  with  pragmatic  in  of  theory  and  it.  metaphysical the  liberal  of  belief  in  in  providing  international  not,  so  or  avoids  revealing  man,  from  "realist"  it  principles  his  bold  century  derived  those  justifies  It simply  rather  both  view  grand  discovery,  Morgenthau  this  although  agreement  problem.  the nineteenth  based  politics.  on  of  progress, basis  the  seems,  for  theoretical  its  principles, depend  upon  a  validity.  framework  on  grounds:  A scientific theory has the purpose of bringing order and meaning to a mass of phenomena which without it would remain disconnected and unintel1igible. Thus, a scientific theory must meet the dual test of experience and reason. Do the facts as they actually are lend themselves to the interpretation that the theory has put upon them, and do the conclusions at which the theory arrives follow with logical necessity from its premises? In short, is the theory consistent with the facts and within itself?*" Morgenthau's to scientific but  latter  "reason,"  to confirm  mediated  by  uniquely  a  truth  religion,  determines  not  pessimistic  of  "realism"  appeals  the  truth  about  politics,  to discover  already art,  brand  and  established philosophical  the metaphysical  questions  through  experience,  introspection.** reason  must  The grapple  15. Hans Morgenthau, "The Purpose of Political Science," in James C. Charlesworth, ed., A Design For Political Science (Phi lade 1phia: American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1966), p. 63. 16. Thus "no quantitative extension of scientific knowledge can solve the perennial problems which art, religion and philosophy attempt to answer." Scientific Man, p.123. Exactly the same argument is made in one of his last books, where he argues that "all knowledge is justified by a meaning that transcends it." See Science: Servant or Master? (New York: New American Library, 1972), p.9.  54 wit/?.  It  supplies  empirical  enquiry,  metaphysical only  which  imperfectly  is  not  Human three practice,  in  all  that  the  How,  does  then,  as  distinguishing  it  religion lies  religion,  in  his  in  which  power  to  dominate  (the  (the  spiritual  realm  belief  by  that  and is  others.  so  centrality  on)  is  an  ultimately Consequently,  instruments  the  politics  in of  this  a universal  political  through  reason,  metaphysic,  human view and  of  In  s  and  man,  which  rational  dimensions. focus  on  of  rational  pursuit  by  morality particular animus  of and  law?  implication,  autonomous dependent  the  politics,  morality),  (and  x  behaviour,  exclusive  of  has  spiritual.  characteristic  economics  sphere on  the and  arena,  Scientific Ibid., p.  Man, 5.  p.lO.  The law,  of use  social of  reason which  dominandi:  To the degree in which the essence and aim of politics is power over man, politics is evil; for i t is to this degree that i t degrades man to a means for other men. It follows that the prototype of this corruption is to be found on the political scene. For here the animus dominandi is not merely blended with dominant aims of a different kind but is the very essence of the intention, the very life-blood of the action, the constitutive principle of politics as a distinct sphere 7• 18.  can  17  and  his  theory  model."  determine  justify  defining  success  subordinate  defined  Morgenthau's  from  economics,  life,  both  the  its  ethical  of  of  understood  to  his  master,  of  "scientific"  a pluralistic  of  Morgenthau  "will-to-power"  be  purpose  reality  finds  to  adopts  influence  a  rational,  combine  the  it  biological,  recognizes  not  and  irrational  "must  according  explicitly  tool,  the  reason  three  meaning  Furthermore,  wrote,  nature,  Morgenthau  answer  the  he  dimensions;  wealthj,  is  approximate  Politics,  it  transcendental  speculation.  practice. yet  the  are is  55  of human activity. Politics is a struggle for power over men, and whatever its ultimate aim may he, power is its immediate goal and the modes of acquiring, maintaining, and demonstrating i t determine the techniques of political action.** As  a result,  merely  instruments  serves  to  represent  and  the  to  reason  for  choose the  selects  Morgenthau  most  harmonise is  like  attaining  between  stakes  argues  that  power.  impulses  a particular  or  power  appropriate  means  to  conflicting  means  with  a light  and morality  and justifying  conflicting  in  reason  achieve  Reason  goals  struggle.  are  that It  also  predetermined  those  ends.  ends, Nevertheless,  which  is carried by the irrational forces of interest and emotion to where those forces want i t to move, regardless of what the inner logic of abstract reason would require. To trust in reason pure and simple is to leave the field to the stronger irrational forces which reason will serve. 2  Final  1y,  morality  and  former,  whose  from  Morgenthau  source ethics,  justifies mores  Because  politics  gain  your  "laws" and  is  Ibid., Ibid.,  politics  ever  p.  power  a realm there  out  the  example, others  perpetual  of  social  exposed  to  corruption  transcendent rules.  certain  within  life.  a system  of  apply  the of  effectiveness. in  which  my  between to  two  whereas  by selfishness  to  whilst  conflict,  Thus  derives means  genocide),  They  The  presumably  contradiction  norms.  spheres  of  order  an absolute  and ethical  195. p.155.  use  a  ethical  but  ascending of  is  of  explained  (for  in  between set  legitimises  laws," is  loss,  autonomous  action  19. 20.  of  and  never rules  and  "norms,  is  specific is  and maintain  latter  distinguishes  a culturally  Christian  achieve  0  the  different "nonpolitical  and  lust  for  56 power,  this  political  corruption act.  human politics,  rules  Good  points  the  actor, of  the  very  nature  the  his  as  grace  or  It  of  an  salvation  pluralistic the  of  the  will  Herz he  can  "inescapable in  to  As  is  absent,  and  from  other  Greek  Carr.  than  as  a  is  able  human  nature  man  political  which  world  this  Although  sss  necessity,"  another  reconcile  more  never,  of  of  is  and  to  view  morality.  outlook  Kennan,  important  tragedy  and  vision  philosophical  very  failure  ethics  human  sinfulness,  is  avowedly  with  tragic  Neibuhr, own  is  inevitable  art"  element  autonomy  reveals  man's  political  his it.  and  Morgenthau*s  such  avoid  his  1y,  from  distinguishes  recognize  modifies  arises  out,  "realists"  political  radical  because  clearly  act  it  quite  of  Biblical,  can  idea  which  "the  of  in  2? t  because  nature  inherent  "• -  Morgenthau's understand,  is  "only  an  to  overcome. These autonomy  beliefs  provide  international underlying  and  international  fail  Ibid.,  for and  of  argues  that they of  p.  his its  all represent  liberal  critique Kantian  interests  government,  because  enduring  organisation,  universalisation 21.  basis  harmony  constitutional Morgenthau  the  an  1iberalism,  the  to  about  the these  of  men.  the  spread  of  virtue  of other  a mistaken  political  nineteenth  assumptions  among  and  and  century concerning  Peace  through  education,  public  opinion  reforms western  trade, -  are faith  law  destined in  the  values.  196.  22. see Robert C. Good, "The National Interest and Political Realism: Niebuhr's "Debate" with Morgenthau and Kennan," Journal of Politics, Vol.22, No.4 (November 1960), pp.597-619. See also Michael J. Smith, op. cit., pp.201-213. 23. Scientific Man, p.204.  57 Morgenthau''s realm  basis  of continuity to political  elements,  thus  autonomy  revealing  without  system place  a radical  this arena  territorial  politics  mitigated  through  and generally  both  and direct  disguise  combined as  is  with  a shared  domestic all  of the good  these  a network  language  politics factors  of social  and history,  accentuated  by the multiplicity  sovereignty  elevates  and  moral  authority.  each As a  politics  as an  the for power  of the game."  for power  toward  power  is  progress.  of states,  free  state,  bonds,  the context  internationally.  virtualy  These  competing  of the  and community  distinguishes  as the secular  and  constitutional  of potential  allowed  takes  counterpart,  Within  "rules  norms  states  poli tics  the struggle  The coercive  are much weaker  the "will-to-power"  form.  the struggle  as a realm  in which  loyalties,  accepted  life.  of the  of international  suprasectional  such  pariiamentary  its domestic  of the state,  arrangements,  conceptions  from  in its purest  boundaries  through  transformation  context  distinct  substantive  of  and international  for the continuity  of power  to its  (for example,  structural  as a  contextual  the possibility  per se. The international  accounts  politics  a  in addition  politics  trade,  is structurally  invokes  as naive  international  means as disarmament, bodies)  international  and "necessity"  dimension  domesticating  for positing  In  whose pinnaele  of  contrast,  Here,  reign,  such  not  it is individual of  political  result  continuity in foreign policy is not a matter of choice but a necessity; for it derives from [factors] which no government is able to control but which it can neglect only at the risk of failure...consequently, the guestion of war and peace is decided in consideration of these permanent factors, regardless of the form of  only  58 government... and its domestic policies. Nations are "peace-loving" under certain conditions and are warlike under others, and i t is not the form of government or domestic policies which make them so.24 Thus  not  only  that  Morgenthau  does  not  the  nature  the  structural  of  all  on  its  in  an  dynamics  of  its  then  empirical  facilitates  the  delineate from they  do  The  that is  recurring  the  power  for  power,  the  require  it  of  patterns struggle,  the such  of and  distinctive to  essential  to  meet  is  only  theory,  political  specify  that necessary.  precludes  domestic a  be  suitably  the  which  on  of  essential  power,  sufficient  government,  construction  the  the  it  who  international  refute  politics,  restraints  anyone  not  reveals  term  implications  and  of  generic  misunderstand  the  concept  domestic  mitigating  denigrate  politics  subject-matter, in  to  outlook)  struggle  theory  of  which  a  terms.  international  resulting under  own  somewhat  domestic  differences  of  replication power,  between  is  (a  misunderstand  international  whereas  absence  philosophical  also  politics  embodied  The  they  of  requirement,  his  these  characteristics understood  indiscriminately  dichotomy  Whilst that  to  man,  Utopians"  "liberal  employs  subscribe  politics. point  do  the  struggle which  for can  outcomes the  conditions  occur.  24. Ibid., p.66. 25. In this section, I have avoided categorising Morgenthau's views on the logic of power politics in terms of "levels of analysis." Morgenthau simply cannot be neatly categorised within a typology of "causes" located at the "level" of the individual, the state, and the international political system. In fact, he straddles all three.  59 Politics  Among The  epistemological  perspective what and  he  Nations  -  his  calls  politics  However,  context store  of  that  are  valid  although  these  inductively  verifiable.  Instead,  is  nature,  the and  concerning and  the  of  Morgenthau,  "how  appreciate,  the  these  thinkers  of  their  on  the  perennial  theorists understand  we not  in  problems  and  always  Of  course,  is  since,  always  of in.  the  for  were  human thought  the  establishment  but  element  Kauti1ya,  the  regardless  being  truth.  to of to  s s e  effect  political wish  "the "  reflect their  human, they  all limitations  impossible  society  a  uniting  contexts  is  argues  also a  transcend  it  they  otherwise,"  Consequently,  a partial  of  political  political  government,  be  that  guality  common to  cannot  believing  a Jeremiah,  of  products  participate  science  The  s<b  empirically  nature  of  man  space.  they  classical  it  to  about  and  understand,  and  transcendence,  time  static  effort  historical  manifestation.  are  only  insights  their  truths"  for  "If  117  commitment  objective,  man's  order.  his  directly  of  a Hobbes?" '  lies  a complete  political  could  respective  contextual such  social  or  not  and  of  political  a Bodin,  are  relevance  is  of  justification  implications  maintenance  Plato,  are  theoretical  general  regardless  timeless  the  -  objective,  and the  Morgenthau's  discovery  "truths"  allegedly hence  of  of  "a  discovered  exist  basis  The  both  truth result  to  of is  a  26. "The Commitments of Political Science," in The Decline of Democratic Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), p. 45. 27. "The Nature and Limits of a Theory of International Relations,". in William T.R. Fox, ed., Theoretical Aspects of International Relations (Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1959), p. 19. 28. Ibid., p.21.  60 dilemma,  which  certain  cannot  be  intellectual  minimise being  the  and  Intellectually, maintain of  in  has  to  be  from  measurable  facts  are  we supposed  are  we  to  between  power,  derived  the  between  politics  than  provides patterns between  international patterns,  are  to  specify  likely  and  to the  to  occur,  in  man  by  seen,  by  the  behavioural  in  a  concept  structural  determine  and  trans-historical change,  is  in  the  for  the  a  the  struggle theory  classify  cease  basic  which  for of  these  conditions or  of  international  context from  are  context  of  tasks  of  implications  structure  The  unique  establishes  itself,  temporal  how  differences  conception,  end  What  importantly,  conditioned  the  inducing  relevant?  and  by,  rooted  the  are  Most  himself.  is  simply  facts  resulting  place.  are  an  lies  correlating  is  theorist  politics  them  we have  The  activity  takes  politics and  they  states  from  architechtonic  similarities  determined  spatial  of  "truth"  behaviour,  What  each  as  an  although  then  whose  behaviour.  the  of  a metaphysical  Power,  state  the  As  politics,  states.  of  historical  which  all  such  a to  academic  discovery  correlate?  when  context?  rather  determinant  power  events,  of  accentuated,  and  between  from  of  life.  measure  adopting  politics  the  the  to  discover and  political  political  autonomy  action  to  historical and  cannot  behaviour,  distinguish  social  context  because  one  of  that  determinant  metaphysical,  observing  argues  whose  laws,"  by  towards prevent  commitment  ultimate  with  applied.  Morgenthau  the  coped  inevitably  or  politics,  "objective  them  attitude  a metaphysical  understanding This  political that  understood  conception  only  distortions  either  must  resolved,  altogether.  under The  61 fact  that  such  contingent  elements  opposed the  patterns  to  of  can  be  discovered  practice,  history,  between  than  and  historical  a narrative  difference  rather  exist,  make  possible.  theory  and  beneath  a  theory,  Morgenthau  history  is  the as  argues  simply  one  that  of  form  substance:  The historian presents his theory in the form of a historical recital using the historic sequence of events as demonstration of his theory. The theoretician, dispensing with the historical recital, makes the theory explicit and uses historic facts in bits and pieces to demonstrate his theory. * s  Thus  the  possibility  existence  of  some  politics,  which  of  historical  Morgenthau  explains  conception  of  springboard  of  whilst  the  means  to  action,  proximate  goals  achieve  those  possible  courses  of  rational  choice  function  of  through  the  possible resources "defined  in  and  them, to  "chaos  of  social  the  desired,  a prudent terms  of  guide  particular  use  to and  selection  marshal and  the determines  1ing pursuit  as  well  quite  purpose  available of  interests  power":  The element of irrationali ty, insecurity, and chance lies in the necessity of choice among several possibilities multiplied by a great number of systems of multiple choice. [Yet] the social world is not devoid of a measure of rationality i f approached with the modest expectations of a circumspect theory... the  29.  Ibid.,  p.25.  The  power  distinguishing all  the  for  limited. of  as the  possibilities  be  contingencies," and  his  situation,  the  likely  the  provides  compete,  therefore  are  to  rationality  states any  back  Power or  the  international  referring  nature.  In  action,  is  by  which  presupposes  in  reason  goals.  reason  from in  human  for  between  theory  continuity  pluralistic  both  empirical  the  62 empirical practice  political world presents with a limited number of  Thus  Morgenthau,  for  speculation must  and  originate  society.  whose  which  power  is  interplay  between  can  be  discover  The  JO. op.  the of  possibly counterparts  in  international  source  and of  "The Purpose cit., p.65.  of a  insights  into  Political  concept  these  laws  Instead,  the  of  power  are dynamic  of  states  manner,  which  they  will  apply.  understanding of  that  certainty  historical  practice. propositions  inherently and  To  and  theoretical  tentative,  predictive  and  power  of  sciences. theory  the  the  which  rigorous  are  former  in  theoretically  natural  The  nature  which  details  the  to  activity,  specific  the  extent  international  a deep  mean  of  human  a multiplicity  under  political  history.  of  by  politics  achieve  of  sphere  context  nature,  reguires  history  facets  Although  reason  in  the  institutional  conditions  international  philosophy sole,  broad patterns  contingencies  Thus  and  and  political  a particular  directly.  patterns  towards  concerning  their  power  Theory  man  for  other  human  tested  of  determine  place.  classified  these  cannot  be  interdependent.  to  by  the  of  metaphysical  concept  applied  takes laws  cannot  the  sensitivity  be  well as choices.  30  reflection  both  power  explicitly  are  central  and  identifiable  delineating  history  characteristics  objective  and  to  then  morality),  deductive  leads  the  restrained,  for  on  of  as  theory,  "philosophical"  must  is  struggle based  a  specific  example,  the  study  provides  which  action,  (for  in  This  analysis,  the  empirical  theory rational  is  an  is  link  important,  fundamental  Science,"  the  in  if  nature  James  between  C.  of  not  the politics,  Charlesworth,  63 which  provides  the  propositions such  can  be  propositions  patterns  testify  the  aid  of  to  the  relevance  practice.  and  power  calls  view  "the  in  is  explained  history  nature,  and odds  what  necessarily place,  The  its  for  be the  subject  calls to  "the  the  "rules"  concrete  wisdom  31. George Liska, "Morgenthau Thompson and Robert J. Myers, Brunswick: Transaction Books,  and  discover  its or  dynamic monism  what  recognizes,  history  be  predicted  can  the  vs. Machiavel1i," eds., Truth And 1984), p.105.  be  The  logic  logic  of  of  tools  their  strength  any "rational"  never  intellectual  cicumstances  is  of  else.  the  space  with  number  from  of  of  Liska  geopolitical  of  moral  to  circuitous  something  nature  a  in  different  the  to  by  distill political  him  1y  the  with  to  beneath  result  of  without  essential  enables  setting  eventual  intractible  recurrent  uncovered  redeemed  cannot  comprehended  whose  simplicity  occasion,  fundamentally  evaluating  contemporary  nature  Morgenthau  outcome  for  commitment  broadest  the  be  is  practice  outcomes  but  Morgenthau  reguiring  history  historical  cannot with  latter  a compensating  the  a necessary is  the  allegedly  As  and  can  conceptual  turn,  theoretical  theoretical  patterns  human  of  limited,  as  human  Thus  in  On each  outcomes  at  time.  time. flux,  of  political  employing  certainty.  are  of  is,  historical  always  about  requirement  application,  of  which  practice,  possibility such  of  testing-ground  epistemological  essence" over  out  historical  meaning  "truth"  "static  The  theory,  Morgenthau''s  fluctuations  and  the  explicit  metaphysical  the  in  Although an  tools  deduced.  lies  systematization.  the  conceptual  that  subject-matter.  political of of  "art" time the  are  and statesman"  in Kenneth Tragedy (New  64 rather  than  "the  rationality  certain  point,  then,  the  of  explanatory  aid  any  Having political  of  political  outlined  the engineer." reality  and  cannot  a  be understood  with  structure.  Morgenthau's  autonomy  Beyond  3S  the  beliefs  in  distinctiveness  the nature  of  of  man,  international  i  politics,  I will  subsequent  now  theory  indicated  in  empirical  theory  by  the  role  that  in  to confine political  place,  not  modes of various  This  each  to a certain  simply  a key  theoretical an  of  will  other  with  but that  states  a  map,  or  elements  theory  and  are  should  be noted,  to distinguish engage  in  and  32. 33. 34.  Scientific Science; Scientific  of  between internationally.  are normally undertaken without' power, nor do they normally affect  Man, p. lO. Servant or Master?, Man, p. 149.  op  cit.,  p.l.  is  other  Thus many such activities any consideration  of  of  regularity  politics  has  outline  and  it  in  -  33  time  between also  throughout  reality,  contingent  both  activity  way"  a certain  to distinguishing  of  1y systematic  those  an  of  experience  Power,  3  nature  produces  a rational  order." *  activity  and  patterns  irrational  though  that  to make  distill  As  is made possible  recurrent  attempt  which,  human interaction, kinds  "the  his  believes  scope  for power  to constructing  politics  "follow  subject  -  in a  practice.  international  the  to comprehend  itself  Morgenthau  the  of  Among Nations.  politics  struggle  science  reason  section,  and  elements  in Politics  in delimiting  the  reason  basic  international  politics,  Since  employs  of  the  developed  of power  among states  conscious  as  the previous  international  history.  describe  65 the power of the nation undertaking them. Many legal, economic, humanitarian, and cultural activities are of this kind. Thus a nation is not normally engaged in international politics when i t concludes an extradition treaty with another nation, when i t exchanges goods and services... and when i t promotes the distribution of cultural achievements throughout the world, [p.30] Furthermore, equally with  although  applicable the  behaviour  propositions because  all  functioning  all  states,  of  the  most  the  the  the  character  time,  rest  being  the  actively.  Since  historical time,  merely  international  power  to to  qua 1ity"  the  the is  to  By power  as  of of  from  the  on  basis  of  maximise tend  activity  -  the their  to  defending of  power,  conform  power,  to  the  of  theory  imperial  states  that  of  "dynamic  outset. that  argues of  all  that  maintaining trying  of  his  sources  quo  and  over  the  limiting  one  ism  the  quality  to  reflect and  of  changes  internal  the  one  logic  dynamic  and  proposition  Morgenthau  status  the  policy, at  any  participate  attention  tool,  strategic  and  states at  this  different  his  the  with  hierarchy  his  simply  affect  to  concerned  a policy  contribution  is  politics  confining  concerned  powerful  parenthesis,  excluded  policies  distribution  in  This  themselves,  not  is  generating  to  most  politics  directly  in  power  the  the  implementation  Instead, seek  of  only  system.  by is  mentions,  use  is  international  which  politics.  instrumental analysis  of  international  powerful  Only  unable,  by  it  enough  Morgenthau  process he  have  system.  determine  of  international  states  of  theory  to  about not  a  three  to  states all  foreign  patterns an  change  overall the  of  66  status  quo,  with  the  or  prestige,  extent  of  Morgenthau policy the  pursued,  methods  by  which  imperial  ism  victory  in  when  a  all is  state  status,  or  when and  latter's simply  these to  seem  lost  there  exist  may  a strong  be  world in  of  Each  these  conditions,  goals  amply  i1lustrated  with  length, discussion  is  explicitly  "intelligent" the  two  foreign types  Appeasement, status  and  negotiation  balance  of  of for  the  are  guo,  power.  policy,  that  and  example, since  the  which  seeks  Against  is  to  region.  former is  hegemony,  Finally,  the cultural.  discussed  an  at the  distinguishes  proper  response  may  upheld  imperialism,  to  whole  between  appropriate  within  or  Similarly,  formulate  the  of  its  and  the  a policy  weakness,  examples,  correctly  "adjustments"  anticipates  and is  help  be  Thus  continental  methods  at,  some  [p.58]  implements  latter  For  domination  economic,  to  the  recover  state."  historical  designed  and  state  whose  a given  and  aimed  alternatives.  empire,  military,  policy  a  which  are  temporary  states  to  methods of  imperialism  when  seeking  weak  predominance  three  opponent's  a war,  accessible  they  [pp.42-76]  to  nations  determine  pursued,  them.  place  its  just  be  down  take  that  goals  can  other  30  conditions  proximate  boil  to  objective local  the  counteract to  impressing  [p.42J  goals  exploiting  has  "attractive  power,  the  likely  war,  involves  outlines  policies these  or  then  be  reason,  the  one's  will  appropriate  which  response. a policy  through the  of  compromise overall  however,  it  is  35. In practice, the policy of prestige is almost always subsumed under the others, and used to support them. Otherwise, diplomatic and military prestige is the last resort of an insecure state, to boost public morale and impress other nations, Italy under Mussolini being the paradigmatic example of such a policy.  67 disastrous, which  for  cannot  the  be  of As  the  policy  in  those  and  leadership,  into  account.  must  compare  and  space.  hence,  such  objects  stable  on,  any  of  proportions,  achievement." to  arguing  that  reduce such  are  prone  factor."  Ultimately,  the  estimation  hunch,  Second, rapidly  as  policy  themselves  quo  ism and  being  external  but  present attempt  as  it  "is  Morgenthau  of  a nation's  to  imperialistic  may  approaches it its  and,  geopolitics  defensive  state  will  area  and  the  single  power  rests  and  policies and  rise go  on  [p.l64J  to to  control.  can vice  the  war  and cease  of  time  quantitative  fallacy  gave  taken evaluation  task  to  dynamic,  expand  be  imagination.  that  quality  across  ideal  as  as  its  Indeed,  task  be  natural  to  factors  is  victory  cannot  military  have  an  such  measurement.  such  politics  a  make  power  elements  these  "the  to  size,  of  themselves, to  easy  concept,  a creative  Thus  is and  geography,  character  of  conditions  change.  purposes,  imperial  status  the  from  versa,  for  by  international  switch  defensive  aided  as  the  to  forms  quantitative  techniques  evaluations  educated  not  [p.l5BJ  military  an  to  a relative each  containment  First,  human  therefore,  attempts  is  population,  is  strength  Ultimately,  to  it  and  aggressor,  frustrate.  elements  morale,  the  specific  (again).  important  power  of  the  out,  capacity,  Since  incapable  to  of  Instead,  susceptible  national  the  designed  reasons  so  war. to  three  industrial  preparedness of  to  ambitions  tailored  points  factors  addition  resources,  is  of  often  for  to  the  short  it  Morgenthau  reduced  feeds  response,  distinction,  For  only  appeased  appropriate  goals  a  it  initial  for  purely  opportunities to  support  the  Obversely,  68 a  frustrated  quo,  state,  can  also  achieve  its  power, quo  as  become  policies  engendered  evidence  for  the  Third,  the  difficulties by  national  ism,  disguise  of  in  a case  existence and true  the  a  of  ism,  change,  ideology  disguising  state  "justifications" since of  true  policy.  the  has  a more  policy. an  ideology  "rational"  determination  objectives  and  the  important  ty  the of  for  of  is  case proof"  likely  by  its by  of in  justifying  role  in and  and of  corrupt  to  law the  "disguises"  in  very  of  explicit  thereby  is  modern  less  which  perception  resources  power,  and  statesmen  interests of  the  disguises  these  and  state  by  supported  and  one's  behaviour,  availabi1i  In  task  "the  [p.73]  of  this  still  through  that  empirical  context  quo,  "burden  distort  of  the  status  important  Seeing  can  states'  the  and  threat  a justification  politics.  always  very  distribution in  are  status  assumption."  legitimacy,  latter  a  provide  Although  moral  of  challenge,  aggravated  as  the  international  is  other  ideology  protecting  plays  to  the  to  Consequently,  original  tendency,  to  war,  prevent.  evaluating  a certain of  the  if  the  the  appear  status  distribution  of  forth  the  unable  Moreover,  misperception,  in  resort  which  state  of  is  given  nature  to  fear  increasing  acquires absence  mutual  a  call  designed  of  state's a  the  within  it  1918.  may  correctness  the  imperial  meaning  by  danger  to  of  nature  alike,  was  inherent  heightened  after  it  goals  because  diagnoses  response  its  within  discovered  inappropriately,  initial  secure  objectives  incorrectly  responds  to  imperialistic  original Germany  state  its  unable  light achieve  students the the  of  its them.  69 Despite status  all  quo  and  Morgenthau for  balance  although 1y  means  Such  it  stability  constitutional  without  the  weaker  here.  network  of  vary  their  in  an  function  of  recognize that  it  is  past.  of  among  ability  and  exists, their  the  post-1945  by  structural much  more  which  power  when of  politics,  it  social does  For  of  its  to  much  leaders  within This  have  it is  to  is  is a  first,  the  constraints particularly  whose  made  manipulate  may  although  stabi1ity  system, that  is  are  statesmen  action.  international changes  its  work  within  countervailing  existence.  to  so  it  respective  of  each  maintain  a  politics,  is  structural  factors  by  he  equality."  of  whose  then  difficult  in  restraining  its  freedom  manner,  that  is  chapter,  loose  principle  wi 11 ingness  and  perpetual level  next  a context  maintained  power  the  Internationally,  such  of of  on  power  force.  states,  outcome  it  imposes  threatened  balance  the  in  is  appreciation  that  important  it  pressures  in  domestic  because  Instead,  "inevitable"  power  of  of  approximate  structures  use  credit,  "inevitable"  a constitutive in  his  very  affairs  apparently its  the a  with  between  international  in in  of  to  outcome  the  see  nations  operates  unstable,  at  phrase  state  is  of  inherently  this  maximise as  the  we shall  actual  outcome  Although,  framework  As  distinguishing  which  avoid, states  several  to  equi1ibrium,  to  uses  "an  an  strives  anarchy.  a  power.  in  policies,  amongst  among  [p.173]  difficulties  seek  power of  distributed  state  not  Morgenthau  general  above  imperialistic  does  struggle the  the  the than  stabi1ity new in  the  70 First, balance  the  has  number  declined  In  the  past,  when  or  six  great  powers  induced  caution  them The  uncertainty  ensure  purposes  and for  believes  flexibility,  and  through Second,  uphold  large  power navy,  successive any  one  state  powerful  means  to  of  violence  After  the  robbed  power  has  a marginal  shift  in  power  could  opportunism  or  role  as  and  the the  whose  was  based  on  its  political  play  become lead  a  a  necessary  a  zero-sum  to  war,  of  regional no  a  preponderant  was  power  or  by  it  the backed  to  Continent. up  by  isolation  from  it  prevent  enable  state  for  on  empire,  hegemony  played  in  sufficient  geographical  in  to  Europe.  group  of  states  In  a  the is  role.  compensations the  of  system  was  conflicts  system, such  War,  one.  "arbiter"  colonial  and  achieving  territorial maintain  its  territorial  European  power  distribution  to  World  through  neutral  equal  bloc"  the  frustration.  in  acted  and  diplomacy  of  course, diplomatic  bipolar  war  each.  of  for  Second  balance  "two  Third,  scale  new  from  enough  scope  five among  of  not,  some  has  among  policy  did  a global  century.  structure  foreign  situation  by  this  al1iance  the  predominant  balance  of  European  contemporary  a  and  replaced  stable  risk  relatively  Britain's  used.  the  eighteenth  the  conflicts,  a  a  allowed the  escalated  which  continental  in  in  the  loose  this  least  was  a pivotal  Britain,  by  that  The  which  the  both  it  in  upon  prudence  at  was  miscalculation.  Great  and  which  heyday  Europe,  limited  Morgenthau  either  its  participating  depended  in  it  balance  in  from peace  but  multipolar  game,  states  engendered  peace,  compromise,  of  are  no  balance  longer of  available  power.  as  71 Explicitly  recognized  war  of  the  and  lesser  Spanish  in Europe  technigue  European  diplomacy  The  loss  of  the  ability  Fourth, been  over  the  struggle  the  mutual faith  world. their  for  weapons  on  not  source is  the  by  and the  just  by  and  the  the  and  on  strategies  to do  barely  on  stabi1ity  the of  stabi1ity  mutual is  bounds  such  an  numbers  Since they  of  nuclear As  to persist  with of  weapons  a cure.  has  unstable  deterrence,  are  by  Morgenthau  nuclear  deterrence.  unlikely  maintain Although  tolerable  in  to  to  so.  weapons,  peace of  neither  The  but  states  will  war  "total  other  analysis.  instabi1ity,  of  [p.383]  worst-case  of  era  available  nuclear  to maintain  and  capabilities  the  within by  an  dominion."  turn  kept  as  basis  that  of  revolution.  ever—increasing  recognizes,  in  dividing  communications,  to justify  a condition  powers  arbitrarily  century  total  in  is  rely  maintaining  an  centuries.  industrial  coercive  provided  predicated  was  trade-offs  great  tendency  of  the  colonies  powers  nineteenth  robbed  to conquer  ability  cannot  inherent  control  in  power  their  and  ended  of  European  transport,  twentieth  war,  deterrence  division  concessions  other  of  them, creates  in One  the  the  not  which  empires.  changed  increase  the  rival  has  each  Utrecht,  1713,  eighteenth  frontier  total  superpowers,  control  the  technology  portrays  exponential  in  of  negotiating  colonial  the  mechanisation,  no  in  drastically  Morgenthau  the  for  a colonial  their  Treaty  amongst  to compensate  expanding  has  the  Succession  units  important  by  are  Their  technology  in  Morgenthau as  long  as  such  72  a  condition  utility  of All  is  underpinned  such  weapons  these  by in  structural  international  system  the  globe,  and  the  1 ike 1ihood  the  event  changes  as  it  Morgenthau of  strategies  has is  based of  have  the  war.  expanded  3  from  transformed Europe  to  pessimistic  coexistence  rational  [pp.414-416J *  radically  extremely  peaceful  on  encompass  in  between  the  evaluating  the  superpowers:  Total war waged by total populations for total stakes under the conditions of the contemporary balance of power may end in world dominion or in world destrucHon or both...the revolutions of our age have this in common. They support and strengthen each other and move in the same direction - that of global conf1agration..such are the prospects that overshadow world politics in the second half of the twentieth century, [pp. 386-87J However, devotes  long  public state  chapters  opinion, as  beliefs  in  he  attempts despair  by  and  tackle  existing  are  not  the  futility  the  to  embracing  United  centrality attempts  its  symptoms,  useless  solutions  Nations,  the  -  they  that  to  lead no  world  international  avoid  the  discover  states  have  a  metaphysical  in to  he  law,  and  his  power  or  although  international  either  of  despair,  Given of  all  than  of  peace.  framework  worse  completely  the  paths  condemns to  the  does  disarmament,  man,  problem  outside  to  alternative  politics, the  Morgenthau  Such  cynicism  chance  of  answers  system. to  roots  of  and ever  being  implemented.  36. See Political  also "The Science  Four Paradoxes Review. Vol.58,  of Nuclear Strategy," No.l (March, 1964),  American pp.20-29.  73 From  Description  to  Instead, "contains as  Morgenthau  in  for  itself  lies  in  tendencies difficult  and  concludes  each of  both  al1eviating  for  since  the  First  structural  directly  with  each  the  to  experience  and  corps  are  badly  affected  much  of  secret  wasted.  the  voting  in  which  referred  to  are  public in  of  for  that of  Politics Vol.10,  the  "strategy  of  which  where with  with  the  the to  negotiate  Conseguently,  of  World was  "the  diplomatic  diplomacy  to  eyes as  been  when  attributed  and  within  has  War,  watchful  Third,  of  a  a  pseudo-par1iamentary  outcomes the  diplomacy  leaders  First  conflict  conducted  in No.2  revived  a permanent  ignorant.  accordance  brief  prescriptions  diplomacy.  experience  glare,  Morgenthau a  of  more  overseas  image  is  both  First,  their  public  kept  with  above.  Second,  were  is  concomitant  enables  "shuttle"  details  destructive  and  decline  of  diplomacy  37. See also "World Review of Politics.  the  wisdom  the  well the  the  Nations  a  as  realizing  task  set  power  good  before,  accumulated  the  procedures  ever  of  the  of  era.  bypassing  responsibility  full  That  for  all  to  conducting  post-war  conduct  key  a general  for  Statecraft  balance  moderate  Among  communications  other,  public"  consequence,  and  briefly  agreements,  peaceloving  forums,  by  than  of  unheard-of  situation.  Politics  War,  modern  representatives  to  responsible  World  of  diplomacy  and  the  are  changes  development  The  new  these  new  of  essential of  in  the  [p.363]* '  difficulties  factors  the  the  more  accommodation" Five  in  edition  analysis  that  7  rejuvenating  yet  Rejuvenation  potentialities  evil."  inherent  The  argues  the  unprecedented  former  of  Prescription:  are  ratified  particular  the Mid-Twentieth (April, 1943),  by constitution  pp.  Century," 154-173.  74 of  the  to  diplomacy,  subtle  organisation.  war,  form  of  in a  all  to  rather  these  in  each  to  "newcomers"  intricate had  and  given  interest."  the the  [p.539]  context  of  a  superpowers  defines  its  compromise  the  bipolar  take  the  national  and  and  implications  responsible prospects  for  the  peace  Morgenthau theoretical  Its of  for  the  its  psychological The  be  justifies  in  interest  search  for  human  by  to  mind,  of  are  thus  or  ends  uniformly  that  practice,  justify he  his  they  a  somber  is  foreign  beyond  provides  how  grim,  significantly  viable  However,  on  analysis  American  arguing  a  Morgenthau  these  is  of  constructive  interests.  may  be  but  but, heeded  no  providing by  policy,  those the  enhanced.  a prescriptive  political  need  what  theoretical  can  a  strictures,  Nations  conduct  absence  of such  diagnosis  approach  reconciled  to  Among  note.  expand  general as  Politics  the  reinvigoration  and  suggestions  ambivalent  difficulties,  discover vague  achieved.  terms.  national  between and  "that  diplomacy  flourish  game,  demands  diplomacy  be  the  are  terests.  alternative  concrete  superpowers  manipulating  to  opposition"  in  two  traditional  relations  zero-sum  Despite  some  which  cannot  which  "inflexible  common  in  furtherence  diplomacy  cold  the  by  and  Finally,  the  inexperienced  machinery  protection  in  Fourth,  dimension truth because  behaviour  and of in  to power  his can  never  man's nonpolitical  argues  cannot bear to look the truth of politics in the face. It must disguise, belittle and embelish the truth the more so, the more the individual is actively involved in the processes of politics, and particularly in those of international politics. For only by deceiving himself about the nature of politics and the role he  75 plays on the political scene is man able to contentedly as a political animal with himself fellow men. [p.15] This  conflict,  it  "inevitable and  until  the  men  of  tragedy" "the of  the  action,  However,  intervention,  the  may  turn  out  and  well  as  "the  objects,  by  38. 39. op.  its  be.  in  the  avoided men  unless  of  wisdom  happens,  and  the  goals  are  incompatible,  and  are  incompatible  depends  actor. with  personally  can  and and  risk of  to  human  upon On  the  are  and  socially  be  professional methods"  it  order  completely  the  important  functions  is  in  good  part  to  minimise  theoretical  political  search this  bound  that  and  upon  to  be  a  an  transcended,  unpopular  which  is to  becoming most  the  duty  pressures of  hand,  unpleasant  Morgenthau,  never  and the  one  intellectual  in  will  both  his  for  judgement  truth,  to  duties  experience,  continuous their  they  certain  which  one  the that  susceptible  According  results to  which  compromise  societal  has  of  be  kings,  Until  3  political  however  Nevertheless,  measuring  are  alienating  the  theorist  sit  the  bias  cannot  politician  to  impose  not  to  the  part  his  clash.  which  truth,  one."* the  is  and  and  extent  and  ethnocentric  "to  to  and  must  for  lonely  and  factors  theorist  politics,  become  the  theoretician  remembered,  philosophers  bound  two  be  of  theoretician  therefore  upon  should  live and  as  determine  research,  generally  the disliked.  of man  a social  a  and  theory  is  society, convention,  own.  Science: Servant "The Purpose of cit., p.72.  or Master?, op. cit., Political Science," in  p. 45. James  C.  Charlesworth,  76 On between  the  other  hand,  the  mere  politician  opportunist;  he  in  His  politics.  Maintaining  is  In  His  is  a  basis  is of  foreign  an  past,  such  greatness with  a  accurate and  upon and  their  foreign  of  The  conflict  the  extent  the  manages  degree to  the  demands  40-  Truth  and  if  policy" (i.e.  a  international  to to  which which  power  Power  the  a  commitment of  that  while  is  statesman  acts  "tragic great  on  all by  the of of  the  achieved  approaching  them  "general  strategy of  the  statesmen  inarticulate, grand  It  dilemmas"  Churchill, affairs  a  action.  them  the  theory)  to  the  based  on  essential  their nature  politics.  between  reconcile of  foreign  conscious,  understanding  dynamics  of  the  courses  the  and  a  means  behaviour  the  of  Bismark,  than  and  the  view,  the  unknown  between  conduct  and  of  the  election.  purpose  of  an  resistance  his  is  is  least  next  of  other  opportunist,  Richelieu,  rational  of  former  opinion,  It  all  Morgenthau's  the  rhetoric,  action.  face  of  decision  understanding  In  in  conception  the  an  intuitive  as  "the  distinction  simply  policy.  mere  precludes  in  path  public  distinction  The  questions  are  to  important  than  to  with  commitment  The  politician  pandering  that  the  further  promises  taken  unknowable.  never  an  statesman.  take  contrast,  action  a decision  the  to  concerned  complete  statesman... particular  is by  less  techniques.  erratic.  is  aim  makes  and  concerned  support  palitician and  is  Morgenthau  truth the the  and  theorist statesman,  domestic  politics.  (LondonsPal1  power is  is  committed  cognisant  requirements Statesmanship  Mall  therefore  Press,  dependent to  of of  inheres  1970),  the  former,  the  truth,  success in  with the  p.146.  77 attempt king  to  and  achieve  impossible  philosopher.  explaining that  the  the  the  The  general  ideal  prescriptive  principles  uses  photograph  to  the  i1luminate  of  this  combine of  apply  of in  policy  in  so  practice.  portrait  relationship  role  lies  foreign them  a painted  the  theory  a rational  can  metaphors  to  role of  politician-cum-statesman  Morgenthau  -  and  between  a  theory  and  practice. Poli tical realism wants the photographic picture of the political world to resemble as much as possible its painted portrait. Aware of the inevitable gap between good - that is, rational - foreign policy and foreign policy as i t actual 1y is, realism maintains not only that theory must focus upon the rational elements of political reality, but also that foreign policy ought to be rational. [p.8] The  concept  function  of  which  prescribe  for  he  two  national  survival,  war. is  The  personalities, partisan  category public  politics."*  s  41. "The Problem of Democratic Pali tics p. 94. 42. Ibid.  first  is  is  of  the  and  shaped  its by  of  the National Interest," (Chicago: University  and threat  it  of  by its of  content  other substantive  invasion  and  debatable.  It  cross-currents  interests,  of  tool,  physical,  "the  diplomacy  and  requirement  encroachments  sectional task  analytical  stable  under  goals  evaluate  a state's  relatively  variable  an  dual  national  to  logical  against  opinion, The  a  this  the  tool As  of  identifiable is  perform is  policy.  identity  element  to  a critical  protection  element  second  a residual  as  The  cultural  easily  uses  prescription  foreign  the  This most  applies  elements.  and  content  and  American  contains  nations.**  Morgenthau  explanation  interest,  political  that  is  of  [and] to  in The Chicago  determine,  Decline Press,  in  of 1962),  78 any  concrete  elements, and  situation, always  finding  a  resources,  task  from  interests,  and  balance  The  "rational"  the  role  of  by  attempt  identifying  and  statesmanship as  is  possible  supra-national  "usurp"  with  to  under  and to  it  two element,  objectives  a manner  may  these  essential  other—national,  supporters  interest  of  between  benefits. as  between  primacy  sub-national,  whose  national  in  relationship the  harmonious  this  pressures  the  ensuring  costs  perform  the  and  their  "corrupt"  own  preferences. The States,  danger whose  of foreign  statesmanship  and  contemporary depend of  the  Morgenthau's  analyses with  concerned States rid  in  the  with  think  the  the  terms  challenges  of it  situations. the  external  deep-seated  under  faced Much  illusions  its  most  of  of  they  about  to  should  literature  facing continual  for  and  how  this  his  reasons  politics,  difficulties  condemning  conditions that  underlying  and  the  of  devotes  power  In peace  important  he  United  of  and  implications and  the  kind  stability  vitally  exposing in  critically  many  is  in  espouses.  diplomacy  prescriptive  to  the  Morgenthau when  analysis,  particular  with of  to of  less than  itself  it  writing failure  that  traditional  theoretical  America's  dealt  of  acute  reflects  system,  heed  post-theoretical  cogent  ty  difficulty,  leaders  particularly  rarely  rationali  revival  unprecedented  is  policy  international  on  American  usurpation  the  is United  failure international  politics: The main handicaps that American foreign overcome...are not to be found in the confronting it from outside. They l i e in  be  policy must challenges certain deeply  to  79 ingrained the nature  habits of thought, and preconceptions of foreign policy.*  Generally, continually  typical  Morgenthau  plagued  sentimental  ism,  tendency  of the United  States'  conflicts  security  without  Although  the security  and  as  soon  state,  States  vices  as the United having  expansion  reached  Nevertheless, identity conditions  and purpose on which  balance  has been Ocean,  which  from  ensured  natural  politics.  barrier  was now  that  the sources  it was conflict "tyranny,"  argues  accident,  that  which  ended  and united  of its internal  nation-  territorial  century.  conceive terms,  of their even  self-image  Interest  1itary  of  - aristocratic  became a powerful  flattering  43. In Defence of The National 1951), p. 91. 44. Ibid., p.7.  its  in European  of the nineteenth  their  protected  had come to believe  in exceptional  and  of power  and mi  still  in  centuries.  is an historical  Americans  this  in communications  the limits  at the close  in  historical  and so on. Morgenthau  States  is  in a  explains  geographical,  to Europe  diplomacy  are rooted  Morgenthau  and immune from  it attributed  policy  utopianism,  of its actions  by this  developments  of these  that  involvement  afforded  secret  absence  States  foreign  (legalism,  and nineteenth  a "New World"  war that  American  the European  a conscious  the United  colonialism, the  from  by the Atlantic  due to rapid  1iterally  unique  the United  European  technology,  flaws  to conceive  the eighteenth  Geographically,  over  main  terms."**  separation  throughout  that  by four  moralistic  ideological  argues  and neo-isolationism)  American  "nonpolitical, terms  as to  3  though  national the  is based  (New York: Alfred  no Knopf,  80 longer  apply.  consti  tutional  its  good  the  ideal  American law  nature  to its  and and  on  its  policymakers  approach  the  that  these  rather  than  substantive.  scene,  as  tended  to conceive On  American lasted  from  and  George  prevent second  interest either period  "ideological"  45.  He  calls  Ibid.,  and  lasted because  p.7.  well  as  the of the  errors"  with  faced  rule  American  the  one  on  the  but  from  achieving  from  1785-1902,  the  European  increasingly  of  upon,  American  characterized  France under  of  the  i.e.  hegemony.  Morgenthau  first  from  demands  acted  have  of  The  because,  and  and  history  threats  Hamilton,  recognized  the  period  "realistic"  we  moralistic  periods.  military  he  international  terms;  divides  initial  hand,  perceptual  tical  distinct  states.  practical  which  predominantly  the  period  was  the  On  acted  the  other  in nonpolitical,  direct  Alexander  of  to  politics.  three  covering  both  that as  actions  this  as  ambiguous  "we have  into  it  that  particularly  in power—poli  were both power  nations  the universalisation  hand, Morgenthau  policy  Washington  national  must,  of our  when it  Britain.  as  are  Thus  1775-1785,  independence,  policy  conseguences  the other  other  misunderstands  international  nations  foreign  States  "intellectual  argues  terms.  United  is decidedly  of  attributes  self-determination.  foreign  consequences  in  often  to believe  institutions,  democratic  own  too over  tends  l i e in  political  Morgenthau  all  it  experiment  States  superiority  conflict  the  a unique  United  inherent  to war  a result,  However,  the  Consequently,  based  of  represents  state.  values  As  it  democracy,  luck  solutions  of  Because  to  The  calls  it by  81 "moralism" action,  in the  of  were  still  1945  is in  terms  of In  i1lustrated  attitude  U.S.  his  people  Europe. entry  all  and  time,  in to  collective  security at  disastrous  effects,  the  7  Morgenthau  War in  the  force  of  national  Ibid., Ibid.,  p.13. p.26.  the  to  League Peace  which  there  However, explains  following  only  terms;  interest,  "it which  conseguences  from  to  of on  no rational  a  set  and His  policies,  "had  before  was only  with  for  American-inspired  no precedent  entry  end war  power  Nations.  a page  these  hoping  Conference,  America's  misled  and  diplomacy, of  is  eventually  justifying  based  public the  America's  on  balance  procedures,  in  to Morgenthau,  terms,  European  in  totally  Germany  and  nicely  was  he  insisted  moralistic  flaws  purposes  prevent  Wilson  Versai1les  "* '  1917,  think  is  who,  Wilson  1902-  recurs  and  and  According  -  the  for  World  46. 47.  war.  through  mankind.  the  to  self-determination,  particularly  statement,  although  regard  "to  Wilson,  errors  in  from  tendency  Interest.  the  powers)  inconsistency  President  on Germany  and parliamentary  of  National  war  wholly  a  This  For  replace  of  reflects  policy.  Instead,  principles  history  lasting  it  of  (the  period,  third  of  the  interest  the  treatment  in  terms  European  the  with  in  against  But  of  but  dominance  straightforward  America's  national  encapsulates  involvement  conquering  the  rhetoric,  principle.  declaring  were  legal  moral  foreign  American  and  because  ' s eyes,  in  purposes  of  to.  Defence  in  to  correct  of  of  "moralistic"  Morgenthau  thought  hemispheric  adhered  throughout  the  of  requirements  maintenance  act  terms  into  politically  in  the  this  sweeping  the  the  First  objective man  could  82 escape,  that  [MilsonJ  as  Since will  imposed  be  the the  it  ambiguous  to in  analytical  say  to  Morgenthau's  by  Unfortunately,  mission  as  an  be  as  function  certain  distinctively  foreign  policy,  for  a more  its  complex  48.  Ibid.,  the one of  they of  challenges  his  p.25.  its foreign with  alert  been  the  theoretical  -  policy some  to  that  intellectual  to  new  of  only  its  leaders'  policy.  homeland  Thus  thereby at  the  to can  the no  the  is  of  In his  which  past.  will  can  interprets  analysis  and  the  revive  foreign  misconceptions own  from  superpowers.  because  his  a in  which  politics, in  do  arises  Morgenthau  to  as  an  dimension  the  making  international have  including  -  and  balance, by  here.  both  prescriptive  mainly in  as  should  i 11-equipped  truth,  American  "rational"  is  it  somewhat  do,  theory  diplomacy  ambiguity  pursue  interest  States  bipolar  eguipment" of  upon  this  is  invariably  the  States  educational  avoided  Morgenthau  United  new  not  national  statecraft,  realities  prescriptive  the  of  will  political  United  custodian  uncomfortable longer  of  intellectual as  I  Nevertheless,  diplomatic  role  the  a constructive the  significance  the  danger B  states  what  dangers  "defective  all  mortal indignation."*  that  of  international  minimised  America's  chapter,  point  what for  and  next  this  affairs.  unprecedented  his  at  of moral  nature the  guide  traditional  his  treatment  guide  international  be  in  source  of  source,  his  prescriptive  of  object  explored  Suffice  the  to  shatter  nature  lay least clarity.  the  of basis confront  83  CHAPTER HANS MORGENTHAU;  Do I contradict large. I contain  FOUR  A CRITICAL  myself? Very multitudes.  well,  I  ANALYSIS  contradict  myself.  Malt  I  am  Whitman  Introduction This in  chapter  highlights  Morgenthau's  between  this  contradictions Morgenthau's international ontological  fundamental  description  of  description are  and  not  failure  ism.  his  grasp  politics; ideal  international  in As  They the  other Berki  points  and  views. are  as out,  These  a direct  dialectical words,  contradictions  politics,  prescriptive  accidental. to  logical  product  heterogeneity a  result ideal  of  of of  his  ism  is [primarily] the striving after unitary understanding. Secondly, since unitary understanding involves abstraction, ideal ism amounts to the assertion of a dual ism, the abstracted [in this context, necessity in the form of a posited struggle for power] and the unabstracted [the realm of freedom and morality which Morgenthau both separates from power and subordinates to i t . ] Now the third feature of political idealism is its resultant, and entirely "logical" self-contradiction... the unabstracted part of political reality keeps on intruding into the ideal picture of the idealist writer; his abstraction is never left in peace, but is constantly disturbed, assailed as i t were from the outside. What is one whole cannot be kept apart except at the price of distortion. x  1. R.N. 1981),  Berki, On Political pp. 195-6.  Realism  (London:  J.M.  Dent  &  Sons,  84 This  chapter  describe  the  attempt for  to  power  is  divided  distortions  explain among  and  states.  I out  approach  be  to  policy.  Morgenthau  's  analysis  his  Before work  the  not  foreign  justifies  policy  insight, them.  Morgenthau in  prescriptions  I  can terms  evaluate  and  let  alone  am but  These neither  attempt  to  of  prescriptions  concerned the separate  on  issues.  explain  contemporary nor  of  his  theory,  from  it.  Therefore,  deal  of  origins  critical is  simply  can despite  he  nature in  criticising for  American  their  intuitive  appeal  which  he  and  I  will  defends argue  American logically his  t<  the  when  with  basis  First,  resolve  Second,  with are  their  below.  not  American  self-contradictory  about  and  theoretical  My purpose  and  struggle  related  caveats.  s  a  for  a great  period.  of  his  prescribe  two  will  Morgenthau's  the  that  to  I  terms  describe  subject  speculate  evaluations  policy,  cogent  to  in  claim  post-war  discussed  Morgenthau's  his  incoherence  terms,  contradictions  then  proceeding,  the  First, in  politics  of  been  internal  views,  biographical  or  has  throughout  highlight of  used  parts.  contradictions  will  arising  foreign  two  international  contradictions could  into  that foreign  derive  characterization  his o  2. Much of this is directed towards "realism" as a particular orientation, or normative predisposition towards the theory and practice of international politics. However, it should be noted that Morgenthau never claimed to speak for other scholars, and his definition of "realism" is significantly different from the way this word is used by, for example, Herz and Carr. Indeed, Morgenthau was extremely critical of Carr's attempt to synthesiz "realism" and "utopianism. " See John Herz, Political Realism and Political Ideal ism (Chicago: Universi ty of Chicago Press, 1951); Edward H. Carr, The Twenty Years Crisis (London: Mac Mi 11 an, 1946). For Morgenthau's critique of Carr, see his "The Surrender to the Immanence of Power: E.H. Carr", The Restoration of American Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), pp. 36-44.  85 American  foreign  Morgenthau  is  providing  not  within  section  his  of  which  as  Power  in  are  as  a  theoretician,  diagnosing  the  main  its  roots  purposes  of  or Politics  as  discovery),  and  "realistic"  (the  The  blunt  is  to  politics  an  end.  at  of  superiority large  in its  must ultimately a maximum of leads  one  given  sufficient  principle"  "The  their  power  the  is  "political  is,  like  an  is  views  as  and them are  realism,"  is  goal in  being  And turn  out  no to  35,  will  be,  can  all  forsee  nations  desire  to  expand  their  power,  to do  so.  according  the  the  attain  Thus  on  as  a  215J  opportunities based  or  actually  but  nation  power...the  each  the  must  power,  since  of  international  nations of  a  itself  politics...  [pp.  states  the end  power  equality  maximum of  capabi1ities  statements  as  politics...  will  all  the  of  poli tics that  for  universal."  that  his  either  behalf.  miscalculation seek  defends  international  that  own  context  presupposes  power  -  in  subject-matter  (the  international  aspiration of  the  politics,  justification).  power,  necessity  to expect  of  power  its  a balance  power  of  self-contradictions;  international  Morgenthau  that  for  of  to which for  way  context  element  is  other  the  assertion  distinguishing  not  in  sets  of  according  to maximise  a means  three  a struggle  struggle  continual  Politics  description  argument  conceptualized  and  either  highlights  Morgenthau's of  how  both  Poli tics  This  aim  "pathological",  Nations.  International  state  as  much help,  a cure,  Among  logic  policy  theory  These  "second  to which  "statesmen  86 think  and  act  evidence  of  in  terms  history  the  "facts  between  this  own as  the  they  dogmatism based,  status  quo  and  imperialist  to which dependent The  on  struggle  Whether states  or  historical  for  power  power  to  Vasquez  the  as  global  political  not  explain."  distinction the  pursue Referring power" 3. John Rutgers  to discover  the  distinction  between  of given,  under of  of quo  [which]  itself  interests.  is  variable. conditions, and  state and  is  of  interests.  imperial  not  behavior  must be  extent is  state  empirical  status  type  the  what  determinants  one  distinction  power  but  "power politics of  between  that  for  on  so  much  found  explained;  ism,  in it  an the does  3  a  footnote  Morgenthau  "exclusively pursued  them," [p.43]  [p.42]  out,  a description  policies  to  a struggle  a matter  "principle"  This is  and exists  distinction  which  and  history"  the  policies.  therefore  becomes  of  to  contradiction  (in)compatibi1ity not  points  in is  is  the  according  "evidence  own  and  and  [p.5J  assertions,  principle,  is  system  Although  above  states  of  even  A glaring  to what extent  then  rightly  explanation  of  and  study  According as  degree  the  power,  out."  case  of  politics  the  not,  seek  the  Morgenthau's  a contradictory  as  assumption  not  the  and  international  defined  are."  of  are  on  is  really  they  based  that  interpretation  which  is  interest  bears  Unfortunately, Morgenthau's  of  the and  his  policy  concerned  and  not  text  with flatly  claims with the  the  the  status  quo,  "aims at  the  maintenance  motives  of  character those  this  it  "seeks  of  the  Power Politics p. 216.  his  actual  contradicts  of  A. Vasquez, The Power of University Press, 1993),  that  (New  who  claim. to  keep  distribution." Jersey:  87 [p.433  In  contrast,  and  "aims  at  the  power  relations  Commenting well  as  the  on  between  "robs  [the]  world...  that  two  It  to  can  a power  to  status  or  give now  the no  vacuum  the  at  a  work  of  power  longer  reversal  be  notes  exist  their  and  of  for  as  that  predictive  hypothesis  said  of  Morgenthau  determinate  pure  [p.42]  [p.49]  Wolfers  the  cannot  power"  nations."  "realists," of  increase quo,  more  in  theory  seemed  value.  the  distinctions so-called  that  "seeks  of  other  introduction  peculiar  overthrow  these  many  character  imperialism  its  the  any  actual  length  of  time."+ Since "seek"  these  to  do,  i.e.  capabilities power  distinctions intentions  and  "status  judgement.  As Morgenthau  their  After  all,  power  is  seeking intact quo." between  states  behaviour,  measurement  quo"  state  "not  only still [p.49] the  predominance,  render  what  were  within  Moreover,  how goals  continental  the  policy  the would  of  one  imperial  hegemony,  4. Arnold hlolfers, Discord and Johns Hopkins University Press,  is  at  imperial  they  which  world  Collaboration 1962), p.86  observing  are  not.  increase  ism.  A  in policy  power  about  to  relative  framework  ism or  of  by  the  an  the  subjective  impossible  for  essence  the of  of  merely  aiming  go  of  contradict  which  general  states  application  it  category  of the  what  a matter  available,  leaving  operates  they  criteria  a manifestation  adjustment,  various  in  foreign  necessarily  do  concedes,  objective  power  every  they  himself  if  only  upon  a combination  "imperialist"  belong  even  of  and  rest than  not  assumption,  attributes  which  rather  opportunities,  maximization  identify  ultimately  relations  of  the  status  distinguishing could empire  be  local  (although  (Baltimore,  Md:  why  88 these  three  categories  somewhat  unclear  in  of  terms  -  exhaust Morgenthau  threes  all  the  assumption  is  contradicted  be  by  imperialist  pursued  those  set  by  or...by  the  the  historical  power  of  to  in  international  criteria,  or  procedural  light  of  diversity  of  of  the  politics of  think  maximization  policies  that  can  be  limited  "either  the  prospective  and  extensive  evidence,  he  for  by  [p.59] use  of  time,  can  victims  itself."  continuity  over  is  to  power  power  impressive  ism  of  imperial  the  imperial  tendency  the  which  demonstrate  the  chapter  regarding  what  extent,  individual  interesting  whether  to  the  is which  case  answer  is  that  Politics  how one a  simple can  evaluate  military  as  This  to  the  of  patterns  of  provides  their  no selection  is  that  an  clearly  foreign  discussed  in  of  whether,  and  detecting  status  or is  such  provides offers  therefore  Morgenthau factors  character,  demonstrated  and at  by  for in  is  a  example, which  many  others  Robert  U.  as with  to Moscow  extremely  ideology,  one  guidance,  deal  as  any  quo  The  criteria  is  case  status  little no  to it  counter—productive.  and  policy  on,  it  the  imperialist,  state,  whether  Nations  Indeed,  or  views  imperialistic  goals,  of  guo  own  Morgenthau  Soviet  role  difficulties  Morgenthau's  Among  national  Soviet  is  are  containment  manner.  power,  determining  states  reason  "realistic"  ambiguous  problems  counter—productive,  in  the  the  Union  state,  for  additional  observe  Soviet  appeasement  5.  by  rules  all  last  in  eccentric  Again,  the  of  categorisation. In  is  an  time).  Morgenthau's  behaviour  and  has  resistance  aims  examples  objectives  states,  localized  Notwithstanding  the  leadership, in  time.*  Tucker,  op.  cit.  89 Consequently, analysis,  in  Morgenthau  To briefly  one  happens  forces  believed  that  and  the  power),  American  and  or  tendency  failing  Russian  I will  Depending Morgenthau  exhorting  military  the  United  United  the  role  his  both  communist  to build  ism  in Europe  and  the  role  and  a component  articles  an  arch  up  its  (Morgenthau underestimated  complaining ideology  distinctions  in  many  as  strength"  liberal,  exercise.  ideology  consistently  a moderate  to equate  of  of  often  of  which  States  kind  his  appear  "from  States  to draw subtle  imperial  on  on  single-factor  this  focus  can  negotiate  as  against  concerning  A  to read,  warning  in precisely  this,  policy.  conservative,  his  engages  statements  foreign  Soviet  of  i11ustrate  contradictory Soviet  spite  about  with  between,  revolutionary  the  Soviet  for  power,  example,  national  ism  in  Asia. Concerning rationalization argued For to  that  example, fulfil  Thus  the  Yalta  in  under  and  particular,  the  it performed  legitimize  West should 1945,  domestic  instead structure  communist  both  Stalin,  a dominant  of  ideology  part these  ideology  of  sphere have  of  Soviet  functions was  traditional  only  influence  of  "idealistically"  of  East  a  European  both  power, at  a Morgenthau  different  times.  a propaganda  Russian  negotiated  as  interests, in  Eastern  territorial trying governments.  weapon in  Europe.  settlement to 7  at  influence Under  6. For a similar analysis of Morgenthau's tendency to derive Soviet intentions from its military capabi1ities, see Michael Smith, Realist Thought From Weber to Kissinger (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1986) pp. 147-158. 7. Lloyd C. Gardner, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., and Hans J. Morgenthau, The Origins Of The Cold War (Waltham, MA: GinnBlaisdell, 1970), pp. 79-105 and 119-122.  J.  90 Stalin,  argued  instrument  Morgenthau,  with  contrast,  under  "creating  new  was  the  against  from mind  two  leaders.  Soviet  evaluation  is  ideology  his  existing  national  1iterally  fill  the  and or  guidance  therefore even  However, at  odds  ideology is  as  to how  that  to detect  to distinguish  and  or  how its  can  and  between  it  counter  may  very  under  he  is  be  Morgenthau's well these  offers  theoretical  his  treatment argued  rationalise  them.  that  pre-  One  could  inconsistent  Morgenthau with  Among Nations  distinguish  policies  which  relationship  Politics  one  on  advised would  ideology  where  create  documenting  of  the  to legitimise  point  how  He  with  not  States  inconsistent.  basis  when  Morgenthau  course,  role  role,  "Marxism-Leninism  Of  Among Nations,  solely  of  the  a different  United  9  the  new In  In 1959,  s  weakness.  of  interests,  treatment  underlying  little  comparison  volumes  on  Khrushchev,  the  "a  interests."  took  truth."  necessarily  in Politics  functions  for  that  of  completely  ideology  his  claiming  is not  provided  to meet Khrushchev,  a position  in  it  unguestioned  negotiations,  of  Thus  preparing  be correct  in  of  merely  traditional  rule,  interests."  was  bargaining  of  to support  Khrushchev's  embodiment  Eisenhower  change  which  communism  power,  is but  contains  between  an  imperialistic  of  imperial  ism  the  two, policy,  and  the  8. Hans J. Morgenthau, A New Foreign Policy For The United States (New York: Praeger, 1969), p. 56. 9. "Communism is convinced that it will inherit the world after it has buried us, and we refuse to be buried or to concede the inheritance. All foreign policies of the Soviet Union serve the ultimate end of assuring the triumph of communism over the Western way of l i f e (as all Western foreign policies seek to forestal1 that triumph), and that belief will not yield to a negotiated settlement..." "What the Big Two Can, and Can't, Negotiate", The Restoration of American Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), p. 316.  91  s t a t u s quo.  fts  retrospect goals,  Morgenthau  that  i t : >  one  even  can  though  international  themselves,  and  the  future,  assess  this  understands  to  himself  that  the  rather  it  correct  nature  corrects  his  politics his  admits,  than  a  modest  better  theory  can  is  only of  Soviet  belief  than  provide  in  that politicians  a prospective  retrospective  he  evaluation  guide of  the  past. The  power  Morgenthau's in  treatment  international  peace, and  mutual  leads  that  aim  of at  "necessary"  the to  theory  "the  eighteenth  to  it,"  these  the  power  maintain balance  classical  and  nineteenth  of  by functions and  mere  stalemate  self-contradictory) on  the  part  of  several  or  overthrow  the  status  of  power  to  policies  there  is  Morgenthau European  power  equilibrium  condition  for  policies.  contradicted of  social  (again  [p.173]  the  a  also  balance  his  to..the  preserving  of  as  aspiration either  is  maintain  treats  necessity  about  way  Despite  trying  discussion the  of  deterrence.  each  guo,  in  his  that  nations,  assumption  politics  which  statement  his  maximization  and  absolutely concedes  balance  of  nothing as power  much  in  system  centuries:  Before the balance of power could impose its restraints upon the power aspirations of nations through the mechanical interplay of opposing forces, the competing nations had first to restrain themselves by accepting the system of the balance of power as the common framework of their endeavours... 11 is this consensus of common moral standards and a common civi1ization as well as of common interests - that kept in check the limitless desire for power, potential 1y inherent, as we know, in all imperialisms, and prevented it from becoming an actuality... Such a consensus prevailed from 1648 to 1772 and from 1815-1933. [pp. 226-227]  10.  A New  Foreign  Policy  For  The  United  States,  op.  cit.,  p.61.  92 This  concession  image  to the importance  of  the balance  convention  dependent  existing  status and  dichotomy  between rather  passage,  and  than  international  another,  a  to which with  egotistical  and  of  states  are  quest  for  then,  of  the  the subject  international  balance  of power.  Morgenthau's  own  system, x  x  regarding  it,  from  completely  of  an  its that  politics  is also  The  which  asocial  or  suggests  condition.  a  taken,  of  bi11iard separate  the  above  it is  image  by clashing  balls, from  or common interests  Morgenthau's  autonomy  for his  institution  one  to blunt  their  power.  is self-contradictory.  the basis  text and  ties  politics  by  the  conveyed  no communal  Clearly,  static  the  the legitimacy  international  the atomistic  poli tics  upon  among states  "given"  the section  contradict  effects  for measuring  domestic  and  as an international  agreement  the criteria  variable  according  for its  guo,  existence  totally  of power  of self-restraint,  His  distinction as well of  idealism,  of  assertions  as a struggle  The source  ontological  description  regarding  for power between  as his these and  international  is  types  discussion contradictions  his  distorted  the contradicted  of states of  in  the lies  in  reification  11 On Morgenthau's ambiguous use of the term "balance of power" see Inis J. Claude, Power And International Relations (New York: Random House, 1962), pp.25-37; see also Ernst B. Haas, "The Balance of Power: Prescription, Concept, or Propaganda?", World Politics, Vol. 5, No.4 (July 1953), pp.442-478; on the logical inconsistency and empirical vacuity of Morgenthau's theory, see Benno Wasserman, "The Scientific Pretensions of Professor Morgenthau's Theory of Power Politics", Australian Outlook, Vol.13, No.l (March 1959), pp.55-70; Robert W. Tucker, "Professor Morgenthau's Theory of Political Realism", American Political Science Review, Vol. 46, No. 1> (March 1952), pp. 214-224.  93 of  the  abstraction  of  necessity  in  the  form  of  a  struggle  for  power. Similar  contradictions  Morgenthau's  argument  international  politics  based  on  of  empirical  which  states  this.  Morgenthau  sources last  on  man writ  of  objective  in  reverse  individual  that  laws such  He  onto  a  that  have  their  these  have  "levels  of  often  accused  and  hence  guilty used  of of  the of  relations social  the  of  is  the  governed  by  [p.4]  some  scholars Morgenthau's  ecological  explain  in  "political  in  the  but  nature  nature."  problem  "a  being  of  by  -  the  merely  human  "are  psychologism  in  individuals  of  the  these  source  plane,  committing  to  between  interpreted  to  answer  argued  world  human  based within  both  was  politics in  it  that  product  analysis"  uncritically  simple  principle"  all  is  assertions  collective  roots been  or  to as  be  basis  logic  system  no  hand,  "first  states  is  behaviour  holding  entire  are  Morgenthau's  as  by  the  the  forces  that  of  the  nature  unambiguously  indications  writing.  human  Indeed,  Statements as  and  power,  is  to  this  "irrational"  There  one  "only  Is  "anarchical"  seem  on  are  large...social  xs  realism"  nations  scale,"  the  would  assumption  between  projection  On  of  conceptualizes manner.  for  the  himself  nature  he  logic  the  lust  another?  times.  human  a  about  one  which  about  by  contradicts  different  a wider  action."  to  maximization  relations  nature"  the  a distorted  assumptions  relate  at  to  such  assumptions  chapter,  power  in  "human  upon  characterize  according  metaphysical  domination  also  analysis  fallacy of  group  12. Hans J. Morgenthau, "The Purpose of Political Science," in James C. Charlesworth, ed., A Design For Political Science: Scope, Objectives, And Methods (Philadelphia: American Academy Political and Social Science, 1966), pp. 63-79.  of  94 behaviour.*  3  The most sustained,  argument  along  Morgenthau,  these  along  "first-image  with  forms,"  differences  war  of other  regarding  and  human nature,  These  based  Morgenthau's about  on  "explains  For  by arguing disputed  thus  attempting  Niebuhr,  apart social  and  explain  example,  one  man  as a  from  cannot  that  have  although  cannot  is wicked.  Morgenthau's  A  views  to undermine  his  themselves,  are  travels  in one  [as]  that  direction  about  Thus Waltz behaviour  in  assumption  to conclusions  politics. poli tical  valid  the mistaken  argument  human nature  international  and  of all  human nature  classifies  theory  level.*"  criticisms,  sometimes  who  to Waltz,  outcomes.  critics  self-serving,  Augustine,  imperfections  peace  at its most basic  St.  According  a static  in political both  number  Spinoza,  "the necessary  political  possibly  is made by Waltz,  pessimist."**  explaining  explain  lines  and  tells  the from  the nature us  logic  that  the undeniable  of  premises of Morgenthau  and  inevitable  13. J. David Singer, "The Levels-ot'-Analysis Problem in International Relations" in Klauss Knorr and Sydney Verba, eds., The International System (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1961), pp.81-82. 14. Kenneth N. Waltz, Man, The State, and War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959), pp. 165-170. 15. William T. Fox, "The Reconci1iation of the Desirable and the Possible," The American Scholar, Vol. 18, No. 2 (Spring, 1949), p.213; Prisci1 la Robertson, "A New Machiavel1i," New Republic, May 31, 1954, pp.19-20; Barrington Moore, Jr., American Sociological Review, Vol. 14, No.2 (April, 1949), p.327; Norman J. Padelford, Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 64, No. 2 (June 1949), p.291; J. David Singer, in Norman D. Palmer, ed., A Design for International Relations Research (Philadelphia: American Academy of Political And Social Science, 1970), p.160; Steve Smith, "War and Human Nature" in Ian Forbes and Steve Smith, eds., Politics and Human Nature (London: Frances Pinter, 1983), pp. 164-170."  95  product in  of a... fixed  his recent  for  power  and  only  is  analysis,  among states then  though  They  claims  mistaken,  political  man can be abstracted view  human nature.  Waltz  Consider  of "political  about  this  in human  as well  the social  and  even self-  Morgenthau's unidimensional. views,  assumption  from  reifies  Morgenthau's  directly himself "man writ  if  that  man to provide which  which  being  ~ It  x7  have  - realistic  as Morgenthau world  af fairs."  chapter,  politics  realism,"  nature,  and is in fact  real  passage  struggle  it as coherent,  is Morgenthau's from  Gel 1 man,  the  and others  dialectical  of international  and Gellmann,  statements  Gellmann  in the last  and even  What is idealistic  principle"  essentially  are not at all dogmatic  you will.  of  for Morgenthau,  by presenting  As I emphasised  are pluralistic  Peter  of international  Waltz,  logic  Similarly  when it is not coherent  on human nature  "realistic"  that  "is located  as this.  Morgenthau's  contradictory. views  of man."**  in the conditions  not as simple  distorted  nature  a one  part  "sixth  contradicts and his large:"  The realist defence of the autonomy of the political sphere against its subversion by other modes of thought does not imply disregard for the existence and importance of these other modes of thought. It rather implies that each should be assigned its proper sphere and function. Political realism is based on a pluralistic conception of human nature. Real man is a composite of "economic man," "political man," "religious man,"etc. A man who was nothing but "political man" would be a beast, for he would be completely lacking in moral restraints. A man who was nothing but "moral man" would be a foal, for he would be completely lacking in prudence, [p.14]  16. Kenneth Waltz, op. cit., p. 27. 17. Peter Gellman, "Hans J. Morgenthau and the Legacy of Political Realism," Review of International Studies, Vol. 14, No. 4 (October 1988), p. 253. ~  96 Later  on he claims  facets  of human nature]  may favour withhold drives  one drive  social while  Sometimes  pessimistic domination  for  abstracting  human nature conditions the  seem  about  political depends  with  prior  which  they  carefully,  despite  the logic  it is Morgenthau's  for his reification  distortion  of real  Before descriptive  terms  related  and prescriptive  of their  has nothing  "realism,"  attitude  "truth."  Frohock's  despite  themselves reads  the  importance  about  power  the  monism  that  man, an  contradictions views,  human and  is really  the  idealist  toward  and these  between  also  justifies  manifest  the relationship  distinction  between  one should  in the way Morgenthau  distorted  of  social  to do with  politics  of political  basis  man.  examining  self-contradictions  are  about  On the contrary,  basis  the  Thus if one  nature.  instinct  conception  of his presuppositions  of international  for power  assumptions,  are asserted,  his rhetoric  of  the only  about  These  politics  view  the logic  hand,  assumptions  of international  these  of man's  a pluralistic  essence  unidimensional  of  the struggle  earlier.  may  self-contradictory.  the ubiquity  politics.  that  or that  Thus  On the other  as demonstrated  human nature,  [p.37]  different  conditions  is itself  man from  upon  social another,  to derive  and aggression.  contradictory,  of  indeed  [of the  manifestations  others."  of international  Morgenthau  certain  of discovery"  premises  dogmatism  upon  to repress  from  encourage  he does  strength  is dependent  and tend  "context  for  "the relative  approval  they  Morgenthau's  from  that  Morgenthau's note  his views  themselves  between two different  stark in  in his  "theory"  and  conceptions  97 of  the  relationship  disentangling  between  these  theory  and  practice  is  helpful  in  contradictions:  Theories have been viewed...either as a description of reality, or as an instrument to order experience. The descriptive view is the older view, and it amounts to the assertion that theories are factual statements...which are either true of false. The instrumental position is that theories do not make truth claims about the world, but are frameworks which make the world meaningful. ±s  In  the  last  instrumental tool  for  meaning  view,  presumably  be  which  its  view  neither  true  knowledge.  as  so  knowledge  of  "the  Morgenthau consequences  on.  On  truth"  initially for  only  which  propositions and  a map.  to bring  order  which  without  it  would  more or  can  is,  be  less  in  and this  basis,  seems  theoretical  theories .' sc  to support evaluation.  can  itself  in  of  to  their criteria  verification from  the  contribute  In Pol i tics this  is  organizing  according  derived  view,  and  of theory, towards  Among  However,  "a  remain  function  empirical  hypotheses  indirectly  a  is  politics,  in  useful  turn,  evaluated  consistency,  It  international  ways. Each  the  and  there of  different  adopts  as  is  utility  logical  parsimony  theory  purpose]  theories  in  false,  power,  operational  of  Morgenthau  unintel1igible.Accordingly,  "reality"  internal  that  analogy  phenomena  Theoretical  explanatory  the  many competing  nor  appeared  [whose  to a mass of and  it  hence  understanding  disconnected  such  chapter,  Nations,  its  elsewhere,  he  18. Fred M. Frohock, The Nature of Political Inquiry (Homewood, 111: Dorsey, 1967), p. 7. 19. "Power as a Political Concept", in Roland Young, ed., Approaches To The Study Of Poli tics (Evanston, 111: Northwestern University Press, 1958), p.73. 20. It should be pointed out that such a conception leaves open the question of whether theories can or should be inductive or deductive, a distinction that, in practice, is difficult to main tain.  98 defines  a  theory  as  sought  for  scientific a  (note:  "system their  of  own  from...philosophic  which  is  also  could  then  more  argue  that  is  theoretical  discussion...  as but  a  right  or  wrong. " or  empirically with  these  However,  when  realism  theory,  Consequently,  to and  However, conception  "•  s?3  set  of  cling  its  competitors.^  approach  that  principles,  his  other  no  politics  as  overly  for  any  is  into longer  opposing  to  a  be  one a  principles  can  subjective  "scientific"  a matter is  is  whether  arguing  "realism"  words,  that  counts  He  of  that  is  true  agree  or matter.  or opinion. unrealistic,  naive.  this of  to  of  seems  is  not  international  any  transformed  agreement  is  significance  but  apart  particular  Morgenthau  principles,  theory  but  a  question  In  is  be,  truths,  x  his  only  unverifiable.  disagree  idealistic,  than  without the  s  to  criticize  "completely  "philosophy,  empirical  to  is  approach  istic"  sets  may "  realism  "real  pessimistic  are  [which]  or  philosophical} general  definition  verifiable.  outlook  or  verifiable,  This  Morgenthau,  "philosophical"  you  sake.  empirically for  normative  empirically  knowledge  necessarily, Hence  not  theory.  argument As  undercuts  Spegele  points  his  avowedly  instrumental  out,  21• The Decline of Democratic Politics , op. cit., p.43. 22. At the beginning of Politics Among Nations, he uses the terms theory and philosophy interchangably: "This theoretical concern with human nature as i t actually is...has earned for the theory presented here the name of Realism. What are [its] tenets? No systematic exposition of the philosophy of of political realism can be attempted here..." [ p.4] 23. See "The Purpose of Political Science," in James Charlesworth, op. cit., p.133; see also "About Cynicism, Perfectionism, and Realism in International Affairs", The Decline Of Democratic Poli tics, op. cit., pp. 127-130.  99 i f Morgenthau is sincere in arguing that theories are merely "maps" that are neither true nor false, the upshot of his posi tion is that while realism can only make prepositional claims about world politics which are contingent, and also unpredictable, it can nonetheless take up a unified, Archimedean point outside the world in terms of which anti-realist viewpoints can be examined and found wanting. * s  To resolve either  that  beliefs to  his  that  he  the does  conception international namely,  his  directly  label  permit  an  "facts"  and  neutral  instrument  it  the  photograph  to  his  the  to  inevitable and  political  realism  maintains  policy  ought  24. Roger Political  to  be  as  the policy  elements  to  be  For  of  only  political  D. Spegele, "Three Studies. Vol. 35,  of  the  [p.8]  would  have  to  them,  and  of interpretation,  neither. to  in  Instead,  Politics  the  addition  to  portrait theory  theory  reality,  but  it  -  also  that  actually  must  a  of painted  focus that  Morgenthau  Forms of Political No. 2 (June 1987),  a  and  its  good  that  and  picture  possible  as  being practice,  a painted  policy  he  Among  against  between  Thus  of  political  as  argue  he  photographic  much  set  facts  between  gap  foreign  not  rational."  actual  to  descriptive  "tested"  relationship  resemble  — foreign  rational  commitment  wants  a  the  does  metaphors  the  then  valid  history."  realism  of  which  understanding  i1lustrate  to  have a  attributed  single  initial  rational  the  a  of  invokes  Aware  is  to  of  (but  himself  theory,  for  world  false  Morgenthau  "evidence  "Political  portrait.  is,  "empirical"  also  political  commit  would  consists  that  politics  as  Morgenthau  nor  according  Nations  the  or  contradicts  practice.  true  theory,  As  realism  "realism"  do),  own.  Morgenthau  of  neither  not  of  contradiction,  philosophy  are  justify  this  the  Real ism", p. 192.  is, is, upon foreign  100 simultaneously theory,  claims  to  argument policy  be  tested  against does  that against  the  not  Politics  and  Among  the  theory  facts,  but  presented  cannot  live  up  Nations  to  is  also  here  that  it."  [p.8]  an  that  empirical  "it  is  actual  no  foreign  Why  not?  That argument misunderstands the intentions of this book, which is to present not an indiscriminate description of political reality, but a rational theory of international politics. Far from being invalidated by the fact that, for instance, a perfect balance of power policy will scarcely be found in reality, it assumes that reality, being deficient in this respect, must be understood and evaluated as an approximation to an ideal system of balance of power, [emphasis added] Thus  Morgenthau  "rational"  theory  "empirical" be  in  rationality  only  policies  confirm  it.  do  they  are  covered  confirm  it.  irrationality this  really  irrational  by  to  need  to  international  contingent  American  it  is  are  the  that  theory,  rational,  will  is  war  explained  in in  what policies  is  because  wrong.  As  irrational" be  example  Indochina. terms  of are  it  cannot one  from  the  there  theory  therefore  of  used  to  of  systematic  Policies a  theory  It  war is  he are  such of  politics:  The conduct of the Indochina suggests that possibility.  to  So,  analysis If  an  essence  support  "systematically  and  rather,  propositions,  because be  a  [p.7]  conceptual  Morgenthau's  only  deviations  to  circular.  is  "rational  Morgenthau,  believes  be  the  experience."  any  is  may  Nations or  practice  of  logic  theory,  Morgenthau the  in  to  absence  that the  is  found  not  policies  the  according  the  conform  presents  political  "irrational,"  explains, not  to  means, not  only  also  the  Among politics,  without  are  that, In  rationality that  which  appeal  Politics  international  experience, that  his  that  of  theory  found  despite  claims  by the United States a question worth  as  101 looking into whether modern psychology and psychiatry have provided us with the conceptual tools which would enable us to construct, as i t were, a counter—theory of irrational politics, a kind of pathology of international politics, [p.7] This  distinction  policies his  demonstrates  theory  actually  or  is  the  making  By  scope the  refute.  to  be  claiming of  points  out,  is  of  irrational  against  without  the  theory  not  an  although  claim  "the  providing is  in  that  facts  policies  as  any  criteria to  theory.  reference  they  fall  impossible  empirical  not  foreign  Morgenthau's  "irrational"  theory  it  and  tested  that  the  short,  rational  hoilowness  distinction,  In  Kratochwil  the  empirical,  are."  outside for  between  confirm  As  to  Morgenthau,  theories are heuristica11y fruitful only if they explain actual phenomena. To declare a plurality of cases instances of irrational behaviour is hardly illuminating, since the causes of irrationali ty need be explained in order to understand politics as it actually occurs. *  to  s  Explanation  In out  of  Versus  this  Prescription  section,  I  Morgenthau's  will  claim  that  evaluate  and  previous  section,  it  is  Lichteim  puts  to  accord  status  which  circumstance" * 3  prescribe  it, renders  does  for  his  the theory  American  clear  them not  describe  immune succeed.  could  foreign  that his  contradictions  to In  "a the  used  policy.  Morgenthau's  views  be  fact,  to  From  attempt,  privileged flux  arising  of  the as  ontological time  Morgenthau's  and theory  25. Friedrich Kratochwil, "On The Notion of "Interest" in International Relations", International Organization, Vol. 36, No. 1 (Winter 1982), p.28. 26. George Lichtheim, The Concept of Ideology and Other Essays (New York: Vintage, 1967), p. 142.  is  102  a  very  poor  although for  he  a more  realistic of  to  basis  sound  cannot the  explaining  terms  of the  set  a  it  American  evaluate of  any  tension  a  that  first  attempt  for  hoped  states,  The  that  to  in  other  the  guide  its  be  reconciled  alleged  static  international  set  of  own  of  the  national  for  within  be  interests  as  well  whose  immutable  laws,  in  as  or of  international or  "elemental  governed  foreign  that  policy  by  choice  The and  history  that  politics  in  truths." such  on  suggests  superfluous.  determinism,  indeed  more  Morgenthau's  determinism  and  a philosophy of  is  would  American  unnecessary and  foundations  which  inheres  theory  will  and  317  prescribe  are  behaviour,  true. '  contradictions  and  state  intellectual  policy  is  continuity  politics  lay  opposite  prescriptions free  might foreign  "scientific"  between  contemporary  laws,  fate, accounts terms For  of if  which  27. It is highly ironic that despite Morgenthau's consistently harsh judgements of the United States, his theoretical framework has been condemned for providing a rationale for America's global containment policy and its strategy of confrontation with the Soviet Union. Hoffmann aptly sums up the charge of many critics in the following passage: "What the leaders looked for once the Cold War started, was some intellectual compass, which would serve multiple functions; excise isolationism, and justify a permanent and global involvement in world affairs; rationalize the accumulation of power, the techniques of intervention, and the methods of containment; explain to a public of idealists why international politics does not have much leeway for pure good will, and indeed besmirches purity; appease the frustrations of the bel1icose by showing why unlimited force or extremism on behalf of liberty was no virtue; Real ism...provided what was necessary." Stanley H. Hoffmann, "An American Social Science: International Relations", Daedalus, Vol. 106, No.3 (Summer 1977), pp.47-48; see also Richard J. Barnet, The Roots of War (New York: Atheneum, 1972), p.65; ^Christopher Lasch, The World of Nations (New York: Knopf, 1973), p.208; Robert L. Rothstein, "On The Costs of Realism". Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 87, No. 3 (1972), pp. 347-362; Richard W. Mansbach and Yale H. Ferguson, "Values and Paradigm Change: The Elusive Quest for International Relations Theory", in Paul R. Viotti and Mark V. Kauppi, eds., International Relations Theory (New York: Macmillan, 1987), pp. 554-576.  103 function those  in  spite  whose  statesmen their  behaviour  they  laws  or  other  at  all,  patterns  words,  if  should  not  abide  by  them.  If  the  of  be it  basis  A second  set  the  religious  and  the  [p.541] world  his  than  that  predicated 28. Stanley Relations  ignore  politics,  between  a counsel utopia." no both  on  of ss  longer the  the of  sixteenth  at  the  turn  the  these  from to  superpowers  as  and  seventeenth  of  the  as  War  leaders  to  cannot  be  as  status  quo  analogous  to  century.  "idealistic"  any  paths  to  contemporary  balance  despair,  or  Hoffmann  aptly  Its  application  rests  upon  in of  light  eighteenth  and In  of  power,  resuscitation  H. Hoffmann, Contemporary Theory (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,  grand  centuries,  "new"  whose  a  eighteenth  of  of  iron  reconcile  the  reification  by  Morgenthau's  solution,  and  behaviour.  laws  preferred  exist,  part  state  such  Cold  as  as  prescription.  "realities"  of  not  either  the  condemns  are  invoked  governed  so,  if  and  American  and  Among  his  analysis  allegedly  do  whether  hand,  they be  is  exhort to  evaluation  Morgenthau  which  "reactionary  necessary  the  wars  Although  own pessimistic more  of  Napoleonic  international  to  characterization wars  peace  politics  Nations,  accommodation  other  from  Politics  of with  arising  in  strategy  the  by  matter  determining  arises  least  not  cannot  contradictions  at  recognition  recognition  of  attempt,  states  On  prior  machina  necessary  of  not.  activity  is  should  therefore  ex  their  policy-making,  international  it  as  or their  and  and  it  "rational"  deus  laws,  invoked  on  in  a metatheoretical  behaviour  laws  depends  embodiment  change explain,  these  application  "empirical"  In  historical  recognize  conscious  of  of  is  puts  his little  it,  a  conditions is nineteenth  International 1960), p.35.  104  century  European  world  diplomacy,  and  The  is  politics.  Morgenthau  nostalgically  aristocratic norms  farmer rues  statesmanship,  among  ruling  replication  i1lustrated the  elites,  and  passing  that  moderated  period,  from  1648-1792,  the  the  of  vestiges  to  a  contemporary  the  manner  European  cultural  struggle  and  in by  transnational  Christendom, i.e.  its  lesser  which  hegemony,  values  of for  in  and  western  power  in  extent,  this from  1815-  1933. This intellectual and moral unity [providedJ foundations, upon which the balance of power and makes its beneficial operations possible. This consensus grew in the intellectual and climate of the age...reacting upon the power [and] strengthening the tendencies toward and equi1ibrium.  the reposes  moral relations, moderation  This consensus - both child and father, as i t were, of common moral standards and a common civilization as well as of common interest - kept in check the limitless desire for power, and prevented it from becoming a political actua1ity... international politics became indeed an aristocratic pastime, a sport for princes, all recognizing the same rules of the game and playing for the same limited stakes, [pp.225-227] As  a result  of  in  the  chapter,  last  portrays  as  fanaticism,"  an  the  era  and  technological the of  so  and  post-war  political  era,  "nationalistic  which  changes Morgenthau  universal  ism,"  identified starkly "ideological  on,  has dealt the final, fatal blow to that social system of international intercourse within which for almost three centuries nations lived together in constant rivalry, yet under the common roof of shared values and universal standards of action. Beneath the ruins of that roof lies buried the mechanism that kept the walls of that house of nations standing: the balance of power. [p.347] However, accommodation  if  this  possible?  is  the If  case,  there  on are  what no  basis  common  is  a  interests  strategy left,  of if  105  all  the  transnational  the  technological  and  international  Morgenthau's  rather  than  the  "irrational"  On  the  one  the  in  state  a nuclear  such  a goal  that  perhaps  is  of  goal.  recognizes  that  integrated  international  he  hopes  bring  that  about A  exists  postulates an  set  of  with  moderation politics  his  of  contradictions,  theory  of  an  attempt  terms  image to  them. of  endorse  The the  absence  he  naked  toward  any  this  explicitly of  an  not  exist," may  [p.5603 related  to and for  competition  voluntary which  suggests  diplomacy"  "realism,"  of  from because  does  prescriptions  theory,  power  existence  of  the  order  way  actually  closely  of  manner.  and  the  fails  conditions  short-term,  society,  political  but  However,  the  techniques  Morgenthau's  Hobbesian  among in  international  between  (allegedly)  states  an  an  Morgenthau  which  "accommodating  condemn  this,  for  pave  "presuppose  society  and  peace  the  to  serious  5293  although  solutions  the  third  second,  his  such  [pp.499,  Furthermore,  merely  struggle  might  However, with  realizes  world  in  longer  outset.  contemporary  the  diplomacy  the  and  for  no  sufficiently  that  question  account  past  he  under  prevent  the  a revived  "necessary"  that  a  severed,  consistent  idealised  in  holocaust,  out  from  content  extent  and  to  is  an  been  coexistence  proposals  To some  obsolescent  a world  ending  between  admits  have that  doomed  Morgenthau  gap  he  is  is  contradiction  hand,  nation-state  peaceful  formulate  present. with  require  to  bonds conditions  and  "reality,"  bemoaning  deal  political  strategy  trying  contemporary  to  "societal"  moderation  exist,  it,  or  restraints explains transnational  the the  he  basic combines  between and  mutual  international bonds  106 between  states,  presume  the existence  appearance theory, terms  is intended  of conflict  strategy  seen,  therefore,  objects  pressure  relationships  between  determinants  of foreign  legitimises  interest.  for  power,  exercise  for  then  29.  as well  does  state  power  not really rests  of violently  politics  in  ignores  to the limits  of  and if  Contemporary  struggle technical one's  since  his  that  to what he calls  However,  such  Theory,  a  change  national  in the premise.  mean this,  solution  a  other  that  is a ceaseless becomes  power  all  of the of power,  terms  between  of the external  on the assumption  war."  present,  distinguishes  in terms  views  to the  so  interpretation  is implicit  is the only  H. Hoffmann,  preferred an  as the forces  or prudence,  one's  of a cataclysmic  Stanley  which  by definition,  diplomacy  or appeasement,  Morgenthau  in terms  is defined  The prescription Morgenthau  the kind  and completely  policy,  rationality,  in expanding  a revived  specter  model,  in  "the world's  of international  states,  politics,  resources. course,  that  an expansionist  international  hand, reifies  a guide  ism solely  If interest  politics  Morgenthau's  observes,  exactly  policy  guo and imperial  The  or Humean, and Mr. Morgenthau's  to. The simplification  of a deterministic  it,  game.  on the other  supports  foreign  surface  international  most unjustified.As  confrontational  the  conceptualises  when, as Hoffmann  the theory  which  confrontation.  was most Lockean  of human nature  beneath  and as a zero-sum  period  of nature  bonds  prescriptions  and military  of accommodation,  historical  status  of such  of ideological  as we have  to support  Of advocacy  compromise, "the  solution  op. cit., p. 37.  107 presupposes the  that  existing A  set  in  but  goals  the  contradictions  exists  the to  also  of  conviction. he  national  to  the  maintenance  a Weberian  of  not  to  moral  ethics  Morgenthau's  only  as  "rational"  argues  the us  between  preferable  Morgenthau  "saves  or  "abstract  Defining  argues,  to  interest,  "successful"  as morally  chapter,  consists  power,  committed  according  last  policy than  of  guide  policies,  sides guo.  to present  instrumental  state  are  status  final  attempt  both  attempt  to  principles." morali  As ty in  interest excess  define we  saw  foreign  responsibi1ity  national  from moral  foreign  the  that of  an  rather  in  terms  and  of  political  folly:" For if we look at all nations, our own included, as political entities pursuing their respective interests defined in terms of power, we are able to do justice to all of them...in a dual sense: we are able to judge other nations as we judge our own and...are then capable of pursuing policies that respect the interests of other nations, while protecting and promoting those of our own. Moderation in policy cannot fail to reflect the moderation of moral judgement. [p.11] It  is  important  point,  for  foreign  arguing  the  is not  policy,  normative  power  he  to understand  or  absence moderate  that and  that  political  politics  laws  c1 aiming  content is  in  which of  any  the  be protected  the  govern  the  is  morali  latter  ideals belief  cannot by  be  no  be  doing  jungle,  and  so,  of All  legal  exclusive,  one  this  place  superimposed can  Instead, restraints  the national an  on  devoid  politics.  moral  in  ty has  of justice.  international  defined  position  should  that  transnational  it  that  considerations  international if  Morgenthau's  interest selfish  in any  he  is upon transcend given  the  to can  only  manner.  108 Paradoxically, necessity  are  ideals. the  however, ethically  For  the  ultimate  ideals  latter  guarantor  precondition such  for cannot  result  in  either  of  of  only  not  domestic  fail  to  security,  in  Failing  the  to  values  on  the in  good  absence  of  life  -  is  -  a  but  integrated  will  folly  states  state  turn  an  this  political other  abstract  protect  the  to  of  which  recognize or  bowing  imposition  concerning  realized  moral  the  of  only -  the  through  the  use  force. Unfortunately,  as  demonstrated  in  the  interest  of  will  disillusionment,  one's  results  to  arguments  be  society.  practical  superior  of  any  international  imposition  the  national any  what  knowledge  those  is  not  no  theoretical  goals  absolute,  concerning  the  early  inconclusive 1950s,  can  be  concerning are, but basis  the  the  the  how  which  states  reality  Morgenthau  define between  As to  we have  justify of  over  defined  distinction 3  immutable  unless  objectively  relative. "-'' on  debate  his  international  this can  in  show  the  their  or  and  "ideal"  Morgenthau  dogmatic  how  absence  goals,  "real" seen,  matter  has  arguments politics.  JO. Morgenthau's idea that the national interest could be defined in isolation from consideration of American ideals spawned a massive, and inevitably inconclusive, debate in the 1950s. For good discussions on this diffuse debate, which revealed just how value-laden the term is, even in Morgenthau's hands, see Paul Seabury, Power. Freedom, and Diplomacy (New York: Random House, 1963), ch.4; Thomas I. Cook and Malcolm Moos, Power Through Purpose (Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1954); Grayson L. Kirk, "In Search of The National Interest", World Politics, Vol. 5, No.l (October, 1952), pp. 110-116; Robert E. Osgood, Ideals and Self-interest in America's Foreign Relations (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953); Vernon Van Dyke, "Values and Interests", American Political Science Review, Vol. 56, No. 3 (September 1962), pp. 567-577; Quincy Wright, "Real ism and Ideal ism in International Politics", World Politics, Vol. 5, No.l (October 1952), pp. 116-129; Warner R. Schilling, "The Clarification of Ends", World Politics. Vol. 8, No. 4 (July 1956), pp.566-579.  109 Consequently, national terms  he  interest, of  power  particularly pointed  should  in  more  right. *  than  This  3  of  ism,  in  "political  real  moral  action," writes  era.  his  a  result  ism"  is  this  of "aware  and  the  of  the  ethics  is  which  of  of  "resolved"  makes  freedom  despite  for  is  might  his  ineluctable  Machiavel1i,  have  ontological  realm  Thus, the  in  assumptions,  in  power. of  critics  Morgenthau's  of  the  interpretation  many an  requirements  tension  critigue  of  of  of  moderation,  As  philosophy,  form  its  metaphysical  subordination  command  his  of  why  content  international  conception  success  the  [p.10] in  to  "necessary"  reason  contemporary  also  his  the no  lead  light a  is  and  necessity  the  the  gives  Morgenthau's  responsiblity, little  specify  and  in out,  ideal  cannot  to  claim  that  tension  between  successful by  that  political  arguing,  as  Berki  that  it is "necessary" to exempt the exercise of power itself from moral restraints. It is morality that depends on power for its existence, and not the other way round. Power prefaces morality and morality presupposes power, morality has no longer a character of "necessity," but is revealed as contingent upon relations that only power can create and maintain. Thus power achieves its own character as morality, it becomes indirectly moral. Yet  such  power  and  Instead,  a position morality, it  requires  destroys which a  the cannot  recognition  "ineluctable be  tension"  maintained  on  this  between basis.  that  power and morality are in truth interdependent of political reality, opposi tes which Without power morality cannot be practised,  aspects interpenetrate. cannot  31. See Robert C. Good, "The National Interest and Political Realism: Niebuhr's "Debate" with Morgenthau and Kennan", Journal of Politics, Vol. 22, No. 4 (November I960), pp.597-619; Stanley H. Hoffmann, "Notes on The Limits of Realism", Social Research, Vol. 48, No.4 (Winter 1981), pp.653-659; see also Tucker, op. cit., and Wright and Schilling, ibid.  110  become real. But without morality, the exercise of power is immoral...[thusJ this exercise presupposes that power be employed in order to create conditions for moral life - in the absence of this presupposition, or in conscious denial of i t , power ceases to be a truly synthetic term and becomes...an agency which acts so as to preserve a state of chaos and disorder. ^ 3  Conclusion In first  these  was  to  two  chapters,  provide  a  concerning  the  embodiment  in  The  was  second  contradictory  deserving  his to  is of the  broad of  major reveal  nature  contradictions reification  nature  I  of  have  international theoretical essential  those  views.  attribute  of  real  idealist.  32.  Berki,  op.  cit.,  poli  pp.61-62.  form ism,  tics  broad  The  and  Politics  of  source ideal power.  Morgenthau  goals.  The  Morgenthau's  views  their Among  incoherence  ontological the  of  work,  the  in  two  reconstruction  Morgenthau's  necessity  pursued  and of  Nations. self—  these  ism,  and  Far  from  is  a  his  nostalgic  CHAPTER KENNETH  WALTZ:  FIVE  THEORY AS  SCIENCE  Introduction In Pali  1979,  tics,  often  Kenneth  which  has  acrimonious  Comparisons ungainly attributed with  to  the  example,  the  a partial  real  of  "classical notes  that  "the  neo-realism the I  terms  ideal  ism  single  has  been  paradigmatic  will  in  ism"  argue of of  his  that  real  ism"  has  advanced  successor Waltz  the  been  For read text  to  is  by  whereas  Waltz,  Morgenthau."  s  better  idealism, For  and  continuation  widely  complacent  Morgenthau.  drawn,  Morgenthau.  most the  and scholars.*  often  indicate  work  chapter,  nostalgic  are  to  him...as  to  Morgenthau  International  American  Waltz's  Banks  characterized  among  of  substantial  "structural  establishing  and  a  or  so-called  next  Theory  "neorealism"  to  the  and  his  generated  primarily  Waltz  contribution  In  published  subsequently  debate,  between term  Waltz  understood as  opposed  Morgenthau  1. Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics (Reading,MA: Addison-Wesley, 1979). All page references in the text of this and the following chapter refer to this book. See also Robert O. Keohane, ed., Neorealism and Its Critics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986). 2. Michael Banks, "The Inter—Paradigm Debate," in Margot Light and A.J.R. Groom, eds., International Relations: A Handbook of Current Theory (London: Francis Pinter, 1985), p.14. See also Richard K. Ashley, "Political Realism and Human Interests," International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 2 (June 1981), pp. 204-236; Robert O. Keohane, "Theory of World Politics: Structural Realism and Beyond," in Robert O. Keohane, ed., Ibid., pp. 158203. Waltz himself has conceded that his aim is "to develop a more rigorous theory than earlier realists had done." See Kenneth N. Waltz, "Reflections on Theory of International Politics, " in Robert O. Keohane, op. cit., p.322.  112 reifies  the  past,  "paradigmatic" as  a  of  of  necessity  nature  is  however,  Waltz  poli  exclusively  tics  anarchical from  to  his  Waltz's  eyes,  structure,  opposed  others adopt  practice,  is  an  a  Ruggie  and  view  of  the  as  will  if  one  which  is  attributes  and  approach  that  he  the  is  or  Waltz  appropriate  subject-matter  to  link as  between  a mode  of  of  international  terms.  In  3  political  determinant  states' a  of  rightly  two  systemic  approach  (i.e. variables  points the  of  interaction  reductionist  to  dependent  international  calls  interactions  As is  the  from  what  analytic  constant).  relationship  unobservable  arising  requires  more  unarticulated  of  albeit  than premises  show,  theory  the  rather  "ultra-Durkheimian"  facticity  of  far  conceptualization  outcomes  structure,  coexist,  also  of  calls  social  international properties  about  close,  ontological  of  is  I  the  Morgenthau,  power—maximization Waltz  which  a pre-given,  kept  or  states,  Unlike  states  presuppositions  his  the  the are  man,  politics  "Among  structural  which  his  international  nature  interpretation  what  to  examining  (p.  and  There  as  this  certain  Like  (p.102)  the  instrumental  behaviour  within  war."  a purely  and in  politics.  deduce  about  positivistic  politics  power  within  ontological  discourse,  presents  of  from  present.  Waltz  Morgenthau,  "explained."  state  to  the  Unlike  theory  Waltz's  as  claims  states.  between  be  a state  assumptions  committed  upon  and  environment  any  about  reifies  predecessor,  realm  state  Waltz  while  out,  subject  "one  must  matter."  13)  3. John Polity,"  G. Ruggie, in Robert  "Continuity Keohane,  op.  and Transformation in cit., pp. 131-158.  the  World  113 This briefly  chapter  is  describe  Waltz's  international to  structure,  which  ways, or  he  more  Theory,  and  bipolar  relationship  discovery evaluation fails  -  to  to  an  to  what  his  his  his  arguments. the  theory,  prescriptive or  unlike  Morgenthau,  who  theory  should  a major  relevant conform  play of  road to,  American map  Waltz  dimension  rather,  (or makes  its  believes role  foreign "painted no  his  in  of  judging  portrait")  explicitly  and  context  in  of  who  adhering appealing  to  legitimise  concludes  Waltz's  with  a  avowedly  absence.  Again, political  the  substantive  in  providing  which  the  prescriptive  both  and  international  policy  explores  theory,  conspicuous that  power  Morgenthau,  rigorous  chapter  the  concerning  standards" the  of  section  -  empirical  Finally,  and  construction  more  in  great  Unlike  "philosophy-of-science  of  rationality  of  section  extent  structure  much  conception  calls  substantive  empirical  is  avowed  contained  premises  justification.  Waltz  in  second  for  third  theory  of  generative  stabi1ity  potential  ontological  a  behave  nature,  The  regarding of  them,  the  nature  motives,  the  political  context  instrumentalist  delineation  his  views  to  The  the  a whole.  international  separate  he  and  of  arguments  concerning  as  between  — and  leaders'  interdependence,  system  part  states  substantive  system,  the  the  their  will  inguiry,  relations.  the  economic  as  I  autonomous  theoretical  encouraging  claims  contemporary  and  of  First,  the  anarchy  of  on  Waltz's of  states  realm  and  sections.  regarding  postulates  narrowly  of  four  state-society  significance  management  a  regardless  domestic  focuses  the  as  constraining  important  into  views  politics  according  goals,  divided  a former  policy should  judgements.  114 Instead,  although  precondition  for  politically his  he  and  distinction policy  analysis,  for  the  latter.  "The  to  manage  the  world,  possibi1ity  affairs  added.]" as  Hans  a  to  The up for  is  society,  violence.  by  the  latent,  law  and  domestic  constraints context,  power  and  restraint,  domestic  on order  states.  ambivalent,  order  evaluate "is powers,  systems  a given  theory and  and prescribe,  not  to  say  how  but  to  say  how  constructively  will  change.  manage [Emphasis  the  depends However,  not  only  empirical among  use  states.  be  allowed  the  most  the  in  a  on  the we  are  Sometimes  unless  it  countervai1ing  of  weaker. of  seen,  of  punishment, provides  a  how  it  Morgenthau  the  the  similar  In  this  balance  Morgenthau of  is  power.  monopoly  norms,  much  mechanism  but  whose  Internationally,  definition  referents,  this  nature,  reign  threat  societal  have  justifies  legitimate  stabi1ity.  is  although of  ever—present  force  his  free  effective,  enjoys  of  He  human  existence  of  politics  states.  will  and  as  among  a priori  a network  order  international  an  state  but  Selector.  that  appealing  constrained,  insufficient  its  for  irrationality  actively  and  great  as  believes  struggle by  behavioural  among  as  political  concludes,  powers  is  Furthermore,  cannot  its  Structure  Morgenthau  presupposition  basis  he  varies  Structure:  essentially  backed  former  necessary  (p.210)  Anarchy  In  activity.  problem"  a  inguiry  international  the  great  is  theoretical  value-free  including  that  international  explanation  action,  between  foreign  the  that  purposeful  neutral  rigid  argues  argues  power  is  balance  functions  of  of  to that  power  maintain it  is  an  115  automatic  mechanism;  require  the  accept,  explicitly  interests  most  powerful or  which Waltz  realists...  thought  of  attention  state  as  The of  to  from  insufficient action  an  purpose  of  relationships  among  states,  arises such  as  agents  the  commonsense  war  and  imperialism,  relations  is  between  to  determinant  other  by  this  to  explain  the  to  the  The  that  claims  error  dynamics  attributes  of on  of and  the  international  a  that  the  variety  matched  of  behaviour.  main  the  as  context  ubiquitous  for  not  He  external  need  idea  and  exclusively of  for  internally  state  correct  focusing  is  the  "earlier  problems  with  to  and  common  setting  of  quo  national  and  as  paid  component  a whole.  their  coped  reference  structural as  be  status of  behaviour."*  is  from  and  to  tries by  system  simply  and  Theory  politics  political  in  benefits  the  Morgenthau  those  was  which  the  that  its  existence  reflected  appropriate  international  of  be  that  maintain  the  autonomous  "reductionism,"  autonomy  to  of...anarchy  standards  argues  states  believes  different  altering  he  implicitly,  ought  interests.  statesmen  sometimes  systemic  perspective of  by  the  outcomes,  variety  of  them:  Where similarity of outcomes prevails despite changes in the agents that seem to produce them, one is led to suspect that analytic approaches will fail. Something works as a constraint on the agents or is interposed between them and the actions and outcomes their actions contribute to. In international politics, systems-level forces seem to be at work. (p.39) To bring revolution  4. Kenneth Politics: cit., p.  in  off  what  international  N. Waltz, A Response 336.  Waltz  modestly political  "Reflections to My Critics,"  calls  a  theory,  on  Theory of in Robert  Copernican it  O.  is  necessary  International Keohane, op.  to  116 conceive of  of  two  international  related  structure Wendt  the  but  and points  distinct  a set out,  of  interacting  Waltz  assumes mutual  through  their  that  are  elemental  of  the  the  system.  structure,  3  The  second  is  formed  which  system.  However,  behaviour  of  states  from  towards  once  states,  others.  encouraged accounted  and  by for  In the by  unit-level  phenomena,  attributes  and  the  to  within  (p.40)  Waltz  which  specify  how  of  structure  by  three  states  are  formal arranged  of  Only changes  its  states  in  of  that is  them  behaviour  by  is  behaviour  must  is for  omit  doing  that  so  take  by  the can  one  place  international  positional  within  the  the  accounted  the and  is  disposing  structure  defines  units  constraining  kind  how much  from  then  system  and  units.  presupposes  by  what  of  this  of  how much  As  the  influences  policies  and  states.  constitutive  outcomes,  "definitions  of  structure  structure  structure  changes  political  the  and  are  generate  the  interaction  composed  political  and  the  being  a  which  of  determine  relations  -  states  component by  as  unproblematic  certain  distinguish it."  that  and  structure, the  units,  therefore  order  parts  interaction,  formed,  undertaking  system  component  structure they  political  the  criteria, system:  Everything else is omitted. Concern for tradition and culture, analysis of the character and personality of pol itical actors, consideration of the conflictive and accommodative processes of politics, description of the making and execution of policy... they are omitted because we want to figure out the expected effects of structure on process and of process on structure. That can be done only if structure and process are distinctly defined, (p.82)  5. Alexander E. Wendt, International Relations 41, No.3 (Summer 1987),  "The Agent-Structure Theory", International pp. 335-371.  Problem in Organization,  Vol.  117 These political  three  structures.  specificity  of  necessary  at  The the  criteria  first  system.  obey...authority capability."  denotes one  how  the in  differences the  absence  hierarchy between  characterized division  of  undifferentiation, member states. capabi1ities tasks  they  The  third  among its face,  parts  within  tasks  they  and  though  (p.96)  The  empirical  number  of  great  powers  number  of  states  which  Treaty  of  Westphalia  that  criterion component not  in  who  parts. their  for dominate  have 1648,  enjoyed and  which  within  the  the and  relate  Waltz  Given  the  arising  states  and  first  its  is  an  extensive  by  its  obverse.  and  functional  distribution  of  theoretical  great  to  among  "States  the  simply  sovereignty  abilities  this  of  politics  duplication  is  self-help to  must perform.  from multiple  are  a  a structure  characterized of  systems  functional  integration is  which  expression  system,  while  by  required  international  a realm  referent  in  the  relations  second  arising  is  is  in  follows  is  are  arrangement  to a particular  specialization,  politics  them  anarchical,  criterion  authority  the  of  Domestic  is  units  domestic  labour,  International  the  them, it  by  of  the  subordinate  between  system  second  of  structural  two  of  another.  reduces  The  terms  only  to command; none  between  another  from  entitled  international  the  principle  to one  quickly  differentiation  the  international  (p.88)  of  and  level.  is  relate  the  "None is  because  international  parts  domestic  politics,  criterion  hierarchical;  both  However,  international  the  system's  define  system.  are  alike  in  to perform  power  status  suggests  that  the  them."  concept Given  its  is  the  small  since no  the  more  the  118 than  eight  be  studied  (p.  131)  have in  This reduced  terms  to  two  it  drops  arguments  arising  political  structure,  conceptualizes of  constrains  structure  is  Structure  merely  constraining  rewarding  politics]  what  Waltz  calls  It  a  (p.73)  "through  actor,  human it  liver  or  fulfils  it  which  patterns which  socialization  competition  among  the  behaviour  of  the  them."  to  actors  and Waltz  system. natural  and  observed"  Smith's of  punishing  their  (p.74)  tax  these  behaviour  work  behaviour  device"  Adam  and  system.  of  income  is  the  the  of  examined,  analogy  structures  set  selector  functions  shapes  of  "a  in  "compensating  seen,  the  First,  agents  a progressive  be  closest  market,  a  is  similar  "cannot  its  by  or  which  behaviour.  designates  Waltz  independent  through  are  certain process  processes that  international how  an  states  devices,  economic  as  the  the  understand  structure  disposes  at  substantive  of  Only  Instead,  formed  fold;  the  to  because  criterion  Waltz's  definition  the  and  first  agent.  although  human  indirect  an  a concrete  to  However,  not  and  conditions."  than  analogous  of  component  time,  variable  at  is  second  over  independent  important  meaning  The  "can  systems."  structures  the  looking  is  and  political  from  politics  number  constant  spare  behaviour,  structure  an  his  it  the  determinant  as  Before from  small  politics.  inferred  out  level.  of  of  is  be  International  logic  international  can  international  directly.  the  differentiation)  (anarchy),  and  of  definition  in  implications  rather  "consequential,"  three-fold  (functional its  been  freely firms  by  others.  effects [in illustrates  is  The two  international the  119 ubiquity  of  these  processes  behaviour  of  individuals  behaviour  of  firms  socialization at  of  school.  All  informal  Having  states]...and  infer  how and  anarchy,  he  procedural,  each  enduring  outcomes  the  striking  through  the  condition  a constant  "explain",  Waltz  or  of  anarchy  the  a  result,  in  events the  are  and  like."  economic  and  the  mutual  the gains  say  "The accounts life  repeat  themselves  is  The  of stable, not  patterns  change.  of  By  behaviour  events expected  anarchy  that  none  effects  of  political.  limits absence to  powers,  including  (p.69)  first, despite  distribution  why  state  the  international  continuity,  themselves,  may  explains  great  "to  From  events  explains  means  anarchy  of  goes  shapes  politics  whose  of  Waltz  states.  international  system  that  repeat  actors  both  a  a  political,  of  recur,  as  behaviour  of  and  (p.75)  domestic  quality  peers  spontaneous  structure  state  the  the  number  merely  Economically, states,  in  Within  is  the  of  their  characteristics  politics.  ty  of  sameness  i.e.  of  of  (p.79)  characteristics  character  capabilities,  why  continui  changes  (p.66)  recur;  part  the  structure  "the  the the  behavior."  interactions,"  international  the  "in  of of  crowds,  values  of  to  and  and  definition  millenia...patterns  endlessly."  few  in  in  how,  independently  ideological  anarchic  norms  norms  own  component  explains  and  the  their  unit-level  economic,  for  behaviour  together  illustrate  his  referring  marketplace,  establish  established  [i.e.  behaviour  economic to  societies  units  metaphorically grouped  examples  of  to  the  teenagers  determinant  on  when  in  these  ways,  by  the of  states  division  international that  would  of  labour  between  integration. arise  if  the  As law  120 of  comparative  achieved.  advantage Above  sovereign  through  survival  motive  states  compels  future  gains  in  political  each than  specialisation, others  to  go  control  hand  for  does  international admits  "all  between  is  Elements  latter, be  and  vice  descriptively  theory  is  cooperate the them  nature are  place.  labour  of  on  an  the  former  limited  issues by  the  the  states sovereignty  amity  of  other  some  something  of  an  In  reality,  the  and  international of  is  not  useful.  of  of  range  the meant  The  although  complex  extent  anarchy  parts  distinction  Thus,  condition  and  and  characterize  and  on  (p.115)  theoretically  and  dependent  Waltz  but  wide  greater  reality,  the  increasingly  of  about  In  However,  describe.  worry  states.  mixed." hierarchy  to  state  practice  also  among  not  those  is  of system,  their  goodwill in  between  system,  protect  the  There  domestic  self-help  the  distribution  Dependence  course,  are  accurate, explain,  both  of  a  labour,  gains  become  as  might  self-help  out  it  on, on  Of  versa.  to  of  rely  societies  distinction blurred.  depend  security.  division  that  In  a  each  arising  "lest  hand.  not  take  does  all  the  economic  (p.106)  they  and  their  cooperation  gains  survive  inequality  "In  only  worries  in  what  independence,  states  Not  to  of  with  level.  [cooperation]."  vulnerability  extreme  subordinate  possible also  seek  not  although  concerned  absolute  are  division  of  more  (p.107)  it  through  be  security  interest."  states  Conseguently,  environment  to  of  else,  borders  international  their  of  distribution  and  an  across  all  units.  a greater  considerations  want  before  autonomous  benefit  the  and  operated  aim  of  states of  issues,  cooperation  anarchy,  to  and  within the  121 concomitant  need  autonomy,  for  and  each  state  to  protect  its  security,  control.  Hierarchic elements within international structures limit and restrain the exercise of sovereignty, but only in ways strongly conditioned by the anarchy of the larger system. The anarchy of that order strongly affects the 1ikelihood of cooperation, the extent of arms agreements, and the jurisdiction of international organizations, (p.115) The up  in  military  one  phrase  distinctively of  theory  that  this are  preservation a condition will  politics met:  the  that  the to  as  appeal  state  rationality, "The  to  two,  will  emulate  argues  that  the  and  two,  or  of or  the  economic  balances  is  that  states  "rules  some  do  units from  wish their  of  the  to power, game,"  "reductionist" relatively  wayside." patterns is  by  derived  maximize  other  systems  of  are  populated  or  behavioural  own  domination"  which  than  by  their  "balance—of-power  be  accepted  fall  all  requirements  it  farsightedness,  them  seek  Thus  assumes  if  through  assumption  coexist,  that  balance  Morgenthau's  states  rather  simply  cut  universal  theory,  internationally  to  for  that  merely  says  politics,  a minimum,  only  summed  any  theoretical  them.  and  entities,  attribution  political  at  This  and  elite theory  "who,  between  anarchic  anarchy  the  be  is  hamper  On  more  can  there  seems  drive  or  (p.121)  others  domestic  be  autonomous  no  and  a maximum, two  "If  that  actors  whenever  of  Waltz  concept.  form  survive."  makes  errors.  international  which  order  structure  survive  of  (p.117)  recurrently prevail  wishing  theory  unitary  in  anarchy  power.  contradictions  at  of  of  hoary  and,  effects  balance  it."  and  of  states  power  the  is  ambiguities  treatment  in  -  strategic  political  power  the  and  (p.118) to  unnecessary  well, Waltz motives and  122 irrelevant. of  To justify  freely-formed  this,  he  economic  once  again  invokes  the  analogy  markets.  In a purely competitive economy, everyone's striving to make a profit drives the profit rate downward. Let the competition continue long enough under static conditions, and everyone's profit rate will be zero. To infer from that result that everyone, or anyone, is seeking to minimize profit, and that the competitors must adopt that goal as a rule for the system to work, would be absurd, (p.120) In  Waltz's  unintended  who  domestic  the  external internal  the  which unitary  than  states'  survival. ubiguity  of  the  theory  range  of  Waltz  makes  about  of  However,  a  force  in  a  result  are  worth  of  power.  is it  do  not  highly  difficult  not  emphasising  on  ability  Thus  have  fact,  these that  states  break  are  the  tries  to rather  may  even  ensure since out  to  states  conditions  to  to  survival  in  theory  unlikely, to  its  patterns.  that  designed  the  compensate  themselves  all  own  which  and/or  that,  argues  in  interests,  structural  Thus  policies  this makes  to  systemic  of  policies.  undertake  course,  added  recognizes he  complex,  the  their  dominating  behavioural  states  rival  enhancing  depends  broad  assumptions  or Of  of  actors.  foreign  survive,  balance  an the  two  states  more  the  nature  as  more  of  of  requires  are  is  constraints  Two points  Waltz  behaviour  or  becomes  accurate.  unitary  necessary  explain  to  and  a  the  balancing  through  al1iances,  validity  predict  empirically not  as  power  only  three  process  discussion the  and  motives,  only  equi1ibrium  With  such  assumptions  are  the  strengthening.  Waltz's  explain  from  operation  balancing  means,  First,  be  maintain  of  Its  capabilities.  system,  process  arising  structure.  states,  about  the  consequence  system's  for  view,  their the  of  wish  the  latent  123 competitive long  as  cycle. most  dictates  of  states,  are  Second,  impact  of  Waltz  such  variables), will  historical  on  Structural  composed  does  states  constraints  explains  however,  conform  as  to  the  behaviour,  the  explains  the  policy-making  just  conditions  in  how  specific  particular  international  political  elements  -  the  the  may  be  Furthermore,  not  structure  structure.  sometimes  constraints.  its  intervening  explain  incentives  expected  through  as  constitute  behaviour,  distinction  not  interacting  and  of  only  strict  behaviour  all,  which  and  incentives similarity  not  After two  his  function  structural  of  given  causes  (which  to  unit-level  view,  powerful,  behaviour,  structure  respond  interacting  of  power—balancing  theory  systemic  circumstances.  the  most  that,  his  theory  and  by  analysis,  Waltz's  are  in  out  processes  systems  the  point  ones.  Although on  states  of  theoretical  engage  points  structure  processes. impact  and  valid  levels  a  including  anarchy  assumptions  between  From  outweighed the  theory  differences.  The theory explains why a certain similarity of behaviour is expected from similarly situated states. The expected behaviour is similar, not identical. To explain the expected differences in national responses, a theory would have to show how the different internal structures of states affect their external policies and actions, (p.122)  Given testing  it?  confirmation prove  its  exceptions strict  these In  limits good  of  falsification  since may  the  Popperian  hypotheses  validity, which  to  style,  there  from may  it.  how Waltz  derived  confound criteria,  theory,  be  Waltz theory  go  about  successive  theory.  historical  the  one  rejects  the  However,  since  should  These or  not  future  also only  do  rejects gives  rise  124 to  expectations  Although  he  systematic may  which does  by  necessarily  and  other  structure,  and are  (p.122)  if  Comparing  the  is  Waltz,  has  especially  Relations.  such In  in  substance structural  view,  for of  candidate  Adam  free  apparently  international developed. from is  political  a domain  not.  domains  for  Reasoning are  by  the  and  falsification,  also  contrary  the  therefore Waltz  confirmatory  consistent  of  with  hypotheses to  the  similar."  (p.89)  behaviour the  as  theory role.  drawn  from interests  to  is Not  where  to  is  one  be  given  where  it  the from  strict what which  theory, and  well  move  inferred  apply  outcomes  the  also  can  is  different  of  the  only to  one  Second, can  to  a  similar theory  we should  refer  according  International  a  inapplicabi1ity  These  different  where  which  that  where  structure."  developed  permissible  professed  observed  which,  helpful  well  in  of  such  is  suggests  tests.  similar  structurally  is  observed  in  microeconomic  theory  analogy  are  theory  is  theories  but  different  for  analogy  structurally nature  theory,  by  which  problematic  hard  system,  "Reasoning  substance  not  economics,  are  microeconomic  appropriate  tests  "Structural  a discipline  classical  market  say,  behaviour  "good"  any  First,  characteristics  helpful  in  although  in,  behaviour but  particularly Smith's  activity  of  of  tasks  procedures.  fields.  different  indeterminate.  comparable,  similarities  a paucity  his  two  of  differences in  and  these  structurally  are  similar  realms  endorses  nonpolitical  that  general  undertake  realms  if  realms  realms  Waltz  examining  plausibi1ity  across  somewhat  himself  isomorphic,  sociology gain  not  fashion,  proceed  are  wishes  but of  he  calls  are which the  are states  125 concerned.  Unlike  universal  laws  of  century  diplomatic  absence  of  since  it  of  response  elites  the  by  1879.  Other  Grand  Al1iance  between  Union  in  These  they  are  examples  formation  of  Another their  of  ideology  foreign  Few  is  and  all  good  that  -  tend  borne  out  interest the  to  by  in  in  pact, and  and  the  Soviet because  recurrent theory.  the  behaviour  gradual  subordination  century arms  the  the  tests  imitate  naval  in  a deductive  twentieth  Anglo-German  states  -  the  suggests example,  confirmatory  from  a  Waltz  better  Britain  drawn  and  Austria-Hungary  hypothesis  states  is  possible  Nazi-Soviet  hard  a  power  and  States,  support of  1939  United  monarchical  antagonistic  Germany  the  a  The  Soviet  race  at  the  turn  century.  Is  Better  Than  Anarchy balancing) testable  despite hypotheses  cooperation  power  as  a process.  time,  Waltz  component  Many,  explains  state  over  are  national  policy,  be  the  which  to  this  between  would  balances  rivals,  previously  the  change.  is  eighteenth  period.  made  and 1894  to  this  system  of  so-called  reference  between  formation  two  which  hypothesis  of  of  examples  by  his  rejects  this  al1iance  al1iance  1942.  in  alliance  formed  to  power  cleavages  Franco-Russian was  of  i1lustrates  Waltz  ideological  process the  balance  European  flexible that  the  who  statecraft,  deep  aristocratic  Morgenthau,  of  And  Two Is  a continuity unit-level  of  changes  concerning over  a  international  on  the  range  Having moves  Best  of  dealt to  All  behaviour and  extent  with  power It  and  of  nature and  anarchy, the  (i.e.  processes.  issue-areas,  consider  political  Of  which  other  systems,  the  leads  to  inter— balance  is  of  constant  structural the  distribution  of  126 capabi1ities.  Whilst  behaviour  over  across  systems,  states  do  systemic  not  its  the  number  of  the  theory  that  it  varies  (i.e.  of  why  or  five, in  First, Waltz  main  oligopoly  the  stability  the  is  the  does  not of  stabi1ity  endurance  management  and  "For  of  great  this  of  of  powers.  [of  great  consequences  great  number  only  fall  structural  the  and  the  and  the  the  To answer  to  recognizes and  a  the  collective  powers]  question,  as  Waltz  In  structural are  a number as  that,  dominated  by  there efficiency  theory,  oligopolistic  markets.  of  a  small is  a of  increases  this  of  why  reasons and  the  few  large  firms tension  the  greater specifies  theory.  purpose  of  firms  is  compete. between  products.  number  Waltz  microeconomic  its  stability  in  for  as  context,  continuity  continuity,  argument  many  microeconomic  stabi1ity  (p.134)  body  that the  different  large  which  with  "economic  stability  in  analogy of  that  There  his  one  by  merely  a market  market  Waltz  in  as  anarchy  is  rise  compares  such  narrow."  peace,  reference  to  the  changes  both  powers  varies.  and  (p.161)  again  firms.  continuity,  since  great  among  some  once  sectors mean  wars  of  steps.  substantiate  of  stability  promotes by  also  defining  what?"  two and  principle  he  he  patterns  capabi1ities  interested  particular,  contention  not  only  we prefer or  oligopolistic  is  of Indeed,  peacefulness,  compares  preferred  he  system-wide  should  these  in  stabi1ity,  proceeds  all  the  change,  systems,  affairs,  of  them.  In  of  does  within  variation.  sake  His  not  time);  absence  ten,  distribution  over  different  recurring  the  explain  powers  explains  time,  component  explicitly  anarchy  Of  They systemic  to  be course,  the  stability  What  benefits  127 firms  does  inversely for  not  necessarily  related  to  consumers. more  by  quality  of  their  is  wanted  Second, preferred specifying  this,  well  as  those  increased  argues  ignore  the  latter.  He  that  argues  that  level  of  states, political  to  which  originating  term  states  overseas.  vulnerabi1ity  is  much  interdependence.*  6. David Analysis," 1980),  A.  this  which  Baldwin, Internatipnal pp.471-506.  prices are  quantity  and is  United  the  just  As  closer  to  According  the  with  is  and  the to  "Interdependence Orqanization,  that risk  to  or  the  conventional Waltz,  war, and  the  to dyads  The the  these  idea  of  usage  the  and Power: Vol. 34,  in  in  the of  sectors. lies  changes out,  of  structure,  unrelated  financial  to  as  of  interdependence  points  increase,  the  groups  vulnerable  Baldwin  those  significance  particular  economic  Attacking  the  subordinate  a whole  be  system.  assumption  reduce  is  political  economic  are  the  process  former  as  on  to  the  to  is  is in  in  States.  contacts  system  of  states  on  confuse  states  precise  section  trend  the  specific  importance  more  interdependence  between  among  be  large  the  claims  the  sensitivity and  extent  in  dominant  a  in  such to  interdependence  of  inter—state  extent  the  among  to  devotes  welcome  and  low  economically  inequality  tries  number  economic  who  trade  Waltz  that  debate  that  and  often  systems  by  deplored  is  (p.138)  Waltz  he  quality,  than  is  argued  optimum  Stabi1ity  political  units  politically."  the  believe  the  products...what  "interdependence" who  of  equality,  doing  product  "international  fate  having to  Before  the  consumers.  efficiency,  However,  judged  what  benefit  of  sectors mutual the  international  A No.  4  Conceptual (Autumn  12B  political war  system  era  than  relatively  as  in  previous  such  as and  The  reasoning  are  of  ease  of  markets.  equals.  In  of  extreme  states.  As  other  Although  between  than  this  is  only  caused  to  international  Europe  Not low,  domestic takes politics  only he  great  is  a  interdependent reducing  therefore  a  it  with  varies  are  a  system  is  it  increased  given  trade  and  the  system other  their  size  on  trade  is  with  perspective,  lower  the  and  and  systemic  has  the  among  bipolar  dependent  present  and  the  dec 1ines,  less  GNP,  in  imports  superpowers  powers  vary  relation  contemporary the  expected  of  the  exchanges  costs  essential  From  that  their  These  of  "if  than  ever  before.  somewhat  destruction  since which  industrial  the  capacity  of  Japan. convinced  argues  that  where  within  economic  materials,  versa.  be  Waltz  society, place  to  and is  also  is  The  recognizes  postare  global  a percentage  suppliers  they  the  of  as  a whole,  of  in  (p.143)  between  vice  in  Waltz  Western  is  trade  number  interdependence  war  of  Concomitantly,  states  1945,  amount  inequality  the  superpowers  raw  are  or  them."  capabilities.  the  increases.  States  of  as  of  in  goods.  relations  system  the  changes  price  Interdependence  the  distribution of  the  because  each  substitution  export  one  for  to  and  simple.  their  interdependent  dramatic  supply  is  equal  proportion  less  manufactured  breaking  about  to  the  agricultural  is  systems  invulnerable  factors  costs  a whole  a  self-help  that  this  is  systemic  a good  specialisation  framework system.  of As  and central a  result,  interdependence  thing. the  In division  control, given  contrast of  to labour  international the  unequal  12?  distribution  of  increases  the  Rousseau,  "close  raises  the  states  whose  conflict  capabi1ities,  likelihood  war.  will  (p.  of  that  states,  for  example,  size  The  the  system  a multipolar  powers  is  among  the  the  balance  great that  of This  operates  not  system  development  the  of  occasion  for  would in  powers.  In  contemporary  power, claim  differently  Waltz rests  unite  is  be  composed  though why  peace,  complete  multipolar  a  is  China self-  four  great  would  and  only  the  absence to  most  remain  system  economic.  the  For  highly  not  contrast  the  numbers.  be  bipolar  or  of  and  of  two,  by  size  with  strategic,  as  his  relative  would  the  simply  politically  both  bipolarity  upon  the  emphasise that  discovered  Interdependence  reason  claims  in  to  even  defined  argues  precisely  size.  number  he  with  then  The  interdependence  be  economy,  a whole,  is  cannot  were  one.  on  system,  correlate  a modern  optimum  stabi1ity  believes  and  If  the  hastens  varies  Europe  as  the  powers  equal  become  context,  does  with  relatively  in  contact  experience  violence.  exceeds  views  in  great  Western  sufficient.  low  of  emerge  powers,  must  into  that  Waltz's  interdependence  if  to  of  interdependent  unregulated fall  states  Echoing  conflict...  a pace  ineguality  number  noting  was  them.  closeness  interdependence  although  virtues  optimum  among  138)  However, the  occasional  at  then  among means  remain  grows  vulnerability  conflict  occasionally  control,  "  of  relations  interdependence central  of  interdependence  prospect  and  rising  had  two,  great  In of  this war  Morgenthau,  who  unstable  opposite.  argument and  that bipolar  the  balance  systems.  of In  power the  130 former,  the  al 1 iances basis a  to  of  common  because clear  polities maintain  threat.  However, are  fixed  to  keep  be  completely  the  interests  a  effects  by  group  partners, Waltz  in  all the  everyone  each  of  them  devices. anyone  else, to  The else  to  low.  to  may  argues The  the  and  themselves.  the  opposing  in  few can  Military national partners. its Among  is  a  always  al1iance into  conflict.  on  the  alliance  One. a  bipolar  between  by  draw  state  camp."  focusing  War  no  there  states  by  off  too  against  between  al1iance  balance  war  states,  the  to  al1iance  into  inequality their  the  States  that  them  Thus  its  its  the  ward  and  subordinate  defection  World  of  whom.  drawbacks  to  on  unstable,  to  toward  formed  adversaries  of  all  any  (p.168)  dragged  drag  are  on  inherently  threatening  and  maintain  protect  and  rely  members  permit  interdependent  including  United  is  low."  edge  before  Waltz is  allies  be  these  years  contrast,  interdependence and  which  illustrates  In  may  miscalculation of  to  state  may  their  system  cooperation  mi 1itarily  both  diplomacy  it  allies  of  of  so  a  more  the  Al 1 iances  powers  each  maintain  "One's  such  is  States  among  defection  forces  external.  interests  between  who  doing  are  security.  many  of  sure  to  danger  too  lines  interdependence  small  their  common  and  wishes.  power  certain  "there  However,  of  system, the  Soviet  superpowers  partners,  relying Union  on do  military  compels their  own  not  depend  Consequently,  Internal balancing is more reliable and precise than external balancing. States are less likely to misjudge their relative strengths than they are to misjudge the strength and reliability of opposing coalitions. Rather than making states properly cautious and forwarding the chances of peace, uncertainty and miscalculation cause wars. In a bipolar world uncertainty lessens and calculations are easier to make. (p.168)  on  131 In to  the  lead  present  to  war  superpowers French  has  of  the  by  altered from  of  superpower  bipolar  is  across  loss  balance. but  world  the  a  strategy  global  in  all  less  not  allows  China  cope  the The strategic  minimised,  both  with  with  the  geographical  both  drastic.  means  system,  to  greater is  to  likely  Similarly,  self-reliant  bipolar  is of  Miscalculation  develop a  allies  The  annoying,  and  in  superpowers  comprehensive  a  threats,  must  among  central  superpowers.  Furthermore,  two  the  NATO was in  the  clarity  threats. the  not  defection  miscalculation.  al1iances  flexibility  each  through  withdrawal  rigidity  by  system,  which  these  rivalry  scope  between and  issue-areas.  Not just military preparation but also economic growth and technological development become matters of intense and constant concern. Self-dependence of parties, clarity of dangers, certainty about who has to face them: these are the characteristics of great-power poli tics in a bipolar world. (pp.171-2)  As system  a  result,  is  preferable  superpowers, stable from  absence  of  United  war,  or  the  crisis, the  worse,  the  dangers  to  peace and  anywhere Soviet  of  Waltz  -  bipolar  this  nuclear the  Cold  (p.171) and  many  in  the the  two in  a  central former,  a  system  competition.  potentially  overreaction  claims  to  in  these  of  reduced culminates  in is  bipolar  process  Union]."  Vietnam  contemporary When  peripheries  miscalculation  overreaction?  the  balancing  overreaction  happens and  missile  is  -  that  multipolarity.  dangers  geographical  States  demonstrate Which  The  that  argues  to  seems,  sources  "anything  Cuban  it  outcome. two  Waltz  War  The  means  of  concern  The  Korean  other  bipolar balance since  arise  that to  [the  war,  the  examples world. leading the  above  to  132 examples  i1lustrate  that  it  only  and  costs  Moreover,  money  although  overreaction, to  the  inclined  to  aside,  the  partners way  to  global  common  shape  of  agreements, rivalry War  the  will  come  pressures  will  simply  Waltz  "to  far  is  Morgenthau  as  much  not  in  (p.  176)  ways  the  spiral  1ing  arms  obiivious  to  these  dangers important, terms,"  the  leaders  have  to that  that  of  the  indeed useful, live in dread  Cold  structural processes.  by  encouraging  Whilst  move  towards  weapons,  alarm.  On  superpowers  to think of all-out  lead  weapons,  was.  the  the  may  nuclear  ever and  He  the  characters  these  undue  the  Waltz the are  either:  to  in  their  systems,  their  race  with  that  limits  or  Morgenthau  tendencies  argues  they  predict  posed  involving  he  given  recognized  stable,  strategies  contrary,  Rhetoric  gradually  that  multipolar  than  than  less  adversarial  unit-level  threat  optimistic  and  as  the  not  relatively  better  socialized  other.  has  future,  to  ever-present  these  It is highly "cataclysmic  is  the  formally  of  near  of  sphere-of-influence  does  comparison system  military regard  the  by  implicit  Waltz  (p.172)  conservative  been  since  become  animosity  have  talks,  in  dangers  coexist  countervailing  in  more  to  acknowledgement  act  the  more  evil  wars."  recognition  These  end  limited  posed  ever—fragile  World.  an  laments  war—fighting does  Third  expect."  As  Mutual  bipolar  superpowers to  hegemony.  lesser  Superpowers  threats learned  the  the  the  have  mutual  that  of  become  the  overwhelm  argues  contemporary  one  to  control  to  as  also  interests.  and in  have  and  arms  fighting  that  superpowers  a cautious  certain the  they  "is  acknowledges  argues  overreact  in  the  Waltz  he  system,  overreaction  in war,  not  133  and to base mi 1itary calculations on for the ultimate but unlikely crisis. States does so, and the Soviet Union too, makes the cataclysm less likely  the forces That the apparently to occur,  As  rests  long  as  of  second-strike  no  prospect  of  of  the  these  weapons ty  arms  of  if  (p.  these  they  Waltz  which  territorial they  are  1ikelihood Given problems  the  are  priced  turns  to  that The  on  sides,  both  and  in  security  dilemma of  despite  war.  in  sees the  bipolar  the  economic  consequences However,  forces only  existence  Waltz  condition  catastrophic  used  the  redundant, the  force.  the be  sides,  technologically  "mi 1itary  to  be  are  and  if  given  most  money  of  and 7  their  condition through  Waltz  the  useful not  and  also  in  being of  coped  anarchy,  international  he  four  he  that  in  attempts organizations  the to  of  proliferation, little  attention  to to  contemporary manage and  if  some  -  very his  transcend  cooperation  identifying p's  has  confines with  international  problems  from  the  population,  of  inter—state  apart  calls  Instead,  and  require  However,  which  management  issues  These  solved.  terms.  the  global  boundaries.  poverty,  substantive  to  embodies  problems,  pollution,  ever  on  187)  Finally, affairs,  of  and  both  ensures  caution  deterrence,  costly  blood."  use  race,  were  to  made war  the  encourages  costs  least  being  in  deterrence  available  nuclear  result  deterrence  stabi1i  their of  not  nuclear  forces  irrationality will  mutual  needed United does (p.186)  say  in  the system.  transnational supranational  7. However, elswhere Waltz has argued that the horizontal of nuclear weapons does not undermine bipolarity and international stability by replicating deterrence among group of states. See his "The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: Be Better, " Ad el phi Paper 171 (London: International for Strategic Studies, 1981).  spread reinforces a larger More May Institute  134 agencies  will  only  accomplished (p.169) above  be  only  by  However,  and  defines  be  hegemony its  interests  stability  of  other  provision  of  collective  and  a  stable  and  economic  pay  disproportionate  the  United  will  support  costs has  United leading  power  nations  may the  Laws,  be  in  Theories, Spegele  their  has  contrast  to  Hans  realists  in  the  for  of  world  the  establishment  issue-areas.  In  comparison  among  to  solve  small  and  the  it  lead, same  the leaky  dipper." The  called  others world  of with  common  powers,  even  the  and  smaller.  cannot boat,  variety  Without  great be  and  "If  follow. but  one  the the  All of  them  (p.210)  Waltz  that  the  would  Philosophy  Morgenthau.  a wide  incremental.  by  who particular,  social  states  trade  superpowers, In  in  The  defence,  and  provided  sense  influence.  provision.  responsible  to  and  regional  the  each  incentive  management  be  And  of  expansion  by  When  defence  peace, the  an  the  system,  global  not  biggest  the spheres  for  for  particular,  does  it.  undertaken  coordination  in  transforming  their as  system,  of  leadership  States  wields  been  always  and  is  bipolar  have  be  interests  the  for  such  national  a  they  provide  framework  financial  problems  to  in  can states,  maintaining  terms,  goods  institutionalization  society,  than  tasks i.e.  their in  in  within  development  domestic  place  global  states  States  economic,  it,  and  political  capability,"  interested  in  order  "Great  Nevertheless,  within  global  great  invariably  more  maintain  successful.  of  ones.  will  their  agents  states  international  superpowers  marginally  a  of  "concessional  Spegele they  Science:  claims  conceive  The  Vital  realist," that  international  they  Triangle in "are  still politics  135 within  the  framework  relations of  with  the  one  an  conception  rests,  implications  for  enterprise despite  or his  to  absolute  not,  i.e.,  law  one  "is  if  has  which  describe  these  relations.  and  their  theory.  the  a,  simply  Laws  "never  explanation."  (p.4) D. Spegele, Studies,  a  and  not  speak  contain A  theory  "Three Vol. 35,  or  is chapter  of  his  instrumental laws  if  invariant,  and x.  relation  and  (p.l)  theories  In  conclusively  explains  laws  been  contrast  not  b.  points  found,  but  suggest  Forms of Political No.2 (Summer 1987),  laws,  explain anything,  themselves, and  if that  explain  and  Laws  out  to  theories  by  themselves,"  then  probabi1istic  has  phenomena, do  a,  Waltz  that  cannot,  for  empirical Morgenthau,  entire  i.e.,  correlations  accumulation  this  knowledge.  repeatedly." between  an  a purely  probability on  which  propositions...which  are  b with  relations  do  of  as  ism,  between  variables",  relations  found  associations  8. Roger Political  kinds  on  seen,  an  "observational  not  been  have  as  Unlike  normative  instrumental  theory  Waltz  explicitly  basis  theory  devotes  many  0  and  and  we  of  theory.  consistent  distinguishes  then  inductive "Facts  of  between  if  based  that  role  distinct are  to  Waltz  carefully  empirical  As  validity  empiricism."  political  discourse.  adversary  the  epistemological  commitment  relations  are  a  of  and  laws  establish  methodological  its  contrast,  qualitatively First,  more  in  concede  of  and  nature he  far  international  In  where  is  often  scientific  the  nominal  the  of  stating  mode  inconsistent.  they  conception he  in  states  but  claims  however,  self-conscious  as  another,  instrumental  Morgenthau,  tool,  sovereign  methododological  adopts  book  of  result  empirical their  provides Real ism," p.195.  own an  in  136 indispensable  link  probabi1istic  relations  picture, or  mental  domain  (p.  of  1y  between  formed,  unlike  describe  simplify  of  propositions  these  the of  facts.  expressing  A  organization  the  Morgenthau,  reality  reality  forces  from  or  theory of  connections  by  relevant  to  is  "a  a bounded  among  account  The  realm  its  ultimate  a confusion  of  [and]  to  essential  from  the  reality  question, Theories  between we are are  overturned for  always  and  parts."  terms  but of  are  referents hypotheses, associated tested  the  realm  and within directly,  of  law,  by  to  concepts  better  these only  not  utility.  also  hypotheses. indirectly  Since  theories  one  specify  Theories through  is  the  (p.9)  and  may  be  of in  criteria their  turn,  the  truth is  hypotheses  their how  cannot  truth  terms  specify in  are  The  testable  should  principle  theory."  This,  by  theoretical  1ing  data,  in  may  and  propel  theories.  are  contained  should  of  the  generate  Theories  they  by  that  tendency  "If  not  and  behaviour,  explain,  theories.  explanatory  ability  the  false  theories  operational. for  (p.lO) to  factors  central  the  do  they  specified  the  seek  seek  redundant  their  their  find  to  theories  factors  of  to  factors."  and  competing  falsity,  "to  underdetermined  made  evaluating  function  in  is  they  true  range  according  tendencies,  the  certain possible  a specific  aim  seek  distinguish  innumerable  for  that  Instead,  isolating  elements  among  distinct  of  maintains  truth-claims.  artificially  disparate  criteria.  Waltz  make  a multitude  aggregating  be  and  8)  not  or  facts  activity...and  Second,  be  between  a  whose  empirical  deductive variables themselves the  hypotheses  are cannot they  137 generate. of  Final  the  theory  useful  effort  objects  of  of  will  brilliant  facts  not  convey will  of  things  be  more  nature  lead  about  stark. his Waltz  is  the  The has  most  specifically From  isomorphism  between  Durkheim  he  the  borrows  the  However,  op.  with  he  cit.,  polities notion although  p.339.  of  answer trial  theory  until...a  Waltz  things.  sense  on  the keeps  made  could  not  source  and  them  to  discovery,  and  the  and by  Emile  structural  economic facticity  has  is  of  economists theory  and  These  of  which  and social  is  painful  context  discovers  the  Morgenthau  by  laws  explanations  makes  rarely  his  influenced  Waltz  when  views  microeconomic  former,  facts  emerges."  by  strong  on  reality,  relations  and  international  "causes."  "Reflections",  very  a  idea  contrast  silent  was  of  causes  intuitions,  "I  of  a  nature  of  The  process  and  the  as  one  theories.  unobservable  relatively  that  how  a creative  (p.9)  Durkheim."  <p  to  connections  bri11iant  anthropologists;  explains  more  than  theory.  parts  theories  construction  Morgenthau  merely  structural  of  as  and  longest  the  to  of  Waltz  particular  facts  scope  testing  seen,  inappropriate his  and  rather  have  vary,"  flashes,  observed."  of  saying  9.  to  we  or  laws  "The  a sense  be  himself.  From  and  methods  two  that  nature  "Rigorous  between  Waltz  intuition  "will They  "concepts  of As  by  between  the  round.  (p.16)  generated  to  use  as  associations  mysterious.  error  way  falsification  from  geared  the  theory."  associations,  slightly  in  distinguished  transition  be  other  exercise  hypotheses  as  these  must the  test  strict  consistent  expressed  an to  to  scope  not  is  Having as  tests  hypotheses,  vague  and  1y,  nothing  markets. and to  say  138 about  the  spoken a  role  of  this  subject  on  particularly on  albeit  empirical  a  others  of and  thinkers,  be  only  is  no  that  they  government,  the  to  to  discovered."**  is  be  profitably  be  picked  serious to  systematic  Hobbes,  Rousseau  variety  course,  simply  to  up  historians, great  useful  for  Of is  have  concedes  political  gained...  It  they  he  political  of  philosophy.  that  has  two-fold.  "clues  to  of  way  important be  1957,  he  international  writings  as  it  of  work,  in  ideas  the  may  energy  the  is  philosophers,  insofar  Writing  prepare  with  suggestion  intellectual of  ideas  to  role  familiarity  political  knowledge  contemporary  questions to  hypotheses  true  There  central  his  past.  role  That  0  suggests  insights... just  the  primarily  theory.*  First, and  the  in  in  important  philosophers theory,  philosophy  this  have  devoted  a great  thought  about  familiarize  is  claim  from  that  or  a monopoly deal  poets.  of  of  truth,  time  perennial oneself  not  past  statesmen,  minds  of  and  problems with  their  ideas. Second,  and  philosophers to  have  modern  on  philosophy  although  The it  ideas,  on  particular  in value  traditionally  insofar  issues and  a critical  invaluable  has  importantly,  scientists,  good  is  more  reflected  political  dependent  ideas.  far  that  of  direct  of for  with  is  political  philosophy  concerned  concern  theory  inspiration  10. Kenneth N. Waltz, "Political Philosophy International Relations," in William T.R. Aspects of International Relations (Notra of Notra Dame Press, 1959), pp. 51-69. 11. Ibid., p.52.  political  empirical  examination  political been  are  since  providing of  as  these is  order  and the Fox, ed., Dame, Ind:  that, and  Study of Theoretical University  139 justice been  in  domestic  concerned  with  international for  etiology  provides the  the  peace. of  causes  and  of  has  its  guestions  theory;  namely,  A systematic  war  a useful  some  central  political  conditions and  society,  been  inventory to  causes  examination  of  of by  of  have  also  empirical  the  typology  war.  figures  of  conceptualized or  solutions  major  war  how  and  the  the  past  nature  thinkers  analyses  concerning  Thus  The most direct route to understanding the wri tings of philosophers is to seek out the questions they were attempting to answer. I would suggest that posing a central guestion and ordering systematical 1y the different answers that can be given to i t is the most direct route to the construction of international political theory. xs  with and  Notice  that  theory  construction  chronological  subseguently other  not  per  induction  "can  as  empirical  well  theory  gathering  easily  science"  criteria  provide  although In  sufficient,  1954,  almost  published  justly  famous  his as  p.62.  sense  the  for  the  for  empirical  kind  or  that  theory a  pseudo-  is  not  itself  "philosophy-of-  claims.  Nevertheless,  inspiration  necessary,  theory  construction.  before  field.  the  political  meets  of  On of  chaos  dissertation, the  pursuit  holds  explanatory  in  without  "sterile."  either  a quarter—century  a classic  intellectual  examination, it  ordering  separate  is  Waltz  that  doctoral  systematic  speculation  and  systematic  valid  clues  not  Waltz  Ibid.,  for  useful  its  the  are  produce Thus  as  in  They  construction  scholasticism."  philosophy,  such  Abstract  theory data  equate  se.  activities.  mindless  scientific  12.  does  rigorous  hand,  through  may  Waltz  Theory which  It  is  appeared,  has a  became  perfect  it  140 exemplar that  in  the  Waltz  advocates  political not  just  behavioural  broadly  of  man,  and  Having answers  these  themselves, image the  each  frequently other  contained of  images  the  images  these  essential  the  "images"  states  others,  to  answers  can  -  systems  the  nature  of  states,  coexist  without  what  and  one  Waltz  a  inadequate.  it  is  of  a  anarchy  in  to the  facticity.  calls  status  explain  concept as  understand  or  conditions. to  anarchy  theoretical  Here,  "efficient"  excludes of  earlier  The  particular  by one  [implicitlyj  important  social  is  part  that,  "Emphasising  a privileged  is  he  seldom  contradictory  concludes  conceptualization  the  "permissive" if  often  of  of of  of  it  it  treatment  war,  is  accords  war,  array  though  which  Waltz  between  or  which  many  that  political  of  images  discovery  causes, are  three  of  answers historians,  and  reveals  bewildering  in  which  international  them. a  Theory,  Waltz's  immediate  in  distorts,  cause  distinguishes  environment  in  from  before  groups  light  independent differs  three and  to  different  socialists  economic  of  route  philosophy  statesmen,  into  t w o . I n  structure  but  He  above  political  examines  war?"  classified  into  Waltz  causes  domestic  authority  of  direct  liberals,  classified  anarchical  supreme  it,  most  philosophers,  "what  the  the  the  scientists,  question,  be  In  by  exploitation  as  theory.**  given,  the  systematic  an how  work,  this i.e.  Waltz proximate first  and two  wars.  If [states] fight against each other i t will be for reasons especial 1y defined for the occasion by each of them...these immediate causes are contained in the first and second images. Variations in [these images] 13. Kenneth N. Waltz, Man, University Press, 1954J. 14. Ibid, 2nd ed., p.227.  The  State,  and  War  (New  York:  Columbia  141 are important, breaking of  In war.  Thus,  of  war,  anarchy  nothing  to  anarchy as  prevent  government,  settle  inter—state  economic  us  the  of  starting explanation  constant.  variations  in  between  making  and  In  is  However,  war  as  the  Mar  is  not.  the  different  first  image.  Neither of  of  war  as  of  over  1954,  of  the  domestic  it  is  the  best  an  and  useful  a  to  the  helpful  very  In  is  absence  though  and peace  states.  problem  regardless  Anarchy  is  the  the  present,  about  waging  may be used  even  is  the  there  characterize  image  incidence kinds  always which  in  force  by itself,  third  because  words,  that  for  approaching  occur  other  possibi1ity  context  for  "wars  systems  the  of  that  conflicts  states.  point,  a permissive  framework  them.  and political  systems  is  a generic tells  world  the  0  contrast,  of  are  indeed crucial, in periods of peace.*  human in  nature explaining  time  Waltz  and concludes:  The third image describes the framework of world polities, but without the first and second images can be no knowledge of the farces that determine policy; the first and second images describe the in world politics, but without the third image it impossible to assess their importance or predict resul ts. ~ (Emphasis added. )  there forces is their  ±7  By  the  standards  reductionist, merely  a  because descriptive  international explains  15. 16. 17.  Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.  some  of  Theory,  he  fails  term,  to when  political  structure,  extremely  important  p.  232.  p.  238.  the see  Waltz  of  1950s  how anarchy,  understood a  the  as part  theoretical  forces  which  is  by of  a  itself a  concept, shape  foreign  distinct  142 policy  behaviour  Waltz's is  and  epistemological  different  from  organizational and  in  anarchy  are  this  explain  outcomes.*  when The  anarchy  understood  latter  is  "nonfactual".  regard",  and  According  3  positivism,  concept.  assumptions  physics to  international  as  a  move  a descriptive  part  of  assumption,  instructs  away  us  from  term  an  theoretical  Waltz to  as  to  to  reality  "think in  of  order  it:  Imagining that mass concentrates at a point, inventing genes, mesons, and neutrinos, positing a national interest: These are examples of common assumptions... theorists create their assumptions. Whether or not they are acceptable depends on the merit of the scientific structure of which they are a part, (p.10)  Clearly, political from  then,  philosophy  Morgenthau's,  theory  as  an  despite  and deal  to  truths  selected  "classical to  the  reconcile  say of  or  theory  the  theory  is  map.  practice. his  human  nature  realists"  of  radically  different  commitment  Morgenthau a  key  as  such  as  in  Hobbes  and  predispositions  that  between whilst  beliefs  reflected  to  believes  link  Unfortunately,  metaphysical  ontological  contribution  nominal  provides  about  his  to  latter's  tool  historical  elemental  fails  empirical  political  philosophy great  to  attitude  instrumental  international  a  Waltz's  he  has  concerning the  works  the of  Machiavel1i, with  18. In 1965, Waltz still did not believe that a purely theory was possible. "The character of an international depends upon the number of great states that exist, the capabilities with which they are endowed, the ambitions  he  his  systemic system they  may  entertain, and the nature of relations among them. Variations in these factors, which are central in any theory of international politics, determine the stability of the international equilibrium." International 1965), p.720.  Kenneth N. Relations,"  Waltz, World  "Contention Politics,  and Management Vol. 17, No.4  in (July  143 superficially so  instrumental  with  truths  Waltz, concerning  otherwise.  Waltz,  philosophy  fundamental turning  By  determinant  need out  of not  international resort that  Description  final  are  should  be  engaging  in  necessary or  provides by  human  confirming  by  an  construct  an  empirical  in  its  systemic  autonomy, of  the  by  independent  explanations  ubiquitous  but  of  as  or  any  conforming  philosophy  respects  link  condition,  knowledge the  a  structure  that  and  the  "inside-  discipline.  Prescription describes  and  that  the  prescriptive  prescriptive  noted in  so  section  explicit  can  the  Not  a priori  not  valid  down  reductionism,  descriptive any  and  politics  and  This  draw  to  and  systemic one  also  practice,  laid  outcomes,  any  theory.  metaphysical  theory  useful  postulating  variety"  Waltz's  into  empirical  politics,  politics  criteria  of  are  there  historical  about  ideas  methodological  science.  that  empirical  and  truths  good  theory  rejects  of  international  For  between  to  who  conception  views,  lessons  nowhere  prescriptive  relationship  does  analysis.  from  Waltz  and  his  his  theory.  object  On  between  to  the  reluctance  to  It theorists  contrary:  The urge to explain is not born of the idle curiosity alone. It is also produced by the desire to control, or at least to know i f control is possible, rather than merely to predict...Because a law does not say why a particular association holds, i t does not tell us whether we can exercise control and how one might go about doing so. For the latter purposes we need a theory, (p.6)  Thus to  explain  orienting  empirical an  external  political  theory  is  reality, practice  not it within  merely is  also this  an  instrument an  reality.  essential  by tool  which for  Nevertheless,  144 Waltz  holds  Although  the  desire  to  process  urge  to  peace.  inference  and  By  comes  validity  of  his  with  of  theorist  need  his  problems  of  conception explanatory idea given the  it  a  prescription form the  in  which  is  "ought" empirical  of  and by  as  theorist  cannot  evil"  human  somewhat  support confined  giving  it.  may  Regarding  to  compels  given,  form,  opposed  not  concerned  with  which,  recognize  theorist  to  and also and  limits the  morali  of  theory conduct  to  because  normative  "scientific" the  the  role  empirical  as  is  truth"  and  Waltz  "is"  and  Morgenthau''s  explanation  to  a neutral  of  critic.  political  As  practical  function  the  of  claims  the  to  "the  social  be  shield  the  from  evaluations  making  the  epistemological  "reality"  activities, advice  by  the  proclaiming  a  normative  judgements. theory  lonely  the to  theory  far  between  different  prescriptive  face  nature,  distinguishing two  in  to  is  irrelevant  is  commitment  rules  how  Waltz's  is  a  emotional  Just  his  objectivity  a personal  the  war,  enterprise,  to  this  in  "explanation"  latter  rational  According  course,  by  the  Protected  apply  disinclination  radical  However,  Of  or  is  the  inspired  methodological  activity.  may)  theory,  requires  "necessary  become  policy.  empirical  society's  he  by  ideas  and  result  theory  explanations.  logical  utility.  that  gua  bri11iant  (although  public of  a  may  rigorous  standards,  as not  to  functions.  obviously  distorted  uncommitted  subseguent  science  is  be  theory  and  independent  that  not  conforming  "philosophy-of-science"  unity  war,  actions  evidence,  up  and  say,  should  neutral  theorist  separate  explain  explanation  for  of  are  undertaking  a politically  it  these  avoid  of  desire of  that  or  enterprise, ty  of  foreign  145 policy,  and  thus  the morality explain. it  of  the  theorist  the policies  Consequently,  is confined  efficiency as  to providing  policies  propositions are  of  policies  assist  in  policy.  are  designed or  improving  As  Keohane  role  on  to alleviate,  as  assumed  instrumental  he  is  as  the  In other  the  such  likely  empirical  rationality  words,  certain  the problems  well  to  theory,  to enhance  of  on  trying  empirical  basis  of  causes,  comment  ends.  the  cause  points  of  pre-given  the  the  which  information  formulated  the  theorist,  outcomes  useful  both  qua  the  achieving  concerning  policies those  and  regarding  of means in  insofar  cannot,  effects  theory of  can  foreign  out,  The realist theory of the balance of power, discussed by Waltz, could have alerted American policymakers in the 1950s to the 1ikelihood of an eventual Sino-Soviet split. Realist maxims would have counseled the United States to make an al1iance, or at least an accommodation, when feasible, with the weaker Chinese.., ±9  Waltz's utilitarian  instrumental perspective  international  political  Unlike  Morgenthau,  can  disinterested  be  knowledge Waltz  from  argues  who  that  theory  the  the  that  too many scholars reality,  holds sense  pursue  to explain  it  for  imperative  in  explain  to a  the practical  and is  leads  concerning  practice all  order  it  therefore  firmly  in  action  ism  and fail  is necessary  that  relevance  conduct  that it  "no is  knowledge  of  to recognize to depart  of  able  for  it.  that from  19. Robert O. Keohane, "Realism, Neorealism, and World Politics," in Robert O. Keohane, op. cit., 20. Politics Among Nations, op. cit., p.23.  divorce  own  theory  sake,"^^ from  He in  it.  policy. polities  to  its  for  of  foreign  study  to divorce prescribe  prescriptively  claims  order His  the Study pp.2-3.  to criticism of  146 of  Stanley  Hoffmann  could  well  clearly  their  differences  i1lustrates  apply  to  Morgenthau,  on  this  and  score:  Hoffmann has not developed a theory but instead has displayed a strong commitment to a particular intellectual approach. His commitment to the reality of the international system and his conviction that statesmen must "see" the system correctly in order to act effectively have helped to make his writing vivid. The sensitivity of perception and the sharpness of insight are impressive, but any glimmerings of theory remain crude and confused. (p.49)  Waltz  draws  theory. that  This can  be  is  point  prescriptive  so  for  drawn  independently  from  of  intercede  no  the  between  in  trying  behaviour  of  two a  lessons reasons.  theory  goals  and  counter  structural  particular  units,  of of  outcomes,  of  are  his no  lessons  analysis  functions  states. so  causes  i.e.  end  there  unit  ambitions  and  the  First,  whose  intentions to  at  Structures  there by  is  little  altering  the  states:  So long as one leaves the structure unaffected it is not possible for changes in the intentions and the actions of particular actors to produce desirable outcomes or to avoid undesirable ones...the only remedies for strong structural effects are structural changes, (p.108)  Waltz either  does  through  distribution Waltz is the  he  purposes  global under will  no is  be  structures  the  of  calls  "constructively"  with stabi1ity  four  the  "maxims,"  collective the  of  However,  content  systemic  cannot  principle  policy-relevant  quite of  he  that  capabi1ities.  management what  claim  transforming of  derives  that  not  the  as  managed  The under  as  as  problems  likelihood duopolistic  them,  system  well  the  why  calls  bipolar  peace,  or  reason  Keohane  transnational p's.  changed,  organization second  present  and  be  for the classified  that  the  hegemony,  system  147 compared  to  high.  alternative  Indeed,  only  increases  subordinating  of  overreaction States  and  have  learnt  the  intensity  mutual  the to  the  possibi1i  dependent, these  states  to  interest  thus  Union  behave  as  their  is  maturation  to  show  As  greater the  Waltz  competition  and  the  concern  chances  for  of  observes,  cooperating  United  that  should  they  — at  the  mutual  "the  shown  duopolists  bipolarity  between  increasingly  sensible  of  cooperation,  and  reducing  have  relatively  inter—state within  them  Soviet  moderating times  to  (p.20Z) Waltz,  this  becoming  maturation  socialized  Morgenthau "seeing  effectively.  of  miscalculation.  to  as  ties  system,  advantage".  superpowers  lasts,  permitting  of  According  the  the  the  or  it  longer  and  maintenance  possibilities,  the  ideology  superpowers,  systemic  and  the  is  to  Hoffmann  system  the  simply system.  maintain,  correctly  a  in  result It  on order  is  of not  the  leaders  to  act  of  "  Conclusion The in and  purpose  which how  I  those  discovery variable also  have  the  Waltz's  practical  "explaining"  political  circumscribed  role  main upon  important  of  the  an  been  ontological  structure  embodies theory and  derivation  one  both  permitting of  of  exegesis,  contained  in  context  as  international  approach role  simply  arguments  systemic  practice for  has  depend  postulates  that the  chapter  described  determining  argued  regarding  this  arguments  which in  of  an  a distinct  I  have  perspective  interpreting a  of  independent  outcomes.  in  Theory  strictly  instrumentally  or  148 prescriptive the  "maxims"  expansive  hypotheses  which  analysis, Waltz,  scope  one but  provide  an  he  to  compare  of the  systems.  In  that  international for  the  the  and  derive not  any  his  is their  so  of  complete  matter,  bipolar  hegemony stability  of of  highly  policy.  is  maxims His  from  main  characterized  provides  management  the of  best  international  is  to  that  is  "reductionism"  among  scholars and  to  political he  concludes by  military both  of  reading  aim  the  Morgenthau,  superpowers  level  politics  avoid  and  the  abstract  international to  Given  of  predispositions,  economic  the and  its  ubiquitous  system  level  generality  to  different  contrast  the  international  erroniously  of  foreign  goal.  methodological  stability  of  specific  primary  subject  "constructive"  conduct  theory,  theory  low the  the  generates,  its  contemporary  comparatively and  is  believes  regardless  the  it  empirical  appropriate that  of  cannot  this  for  that  a interdependence,  enhances political  framework affairs.  149  CHAPTER KENNETH  WALTZ;  SIX  A CRITICAL  ANALYSIS  The professing atheist who genuflects ai every cross, may all be giving a sincere account of his conscious beliefs, is not providing an accurate statement of the principles govern his actions. Thomas  In troduc  this  chapter,  "scientific" idealism. Waltz's  I  is  an  ontological  aspiring  to no  will  pretensions, It  argue  ambitious  but  beliefs  about  effort  to  defend  reguires  one  to  blurring  has  been  theories  about  international  possible  to  this,  argues  from  existence  of  that  the  and  "causes"  an  to at  autonomous  postulation  of  the  sever  between  levels,  firm  "scientific"  thus  on  function  their  (p.78)  independently  the  own  level  whose  construct  principles. of  their  it  depends at  of is  patterns  political  to  terms. politics  That  structure  him,  he  development  particular  permits and  by  analysis,"  politics."  behaviour  validate  Conseguently,  to  systemic  to  politics  impediment  international  to  complacent  international of  determining  cause  links  of  of  its  attempt  on  "levels  the  independent  of  international  explain  an  forces"  Jr.  despite  unsuccessful  autonomy  major  form  beliefs  one's  "the  Theory,  standards.  these  separate  do  behaviour  based  a  "phi 1osophy-of-science"  he  theory  that  expresses  Instead,  Waltz's  Spragens,  Hon  In  makes  A.  after but he which  of  state  upon  the  this  level.  structure or  so  an  he  as thinks,  empirical "Systems-level  recognition  by  state  150 actors,  the  hidden  agents  presence  whose  of  assumed  by  Waltz  Waltz's  "structural  subject  matter,  such  to  be  and  "appropriate"  context,  to  ("think  is  a  device,  subject,  to  invented  despite  his  politics,  international  facts  and  to of  As  a  result,  therefore  reductionist.  formal  system  is  calls  of  his  methodological  subject-matter.  In  x  to  for  the  standards  of  the  phrase,  avoiding  without  matter  microeconomics.  the  Ashley  autonomy  well-known  this  of  autonomy to  Theory  reducing is  science.  as  it  For  international  systems-level  standards"  result  dangerous  of  structure)  by  the  that  achieving  commitment  political  subject  a  conform  "philosophy-of-science his  the  that  a  Waltz,  Janus-faced  the  what  the  to  physics!").  misquote  defence  (i.e.  autonomy  of  politics,  nominal Waltz's  of  by  international  both  explain to  to  Thus  "adoption"  means  testifies  Socialization  secures  to  Unfortunately,  apparently  unproblematic.  the  "explain"  science  forces.  turn"  approach  natural  behaviour  forces  external  social  undermines to  epiphenomenal  the  logic  the of  and  s  1. "CTheJ appeal to objective structures, which are said to dispose and limit practices among states (most especial 1y, the anarchic structure of the modern states system)... cut through the subjectivist veils and dark metaphysics of classical realist thought. Dispensing with the normatively laden metaphysics of fallen man, they seemed to root realist power politics...securely in the scientifically defensible terrain of objective necessity." Richard K. Ashley, "The Poverty of Neorealism," International Organization, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Spring 1984), p.233. 2. "Epiphenomenalism consists in treating political events as essentially the outcome of some environing structure which is itself explicable in terms of scientific laws (though we have not "as yet" attained any precise understanding of these laws). Political reality is thus treated as reducible to something else." K.R. Minogue, "Epiphenomenalism in Politics: The Quest For Political Reality," Political Studies, Vol. 20, No. 4, (December 1972), p. 466 i  151 The  argument  examine which  the  this  in  the  invokes  to  reconcile  as  an  I  of his  It  is  conceals the  main  presuppose  entire  anarchy  with  the  as  of  Morgenthau in  I  linked,  in  that  will  call  refers  anthropology.  In  Waltz's the  as  the I  to  theories  in  terms  view,  inability  the of  which focuses which  international  essence  Waltz's associated  to  Waltz's  Waltz,  this  and  to  disciplines  by  to  to explain  focussing and  of  such  refers  attempt  states  has  "vertical."  attempt  other  which  "nonpolitical  his  examine  that  kinds  affinity of  reductionism  of two  attempt  allegedly  level nature  "scientific"  Indeed,  will  of  Vertical  the  politics  unacknowledged  international-political such  attempt  Theory,  "horizontal"  theories  his  of  According  polities  factors them.  section,  "analytical"  the  between  this  ambiguity  section  in  necessity.  regarding  reductionism.  which  calls  unit-level  second  if  a  from  this  conceptualization  loses  his theory.  of  contained  of  in  international  examine The  in  a profound  of  remarkable  or  at  critically  will  empirical  requirements  idealism.  the  international  outcomes  the  science  stems  autonomy  arguments  reductionism  Waltz  This  outcomes  regarding  psychology  what  with to  the  is  structural  dimensions,  explain  domain  Also  Horizontal  there  of  of  subject-matter. arguments  in  role  I  manner  natural  realm  disc  views  and  that  First,  contradictory  abstracted  discussion  with  belief  stages.  of  arguments.  ontological  an  and  argue  substantive  as  three  nature  political  an  politics  will  essential  Waltz's  in  philosophy  the  Waltz's  autonomous  logic.  two  "the" of  section, logic  proceed  1 incoherence  presentation  In  on  interna  Waltz  formal  will  on  relations  "errors"  are  theories...  to  152 provide  reliable  explanations  related  to  authors'  and  their  recognize  politics  as  explicitly  the  two  to  In  kinds  is  avoid  specificity  domain.  the  predictions"  failure  structural  a distinct links  and  vertical  reductionism  of  the  international  following  of  directly  passage,  he  reductionism:  Essential to the reductionist approach, then, is that the whole shall be known through the study of its parts [vertical reduction J. It also often happens that the [vertical] reductionist finds himself using the methods of other discipiines in order to apprehend his own subject-matter [horizontal reductionJ... in our field, the [horizontal] reductionist urge must derive more from failures [according to "scientific" standards] of work done at the international-poli tical level than from the successes of other possibly pertinent disciplines. (pp.18-19) Unfortunately, "errors"  he  roundly  international and  by  as  condemns  politics  resorting  reintroducing  to  to  ad  affect  multipolar  international to  show  In  is  all  one-way,  resulting  in  a drama  over  responsibility. whole  definition 3. Barry Waltz's delivered Studies  which As  content of  of  the  order  This, and  by  to and in  the  microeconomics, and  explain between  turn,  bipolar  notes,  "Waltz  effectively  system  level  his  and from  causation of  states  nor appropriates own  his  interact of  portrayal control  how  results  direction  neither  for  just  forces  a deterministic  have  very  reducing  of  unit-level  framework,  they  Buzan  in  systems.  in  both  the  reductionism  within  Waltz's  commits  logic  both  structural  systems.  others,  vertical  behaviour  how  Waltz  assumed  factors  within  the  hoc  see,  in  the  unit-level  structures  failure  we shall  narrow  structure."*  Buzan, "Systems, Structures and Units: Reconstructing Theory of International Politics," unpublished paper at the annual conference of the British/International Association (London, March 1989), p.5.  153  this argue  The  third  for  Waltz's  that  the  of  Consider who  science,  I  will  and  Poli two  the of  the is  Here,  virtues by  rest  of  all  I  will  of the  on  theory  (in  extremely  the  enlightened  stability  of  nuclear  a complacent  idealist.  tics quotations.  advocates  therefore  the  and  implications theory.  regarding  conclude,  following  "rules"  the  unsupported  judgements  unreservedly  the  both  them),  International the  and to  are  superpowers  Waltz, Versus  regarding  contradicts  the  examines  "problem-solving"  arguments  evaluative  deterrence.  theory  allegedly  theory  maturation  Landau,  section  bipolarity  contentious  Science  final  Waltz's  contemporary fact,  and  the  first  methodological  subordination "proper"  The  of  is unity  empirical  scientific  from of political  method:  The scientific situation, as ideally described and understood, seeks a special type of knowledge, which is both defined and warranted by its own system of rules. There are rules which cover the constitution of theory and those which sanction the admission of a proposition into the corpus of a science; there are rules of deductive inference, of induction, of observation, of adeguate solutions, of purity of method. These are rules of procedure, maxims of correct scientific conduct, which the scientist must strive to abide by. The scientific situation thus legislates its own dueprocess clause - a "due process of inguiry. "•*  Now consider  how Waltz  appropriates  Landau's  argument:  Students of international politics use the term "theory" freely, often to cover any work that departs from mere description and seldom to refer only to work that meets philosophy-of-science standards... one must choose an approach that is appropriate to the subject matter. The rules by which one's inguiry proceeds varies from one approach to another. "Due process of inquiry", as Martin Landau has said, requires one to  4. Martin Landau, York: Macmillan,  Political 1972),  Theory p.221.  And  Political  Science  (New  154 follow the prescribes, In  light  of  illuminates  a  to  be  the  politics.  Waltz  politics,  "a  connections by  its  subject-matter  as  the  Great  for  as  theory  standards rules, argument  one some  but  in  rules  cannot of  decisions that  "efficient  meeting Sky  1icensing  a  and  said,  the  that  theory  choices.* practice  Waltz's  science,  which  of  science,  and  can  what for  faithful  a realm no  Spegele  aptly  then  approach,  precedes  this  is the  of  the  prevented refers  to  philosophy  providing  and  For  and  theorizing.  "the"  ty  to  way  "scientific"  authori  his  international  in  invoke  of  be  of  is  he  international  of  that  passage  of  one  evaluation,  function  above  subject-matter,  coherently  and  are  "ideal"  (p.8)  the  methodology  organization  parts,"  construction or  the  from  kind  his  one's  between  philosophy  believe  of  its  has  "empirical"  Standards  Unfortunately, science  an  depiction among  of  to  the  the  autonomy  construct  actually  to  in  seems  that  contradiction  revealed  to  and  Landau  commitment  commitment  both,  what  procedures  fundamental  epistemological believes  logic and (p.13)  s  of  standards  argue  that  i.e.,  are  to  concede  theory  of  such  not Ryle's it;  5. Roger D. Spegele, "Deconstructing Methodological Falsificationism in International Relations," American Political Science Review, Vol. 74, No. 1, (March 1980), p.107. 6. As Beardsley points out, "because every "scientific" discipline deals with a subject matter that is different in some key respects from that of other disciplines, each must develop...methodological standards that are to a significant degree unique to that discipline. No discipline can rely solely on a straight-forward application of a general philosophy-ofscience doctrine. This conclusion would follow even if there were only one defensible doctrine (which of course is not the case), and even if the would-be appliers thoroughly understood the doctrine they are attempting to apply (which many political scientists do not)." Philip L. Beardsley, Redefining Rigor: Ideology and Statistics in Political Inquiry (London: Sage, 1980), p. 39.  155 methodologies critical  Landau  cannot  be  ideally  is  set  Landau  uncritically -  to  the  science  should  if  one  conform  in  to  if  the  of  -  order his  rules  should  still  In  and  view  that  proceeds  making. science  polities status,  view  approach,  to  of  scientific  conform  "as  according  theories  enjoy  therefore  own  contradictory  to  the  7  that  to  of  products."  Waltz's  oxymoron and  methods;  mistaken,  the  support of  grants  to  international  of  autonomy.  To argue  homogeneity  of  is  natural  then  in  also  knowledge  another "science," against  way,  if then  science.  the  opposed  that,  theories  to  of  "philosophy-of-  the  not  there This  a permanent  7. p.  Ryle,  The  an  in  form  to  would  have  the  dependent  of  no  point  not  resource well  existential Concept  to  of  for made  any  tension Mind  and  and a  (London:  from  social  denial to  of  logic,  of  deny  its  the of  matter.  one's be  explained,  way  how  To put  it  politics  Sartori, between  can  constrain  defending by  tics  explanation  autonomy? in  poli  heterogeneity on  contextual  is  human to  of  does  is  that  subject-matter  thesis  international  amounts  one  because  "political"  identifies Gilbert 30.  as  this  are  of  and  different,  otherwise,  of  defend  theory  no  principle  "explanations"  conceptualization  a  standards,  politics  explanation  if  that  these  phenomena,  one  even  the  standards." Even  For  rules  polities  are  endorses an  subordination  international  they  rules,  Landau  of  contradiction  itself  such  misquotes  despite  a  methodological  conform  Waltz  which  in  of  application  consistent,  described"  fixed  an  of  implicated  whilst  must  the  investigation  contrast,  For  presuppose  who the  Hutchinson,  two: 1949),  a  156 The scientific urge...makes the autonomy of politics questionable. The treatment affects the object. If science is the how, this how vaporizes the what. This leads, in the end, to the disappearance of what is political, to taking politics out of politics. There is nothing paradoxical in this development. On the contrary, i t is in the logic of [science] to do away with whatever is refractory to its treatment... at one extreme, we have science eating up politics; at the other extreme, we have politics eating up science...it is the task of the political theorist to be on the alert and shun both extremes. 3  The the  "rules"  subject to  tension  arising  of  from  scientific  matter  pervades  his  the  meaning  hypotheses  and  facts.  It  which  Waltz  issues  coherent and  manner.  how  they  instrumental  and  "international  be  to  one  theories  Waltz and  can  posits  facts,  be  a  the  which  with  the of  he  in  laws, on  three  a consistent of  and  these  terms  between  theory  his  attempts  focussing  tension  criteria  of  theories,  status  which  qualitative are  discovered  the  vis-a-vis for  evaluating  than  systematic  descriptions  Thus  laws  are  of  "facts  theories  hypothesis  consistency  8. Giovanni Politics,"  and with  Sartori, Political  must a  which  linked  is  of  postulated  "Philosophy, Theory. Vol.  a given  of  and are  be  reality. discovered, between  or  covary,  and Science (May 1974),  The  little  difference  probabi1ity  2  laws.  political  only  associations  Theory, 2, No.  they  can  The  degree  between  hypotheses  which  constructed. the  by  because  observation"  be  law  distinction  inductively,  more  a  deal  autonomy  to  utility.  First,  whereas  by  cognitive  role and  the in  i1lustrated  another,  constitutive  commitment  between  to  the  to  chapter,  relationship  fails  are;  and  opening  can  politics,"  theoretical  latter  and  These  relate  simultaneous  methodology  clarify  central  Waltz's  although  of p.157.  157 Waltz  fails  since  he  to also  applies  probabilistic idea  specify  theories  uninterpreted  as and  correlative  associations  hypotheses  and  realm  of the  relations  for  theory  for  this  other  data,  how  is  it  meaningful  only  "construct  between  useful a  constructed from  our  available  He  infinite  the  be  not  "data" and  that  being  also and  which  be  be  body  of  expressed  as  we are  "laws  in  of  be  data  to  "is  throughout of (p.5)  that  everything say for  the  interpreted  concepts Waltz  goes  on  materials  also conception  [ItJ that  also  to  epistemology  reality,  ages.  realm  before  elaborate  the  Waltz  or  some  positivistic  an  which  nebulous in  fit  a given  itself  manipulation,  in  "discovered."  explain  search  international  to  his  can  the  evidence  around  within  that  we cannot  The  be  establish  against  view  as  to  organization quantity."  a  statistical  accepted  classified  can  which  can  concepts  warns  float  have  then  them  whole  prior  question,  unscientific  to  do  a  can  Without...theory,  are  and  is  the  and  which  law,  and  which  data,  claims  col lection  reconstructed  selection in  also  profoundly  reality,"  raw  variables  instruments  and  of  a  (p.9)  (p.l)  theories,  on  reality,  truth  Waltz  seems,  fashion,  invariant  based  them,  (pp.16-17)  The  that  "if  variable.  now  associations  terms  theory."  data  hypotheses."  is  "given"  Thus  formulated,  both  becomes  Nevertheless,  instruments  variables,  "the  hypothesis  correlations.  hand,  a  observation.  are  to  values."  adopts  varies  concede  "law"  in  not  through  that  of  term  between  laws.  law,  different  politics,  the  described  between  against  a  accessible  1y  take  point  mere  systematical  On  what  ("law-like")  of  the  at  argues  emerges are that  158 hypotheses,  which  constructed  and Indeed,  induction  when, of  he  and  adherents  to  paradigms  "see"  openly  factual  fundamental  entities  which  Although  Kuhn's  establishment, natural  his  science  is  scientific  philosophers,  experience  play  scientific  belief,  particular  body  element...is Despite such  of  beliefs,  summary or  such a  politics.  that  "they  belief.  But  Kuhn  to  say  of  he  a  not  paradigms  subject  in  to  "paradigms"  may  consist  relegates  is  a  history  of  controversy  among  the  and range  determine  of  a  arbitrary of  Waltz  he  the  apparently  Kuhn,  be  their  observation  alone  ingredient  to  paradigm  restricting  cannot  or  the  matter  scientific  that  that scientific  of  continuing not  both  calls  competing  in  that  terms,  argues,  concerning  of  An  formative  Instead,  meaning  replacement  role  reference  what  of  argues,  legitimate but  always his  international  no  regarding  on  the  the  from  claims  what  tute  a matter he  derived  goes  that  thesis  and  inductively  conceptualisations  concept  entire  still  in  but  consti  evolution,  he  within  incommensurable  and  his  (p.12)  facts,  be  deductively  Kuhn,  theories  different  one,  be  changes  ones."  competing  can  contradicts  produce  offer  contested  also  Thomas  world-views  explained.  claims  can  invoking  theory  theoretical  initially  tested,  theories.  "changes  he  such makes of  in  them  beliefs."* no  mention  the to  study the  of of context  9. Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scienti fic Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), p.4. For a good introduction to the debates sparked off by Kuhn's work, which i1lustrates the substantive differences between Popper, Kuhn, and Lakatos which Waltz ignores, see Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave, eds., Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970). C  159 of  discovery,  "creative  a private ideas."  As  realm Ashley  of  "bri11iant  rightly  intuitions"  points  and  out:  There is no allowance for guestioning the background intersubjective understandings that permit the theorist to arrive at just this "brilliant intuition," the background language of experience through which his "creative idea" is communicable to others, [that] permit the theorist and others to agree on the facts in need of explaining. The theory, if it is to be regarded as anything more than the personally meaningful nonsense of a lunatic, depends upon such in tersubjec ti ve preunders tandings. •* ° In facts,  light laws  theories to  of and  play  the  between  the  two  result  as  as  and  accepted  The nature his  role  procedures  lO. Richard International pp.216-217.  view  that  describing are  clear  mere  are  assumes  that  it  must  to which  subject  matter,  his  discussion.  incoherent  useful  are  because  selfIn  their  somehow  politics. be  The  and  fictions.  they  tries  frameworks their  in  an  role  instruments  of  of  strenuously  constituent  to  status what  Waltz  international  useful,  as,  all  conflated  theories  Waltz  of  as  as  himself  for  K.  and  commits  Conversely, they  claim  to  be,  true.  "fuzziness"  and  role  he  they  at  cognitive  Although  and  in  insofar  not  the  characteristics  tools,  dispensible  is  confused  that  mere  are  reality  are  contradictory role  their  essential  roles is  it  over  "explanations."  a given  identify  confusion  theories,  as  distinguish  understand  this  which  pervades  Waltz's  empirical  theory  evaluating  the  Ashley, Studies  "Political Quarterly,  has utility  Realism Vol. 25,  discussion  severe of  and No.  of  implications  the for  theoretical  Human 2, (June  Interests," 1981),  160 frameworks.  On  the  methodological theories  can  only  demanding"  the  confirmation  trying is  this  [one]  hard  of  is  insofar  that  as  their  according he  he  does  also  the of  to  "distinct  not  endorse  of holds  falsification.  the  the  Spegele  application  points  of  partially  subjective  theorist,  according  set  phenomena  that  As  becomes  a  Waltz's  endorsement  can  in  supporting  the  balance  of  the  theory,  the  be  explained  explanations.  of  and to  maxims  which  which  of  his  power  as  However,  a conseguence  of  formation  of  recourse  there  he  deductive  "recurrent"  without  what  are  to  two  problems  with  hypothesis. First,  tests  can  it be  between  of  not  state and  derived  interaction.  D.  clear to  unit-level  expectations  Roger  is  applied  indeterminacy  11.  this tests  to  power  "reductionist"  that  of  concerning  balances  holds  follow."**  example  According  of  rules  to  anarchy.  for  a matter  the  independent  from  part  confirmation  assertions  this  the  be  support  which  hand,  tests  as  to  methodological  A good  other  evaluation  on  to  falsified  explain,  "rules"  decides  calls  the  legitimate  transforms  of  be  such to  as  choice  set  appears  positively  to  On  that  metatheoretical  "a  evaluated  tests.  is  inductive  he  approach  fail  argument  theory  out,  be  hypotheses  Popper's  hand,  falsificationist  deductive and  one  a  Spegele,  what  theory  form  which the  structural  forces,  the  latter  confesses  op.  cit.,  "distinct  and  recognizes  behaviour,  from Waltz  in  the  interaction and  may that  p.119.  "I  be  within the  fact  frustrated  would  demanding"  be  systems that because  surprised  of if  161 many and  sorts  of  that  unit-level  "neither  affects  the  critical  other."  If  xs  of  nor  units  this  tests  remarks,  version  did  structure  empirical  Kratochwil  changes  is  which  these  not  case,  the  render  falsification  outcomes"  outcomes.  then  falsify  concessions  methodological  system  determine  the  can  alter  there  Each  are  theory.  no  As  Waltz's  diluted  extremely  problematic.  When observed and predicted results coincide, the hypothesis is corroborated; when they diverge, [it] can be immunized from criticism by arguing that the prediction was only probabi1istic. The problem of "refutation" then becomes largely one of practice, when a given set of scientists no longer feels comfortable with a standard explanation, and therefore rejects the hypothesis. * x  Waltz rigor  seems  and  geared  to  the  precision  of  as  international  supplementary determine  the  the  when  to  and  the  this  is  invocation  the  or  "success"  is  of  less  theoretical  tests  of and  "the must  be  [one's] given  theories  Waltz's and  facts,  "philosophy-of-science arbiter  field-dependent  that  demandingJ  case,  of  far  concedes  between  metatheoretical politics  he  generality  interdependence  norms the  this  [distinct  or If  ritualistic  standards" of  of  (p.16)  recognition the  recognize  complication  expectations."  then  to  of  important logics offerings  competing  theories  than which in  the in this  practice field.  x  *  12. Kenneth N. Waltz, "Reflections on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critics," in Robert O. Keohane, op. c i t . , p. 327. 13. Friedrich Kratochwil, "Errors Have Their Advantage," International Organization, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Spring 1984), p.314. 14. As Carol Prager notes, "field-invariant logic closely bound up with the hypothetico-deductive inference warrant, pales in significance to the contribution made by field-dependent logics. This means that what is to count as a sound persuasive argument within a field of inquiry is something about which philosophers of science, qua philosophers, can have l i t t l e to say, inasmuch as the role of "the" scientific method in empirical explanations may be relatively slight." Carol A.L. Prager, "Taking Theory for  162 The  second  utility  of  out,  one  hard  must  derived  from  balance  of  contradict the  recourse  to  or  predicted  this  makes  the  perceptions  of  behave  in  to.  Keohane  support cases,  ways  his in  he  to  the  through  the  which  looking  with  the  France perceived their  for  only  threat al1iance  the  motives,  involved  comes  upon  the  [cases]  posed 1879.  by  they  very For  can  be  to  conform  examples  Political World Politics: Keohane, op.  they~are which  the  explained  as and  [the  conform.  Waltz  explained  example,  the  of to  do  because  Austro-Hungary  Granted in International Politics," No. 1 (March 1978), p. 19. 15. Robert O. Keohane, "Theory of Realism and Beyond," in Robert O.  to  to not  a universe  easily  Similarly,  prefer use  nevertheless chosen  be  does  not  them  would  examining  the  on  situational  "compel"  Waltz  fact,  relies  Unfortunately,  which  they  1894  Waltz  actors'  prefer  the  "testing"  theory,  reasons,  can  to  in  behaviour.  terms. in  in  it  the  In  theory  Russia  established  of  often  0  the  interpretation  would  at  explains  require  "by  how  theory  not  selected  reductionist and  the  which  states  his  are  examples  not  theory."*  support  expectations  does  internal  asking  which  constraints  the are  in  a deductive  dependent  for  them  decision-makers  account  that,  carrying  therefore  when  external  is  do  the  such  process  of  straight-forward between  from  in  and  However,  to  and  consistent believes  of  the  that,  independently  "reductionist"  notes,  all  an  regarding  is  that  (anarchy),  theory  hypothesis], Instead,  from  derived  explanations  As  process  behaviour.  such  manner  Recall  a  arguments  tests  theory.  perceptions  hypotheses  Waltz's  the  condition  reasons  with  confirmatory  power  antecedent any  problem  in al1iance  a  response  Germany  American Studies,  Vol.  cit.,  Structural p.172.  26,  163 rearmament of  its  after  the  perception  of  vice  versa.  they  are  The  of  "balances"  not  the  are  avoid  why  states  who  these  but of  Having inherent  that  his  of  of  his  1icensing  and  justification politics  attempt the  for to  the  of to  "rules"  of  authority  construction  are,  One  cannot  behaviour  terms and  not  necessarily they  do  i.e.  or  whether therefore  in  order  groups  and  to or  pairs  these  of  independent  determine  motivational  a number  subject  invocation  to  because  their  and  situational  behaviour.  Waltz's  understanding  precede  recourse  examined  in  autonomy  by  in  and  the  Whether  periods,  terms  whether  by  particular  not  which  of  others"  state  in Union,  do  others.**  historical couched,  Soviet  states  otherwise. of  the  explained  and  of  explained  variable,  characterizes  be  behaviour,  be  form,  he  regardless  independent  or  particular  conditions  accounts  cannot  accounts  antecedent  by  "significant  threats  must  can  balances,  policies  "balancing"  at  of  an  War posed  recurrently  rivals,  explanations  of  as  "reductionist"  explain of  not  on  threat  states,  successful  depends  they  by  anarchy  do  emulate  the  World  formation  "desired"  condition  Second  or  of  matter, the  reconcile  of  his  16. This point is emphasised in his review of Theory. See Theory Revisited," International (Autumn 1981), pp.691-713.  positivistic  one  finally  should of  natural  explanations science,  with  note science  guidebook  Notwithstanding  natural  contradictions  methodology  methodological  subordinating  and  scientific  philosophy  evaluation.  logic  ambiguities  for the  Waltz  and amply i1lustrated Richard Rosecrance, Organization,  the as  irony a  theory  absence  of  the  of  any  international also  uncritically by  Vol.  Rosecrance "International 35, No. 4  164 assumes  that  the  authoritative However,  source over  sustained,  to  posi  contentious reflected appeals  two to  scientific by  the  support theory  Without the  method."  a  First,  of  Kuhn there  concern  with  towards  a much  the  nature,  himself has  does  been  explicating greater  practice.  both  these  work,  a marked the  formal  interest As  a  result,  in  and  a this through  uncritically fic  logic power  in  science  has  the  problematic  proper  trends  from  their  of and  render  of  not  been  logic.  a complex  natural  search  role  has within  scienti  which  Kuhn's  that  have  regurgitating  course,  of  explanatory  of  an  reverberate  that  and  in  of  to  of  trends  Of  debates  science  philosophy  impact  view  which  scientific  "  xy  is  there  continue  simplicity  discipline  profound  of  reconstructions  interrelated  this  years  series  social  the  story,  science  expiications  twenty-five  repercussions  tivist  physics.  natural  systematic  within  replicate  Newtonian  of  contentious,  fields on  of  last  whose  parasitic  zeal  the  and  discipline,  relied  philosophy  rules were  which  Waltz  evaluation  subscribe  of  any of  "the  accelerated quotes  to  empirical  to.  shift  away  logic  of  from  scienti  the  evolutionary  the  division  an  exclusive  fic  theories  pragmatics between  of  the  17. With regard to American political science in general, this argument has been systematically developed by Gunnel 1. See John G. Gunnel 1, Philosophy. Science, and Political Inquiry (Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press, 1975). He illustrates the dependency of "behavioural agendas" for political "science" on the philosophy-of-science doctrines of logical positivism and logical empiricism, whose tenets regarding the qualitative distinctions between facts and theories, empirical and normative, discovery and justification, philosophy and science, description and explanation and many others have became almost conventional wisdom for many political scientists, even as they were being fundamentally reexamined in the philosophy of science itself.  165  philosophy  of  science  and  the  history  of  science  has  eroded  considerably. Second, which  the  more  natural  positivist have  as  and  been  sciences  considerably  guidelines  of or  such The  rules  according  deemed their  "normal"  to  The appropriate  for  according  to  colonies  of  which  methodology,  the but  independent."** has  theory.  Instead,  so  the  science  and  the he  as  "logic" adeguate  prescriptive  usefully  what  distinguishes  he  calls  a  of  Landau's  "logic-inideal-type  meaning  of  methodological  procedures  scientists  in  a growing as  calls  the  of of  well  Waltz  of  [a  ought seems  a  view  of  analysing  any  other  to  be,  free  be  unaware  of  social  18. Abraham Kaplan, The Conduct of Inquiry Chandler, 1964), p.8 19. Ibid., p.3. 20. Richard J. Bernstein, The Restructuring Po1itical Theory (New York: Harcourt Brace, t i t l e is misleading. For although Bernstein  the  nature (San  the  social  are  not  logic,  or  of  within  together,  single]  to  both  inquiry,  taken  "restructuring"  presents  within  autonomy  science,  right  concern, as  sciences,  governance  philosophy  called  descriptively  ultimate  of  been  various  However,  Bernstein  has  Kaplan  are,  the  xe  "the to  evolved,  in  matter.  natural  what  the  community  there  subject  whatsoever,  a  the  manner  as  elaboration of  the  scientific  Kaplan and  to  subject  philosophy  sciences,  ideal  refers by  particular  the  to  of  and  logics  some  Consequently, the  science,  to  latter  both  Abraham  refers  paid  historically  undermined,  "standards."  former  been  explications  reconstructed  use."  "science."  has have  acontextual  representations  between  attention  discipline and of  what  and and  political goals  of  Francisco:  of Social and 1976). However, the provides a thorough  166 empirical  theory  within  the  within  political  clarify  what  science he  of  to  be  science,  politics  cannot  argued  natural well.  their be  well  as that  for  to  granted,  occasionally  ignores in  is  which  the  study  but  is  he  context  the  not  His  chapter  he  context  does  science.  although  the  debated  Waltz  opening  philosophers,  relevance  taken  hotly  of  his  because  Since  compromised  Unfortunately,  in  fic as  but  philosophy  confused,  them  severely  science,  "the"  scienti  been  philosophy  of  must  their of  international  be  justified  and  for.  International The examination inquiry,  ubiquitous the  ontological thoroughly distinguishes political  merely  construction  understood.  natural  not  as by  theory  between  must  grasp  means  selected  differences  his  of  inevitably  refers  work  has  philosophy  discussion therefore  that  Politics preceding of  as  Power  discussion  Waltz's  paves  substantive  international references hoiistic  to  understanding,  between theory  Recall  as  political modes  of  for  Redux  a  critical of  the  Notwithstanding and  the  politics,  Morgenthau's, from  the  philosophy thought  and  is last  analysis.  of  need  to  this both  chapter  and  domain  the  concomitant  international  like  2i  way  understanding  Durkheim, of  Morgenthau  the  politics.  quality  atomistic.  Politics:  asocial how  and Waltz  empirical He  argues  that  overview of the epistemological differences between positivism, language analysis, phenomenology, and so-called critical theory, thereby clarifying the scope and nature of the methodological anarchy that pervades the field, there is precious little evidence of any constructive discourse between the various schools. 21. As Buzan puts it, Waltz "heavily discounts the authority and organizational dimensions of international politics." Buzan, op. cit., p.16.  167 once  the  former  coherent of  clues  reasoning  variables  within  nature)  international  to  recognize  "systemic  the  "system  is  its  scattered  throughout  ontological  on  not,  and  war  (i.e.  own  best  which  patterns can its  Theory.  international  domain  of  be  inguiry  lengthy  key of  Placed  side  that, polities  in and  in context  this  behaviour for  in  side,  Waltz's therefore  is  and  terms  of  the  Conseguently, Yet  sentences by  of  the  achieving  (p.78)  selected  the  role  itself.  explanation."  in  any In  state  accounted  with  discussions  play  to  structure)  contains  dispense  theories. the  chains  independent  can  not,  logically  deductive  to  one  scientific  or  construct  need  theory,  like  ideas,  hypotheses  conceptualisation of  and  Morgenthau''s  of  system  passage,  substantive  as  large-scale  outcomes" the  go  good  framework,  political  of  constitutive  systemic  "utility"  that  for  testable  should  following  an  to  (such  that the  of  statics  a  "mined"  which link  props  evaluating  been  with which  metaphysical human  has  consider and  they view,  the phrases  disc  lose  is  defines  advance:  The enduring anarchic character accounts for the striking sameness in the guality of life through the millenia...whatever elements of authority emerge internationally are barely once removed from the capabi1ity that provides the foundation for the appearance of those elements... authority guickly reduces to a particular expression of capability...whether [states] live, prosper or die depends on their own efforts... international politics is a realm in which anything goes...among states the state of nature is a state of war...among men as among states...the state of nature is associated with the occurrence of violence. National politics is the realm of authority, of administration, and of law. International polities is the realm of power, of struggle, and of accommodation. The international realm is preeminently a political one. In international politics force serves, not as the ultima ratio, but indeed as a first and constant one..the inequality of  the  168 states, peace  though it and stability  Taken  together,  international by  They  are  been  empirical  politics  among  yourself)  system.  define an  order  unfortunate  follows  or  in  a  Their  in  terms  the  of  sufficient,  most  and  vulnerability,  to  their  power  (end).  pessimistic  Waltz's  politics  and reason  these  assertions of  which'Waltz international 22.  is,  Theory,  the  that,  tics.  makes  the  asocial  as  I  of  argued  in  the be  government claims  politics  takes BB,  91,  is  the  it.  derived the  defining Moreover, 113,  132.  Waltz the  to strong,  It self-  by  definition, states  only  "seek" uniformly  on  whether  about  one  international  Why so?  critique  and  place. 102,  in  help  by  and  depends  order  are  "requires" they  a  of  most  since,  beliefs  logically  weak  the  a grim  validity  they  jungle.  are  though  constructing  enables  therefore  doubt,  its  the  others,  and  Nations.  accurately,  international  on  Among  reality  truth  states  one could  contrary,  more  of  the  phrases  for  existential (or  of  theoretical  "useful"  self-help  image to  The  nor  the  the  stark  Politics  On  without  international  66,  poli  source  cannot  rightly  of  be  even  underlying  pp.  not  (means)  But  thus  simple  absence  It  picture.  accepts  may  dependent  means  survival  out  of  a  ago.  subordination  dependence enhance  years  successful  least  least  similar  taken-for—granted  "necessity"  that  forty  concerning  states  portray  observations  may  assertions  at  strikingly  straight  international  about  is  over  which  definitive  statements  which  lifted  neither  "assumptions" theory  such  Morgenthau  have  no guarantee, possible. 22  politics  outlined almost  provides  of from  For  Morgenthau, the  mere  structural condition these  the  anarchy in  which assertions  169 all  are  about  Waltz's  repeated  However,  the  can  be  only  precludes of  both  the  and  sociality,  no  constitutive  separate  squarely  one's  "levels  based  a  Among  (problematic)  views  problematic) behind  systems-level  forces  K.  of  Ashley, Vol. 39,  as  unit  Waltz  is  that  on  human  are  no  form  of  to  the  need  their  and  Theory concerning  those  context  his  of  of The  openly  Waltz of  only discusses  adoption  "realism,"  to  the  analysis,  from  or  private  assumptions  smokescreens social  of  prior  Morgenthau  nature  "The Poverty No. 2 (Spring  of  indistinguishable.  while  protective external  to  but  "regimes"  their  of  exist,  as  with  different  regard  do  basis,  begin  course,  types,  is  or  short  Of  concerning  and  no  autonomy  known  "there  power  latter  distributions  ontological  are  or  ideal  are  of  the  structures  claims  "philosophy" the  are  one's  distinct.  states.  [statesJ  as  contradict  balance  security  notes,  analysis"  With  them  if  prior  Waltz's  and  anarchy  consensual  that  Nations.  the  today  actors  set  politics  between  23. Richard Organization,  to  system  on  of  individual  what  Ashley  of  political  difference  convictions  As  kept  authority  hostage  therefore  be  hierarchy  of  whatever  Morgenthau  (equally  of  and  individual  discovery,  his  part  impact  force.  sum,  international Politics  the  and  two  achieving  intersubjective...  international is  and  of  e n d s . " ' In  of  anarchy  upon  capability  the  process  international  source  and  structural  means on  that  dependent  a  from  other  that  that  "recurrent"  inferred  claims  structures,  insistence  struggles  recognizing  not  alleged  any  power  Waltz  are  processes,  of hides  "science"  the his and  facts.  of Neorealism," 1994), p.245.  International  170  Having to  the  discussed  manner  in  of  latter,  impact  the  dimensions  of  the  which  former  Waltz  in  the  explains  paying  first the  particular  reductionism  section,  origins,  at  the  now  nature  attention  identified  I  to  and  the  beginning  turn  two  of  this  chapter. Waltz's units.  A  systems  truly  interaction  properly to  reference  to  structure, across drops  one  infer  behaviour  understood  in  anarchy The  second  with  the  the  structures  poli  of  state  that  Furthermore,  between  international  market  structurally  structures, similar  tics,  he  of  of  systems  component is  because  range of  are,  in  alleged  by  ties  the  units)  believes of  short,  and analogy  that  state  structures  conditions  structural  structures  he  structures, Waltz  selected  capabi1i  (i.e  of  They  reason  because  components of  a  what  by  environmental  realms.  constructs  solely  just  can  developing  him  distribution  political  of  interest  the  the  what and  theory,  characteristics  given  one  Instead  and  remaining  this  behaviour.  relevant  a  and  behaviour  that  two  about  not  state  and  how  systems,  the  second  show  structural  component  behaviour.  facts.  a  This  are  between  this.  as  structures  presumably  with do  outcomes  expectations  from  because  or  not  differentiation.  can  causes  associated  variations  interacting  concerning  be  states.  functional  and  does  the  along  within  international  namely,  out  would  of  explain  of  theory  derived  Waltz theory  tries  be  outcomes  Unfortunately,  should  place  can  international  systemic  composed  systemic  takes  expectations  are  alone, but  independent  also social  isomophism domestic across  economic  171  The manner  justification  proceeds  individuals  in  two  behave  cannot  be  of  individuals  the  for  Rather, "collective  in  remarkable  transformation  One  an  Logically,  there  over  and  this  is  to  not  "objective"  sociological reducible does  not  to show  reason  why  behave  that  that  pointed  out  which in  premise,  just  what  people  [it]  the  cannot  all  his  be  comprise  would reduced  be  them.  external and  of  to  minds" reality.  from  the than  any  when "reality"  Of  course,  to affected  by  However,  the as  Durkheim's  behaviour  like  pay  of  have  ourselves.  social  would  alone  facts  critigue  because  he  leap when  find  Durkheim's  level  is  ways."  "collective  constrained we  of  informal  that  should  reality  this  which  these  social  into  col lections  and  systemic one  possess  discussed.  theory,  which  social  in  a  that  we are  not  which  groups  how  being  differently  individuals  situations has  at  no  deny  and  by  groups.  individuals  importance  Waltz's  status  conclusion  the  to  in  that  "spontaneous  process  people  the  above  individuals,  Papineau  is  that  groups,  the  independent  observation in  to  is  the  behaviour characteristics  Just  from  this  because  group  "socialize"  behaviour.  in  that  such  argues  entities  plays  groups,  in  psychological  groups  given  argues  constitute  turn,  of  thought,  attention  the  in  Waltz  of  occurs  premise  acguire  in  independent  have  sociological  Bon,  norms  merely  would  close  group  to  Socialization  Le  which,  with  when of  structures  Waltz  collectively  Gustav  conforming  political  First,  terms  who  minds"  individuals  steps.  differently  explained  guoting  treating  on  what  "might  their the  own,  people  not  be  this are  like  172  in  the  situations  Berger  and  seeks  to  Weber, man  they  Luckmann,  and  in  synthesise  emphasise his  actually their  the the  are  s  classic  In  the  same  sociological  antithetical  process  of  vein,  treatise  approaches  dialectical  social  in." *  of  which  Durkheim  and  socialisation  between  environment:  Despite the objectivity that marks the social world in human experience, it does not thereby acquire an ontological status apart from the human activity that produced i t . . . t h e relationship between man, the producer, and the social world, his product, is and remains a dialectical one. That is, man...and his social world interact with each other. Externalization and objectivication are moments in a continuing dialectical process. Society is a human product. Society is an objective reali ty. Man is a social product. so  It absent opposite  is  precisely  this  from  Waltz's  theory,  error  reification, structures Thus  the  whereby  with subtle  uncritical  by  but  Levy  causes  as  and  achieved  acquiescence  leads  "the  [albeit  important as  understanding him  reductionism,  concrete  structures  is  which  vertical  defined  ontological behaviour  of  dialectical  sets  to  the  confusion  the  constraining  "socialization," initial  fallacy  of  analytic structures.  conceptual conditions  variables,  is  the  of  unjustifiable  independent through  i.e.  commit  unobservablej and  of  to  which  whose  become impact  depends  Durkheimian  shift  on  on our  premise.  24. David Papineau, For Science in The Social Sciences (London: Macmillan, 1978), p.12. As he emphasizes, "it is important to remember that what is at issue is not just whether social facts exist, but whether they exist in addition to facts about collections of individuals." (p.47). 25. Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality (New York: Doubleday, 1967), p.61. 26. Marion J. Levy, Jr., "Does i t Matter i f He's Naked?" in Klaus Knorr and James N. Rosenau, eds., Con tending Approaches To International Politics (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969), p. 98.  173 In for  the  context  conceiving  similar  of  social  with  entire  argument  "must"  he  at  do  However,  way  to  produced  have  (p.37)  All  does  and  well  as  different  demonstrates  "reductionist"  theories Kaplan  is  to  the  points  unit-level outcomes. mean  analytic  because  as  that  necessarily  different  that  "different  as one  phenomena  that  approaches  and  one  have  similar  similar must  must  states  outcomes, well  Waltz's forces  political  that  simply  that  structural)  observation  a  vertical  Recall (i.e.  not  as  conflates  international  ones  produced  As  his  "fallacy,"  as  this  explain.  on  with  systemic  similar  states  rests  a  force,"  level  justification  structure  overgeneralization.  observation is  the  political  "systemic  systems  covary  this  politics,  international  mere that  not  international  or  work,  reductionism give  the  fact,  reductionism  factors  of  outcomes."  limit is  the  scope  trying  of  to  out:  A theory that differentiates types of states and then explains the imperialistic behaviour of each in principle could be both correct and reductionist in Waltz's sense. [For example] Fascist Italy may invade Ethiopia for reasons of internal regime prestige when other states need it to constrain a hegemonial power, but may not risk such behaviour when they do not need i t . S  7  Waltz  thus  confuses  overgeneralization. autonomy the  of  This  political  propriety  vertical  of  failure  reductionism  with  to  the  establish  "systems-level" "reasoning  associated  with  multipolar  structural  characteristics  27. Morton A. Kaplan, Theory (New York: Free  by and of  Towards Press,  analogy," bipolar domestic  forces and  calls  structural into  inferring  systems  from  economic  Professionalism 1978), p.11.  mere  outcomes the  markets.  in  guestion  Not  International  only  174 does  this  contradict  Waltz's  reductionism,  leading  economism,"  but  ss  attempt  to  framework  it  "fit"  what  results  is  in  to  domestic  economic  isomorphic  with  international  the  last  chapter  international between  the  how  political  hierarchy  differentiation functional  anarchy,  (hence  The  international-political the  domestic  declares are an  level,  at  one  point  politically economy  rules  that  or are  explain  out,  domestic  cannot  take  place  convention  the  institutions  and  its  of  economic and  flourish  money, of  the  promising  of  without protection  distinction  between  functional  out  at  of  contracting,  the  but  stays  he  work  within  One  cannot  As  in  at  explicitly orders  that  understand  consideration  and "the  and  and  (p.141)  specialization  and  the  Indeed,  without down."  and  anarchy,  maintained.  laid  of  drops  economies  workings  Recall  integration)  hierarchy.  "all  politically  points  the  of  that  contrived  terms  duplication  because  because  structurally  domestic  component  level  of  structure.  and  (hence second  not  therefore  specialisation  reasons.  definition  are  in  analytic  basic  contrasts  and  undifferentiation  interdependence).  three  deterministic  an  political  structures  and  into  markets  "logical  and  three-part  Waltz  as  simplistic  for  Waltz's  horizontal  describes  politics  structure,  from  a  inappropriate  according  to  Ashley  international  that  First,  to  opposition  of  the  Kratochwil market  common property which  exchange  acceptance  of  rights,  and  are  governed  28. "Logical Economism is the reduction of the practical interpretative framework of political action to the framework of economic action: the reduction of the logic of politics to the logic of economics." Richard K. Ashley, "Three Modes of Economism, " International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 4 (December 1983), p.472.  175 by  r u l e s . T h e s e  market  as  an  Apparently, rules nor,  despite  at  is  the  "  Second, not  money for  an  terms in  many  and  of  reguires  number  causation,  it  must Third,  deduced  from  be  As is  although the  or many  assumption  accord  them he  claims  be  powers  power  power  Baldwin  remarks, to  respect  to  calls  specify  or  measured Instead,  it  "policypower  at  both  in  and  a  discussing  what;  value  is  system.  "in  to  of  aggregated  reduced the  money  Whereas index  be  and  and  exchange.  numerical  in  that  generated,  services,  then  much  political  out,  cannot  essential  whom with specified  and  what  he  level,  when  of  a common  great  he  pointed  mediums  within  framework."  influencing  domain  of  constitutive  spontaneously  have  can  such  level  therefore  which  the  institution.  international  origin,  goods  and  disaggregation  contingency of  the  the  provides of  any  of  international-political  economic  scholars  constitutive  "anarchic"  does  [like  variety  are  that  the  equivalent  capabi1ities  terms  is  as  in fungible, of  type  91)  fungible  relatively  at  in  (p.  an  declaration,  economy  enormous  or  domestic  functionally  is  practices,  believe  exist  individualist  unintended.  are  not  above  decentralized  system]  who  does  the  or  system,  conventions  significance "a  economic Waltz  or  rules,  least scope  as  a  imply and  implied.  microeconomic that  firms  outcomes tend  to  can  indeed  maximise  be profits,  29. Friedrich Kratochwi1, "Norms and Values: Rethinking The Domestic Analogy," Ethics and International Affairs. Vol. 1, No. 1 (1937), p. 137. 30. David A. Baldwin, "Power Analysis and World Polities: New Trends versus Old Tendencies," in Klauss Knorr, ed., Power, Strategy, and Security (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 19B3), p.5.  176 since the  those  that  wayside,"  there  behavioural spelled  fail  and out  by  to is  do  so  will,  a world  of  a motivational Barry  in  as  Waltz  difference  following  it,  between  assumption,  the  puts  which  "fall  by  a  is  nicely  passage:  Either you say that firms do in fact tend to maximize profits, in which case your hypothesis turns purely on output, pricing, etc., and cannot be refuted by any motivational or decision-making evidence, or you say that firms...seek to maximize profits, in which case you are committed to retract i f motivational and decision-making evidence goes against you. What you cannot properly do is try to get the best of both worlds by prefacing the second hypothesis with an "as if," explaining that this can be refuted only by the sort of evidence that would refute the first hypothesis, and not by the sort of evidence that would refute the second, but not the first.** Each in  of  which  these  Waltz  international First,  the  also  to  explain  system  as  an  as  we have  along the  to  step-chiId  accept  his  politics  played  hard,  (p.167) system ordering through  really Thus can  a  only  principle, the  latter  presses  emergence  of  place  either  which of  a  it  follows  of  power  into  the  contemporary  third  great Political  that  one  two  a world  varies equali  ty,  out  in  to  if  rival  camps." international  in  its  government, such  Studies,  peace will  politics,  a change  power,  which  ruled  players  through  in  peace  apparently game  Waltz's  power,  extreme,  require  31. Brian Barry, "On Analogy," (Spring 1975), p. 97.  of  violent  would  manner  contemporary  accepts  of  "the  the  the  1ikelihood  is  because  transformation take  one  the  bipolarity.  terms  the  of  one  then  from The  of  in  that  undermines  stability  providing  deterrence,  ranging  international  the  order  argument  hierarchy.  critically  outcome  seen,  define of  a continuum other,  reasons  tries  predisposition is  three  as Vol.  a  or united  23,  No.  2  177 Europe.  Since  system  possible  bipolarity in  "prefer"  bipolari  between  domestic  ones,  the  ty.  alleged  of  Waltz's  conclusion  stable  guestion  (as  opposed  wide  open.  of to  or  between  Waltz's  reexamine polities  structure  of  money  the  the to  power  of  are  states  of  system Waltz  321  two  continuing weakens  idea  provides  that  ontological  social  takes  among  place  analogy  of  states  war,  and a  marketplace image  inquire  this  nature  of  into  rule-governed do  the  remains  the  Hobbesian  as  facts,  structures)  cannot  regarding  the  superpowers  the  underlying  state  dissimilarity  severely  postulated the  should  the domain  within and  his conseguences  anarchy.  raises  difficult great  a  presuppositions  Second,  of  the  institution.  structural  terms  as  on  abandons  and  to  one  anarchical  vis  states  we  structural  prudence  socialization  invoking  ontological of  how  that  international-political  dominance one  hierarchical  follows  restraints  structures  just  it  the  rational  Once  most  and  any  Furthermore,  international social  the  political  the  of  than  place.  given  systems  that  resting  international  forces  other  the  world,  However,  absence  power  logically  anarchical  economic  balance  a  an  is  relative  infungibility  problems  in  numbers identify status.  of  measuring  great  the To be  of  powers,  point  at  sure,  the  "capabi  their since  which number  a  1 ities"  distribution it  is  state of  vis-ain  extremely qualifies  great  powers  for has  32. However, one should note the important distinction between what Jackson calls constitutive and instrumental rules. "Constitutive rules define the game, whereas instrumental rules are maxims derived from experience which contribute to winning play." See Robert H. Jackson, "Quasi-States, Dual Regimes, and Neoclassical Theory: International Jurisprudence and the Third World," International Organization, Vol. 41, No. 4, (Autumn 1987), p. 522.  178 always far  been  low,  greater  emphasis points  at  two  one  the  are  since  1945,  which  ignore  power  simply  both  more  that  contemporary  shift  other,  has  and make.  Soviet  policymakers  an  Theory  American  launched over  a one alarming  conviction  that  Soviet  tri11  of  relatively  in  the  It  does  implications  for  Waltz's  with  Waltz  published who, dollar in  on  and  only  obviously military  superpower  power  was  ty  follow  Union  are  equally  as will  argument  of  that  threats  are  American  and  accordingly. before  having  expansion  the  election  read  it,  and  relations  rapidly  stabi1i  restraint  whether  year not  its  not  behave  a  been  uncertainty  source  largely  has  distribution  are  because the  argument,  and  Soviet  mutual  arriving  in  declining  presided the relative  to  Union'.  Waltz  power  regarding  that  As  of  bipolar,  the  much  and  sake  therefore  "decisive"  so  few  they  agree  American  is  and  else  depends  decline  Interestingly 1967,  States  this  ion  the  changes  regarding  was  a  for  However,  bipolarity.  that  is  President  an  the  For  places  themselves.  everyone  calculations  to  Ironically,  perceived  United  profound  if,  made.  with  expectations  and  bipolarity  easier  of  than  Waltz  system  superpowers the  be  subtracting  Even  infer and  the  each  to  decreases  (p. 192)  cannot  powerful  This  of  "  the  when  can  associated  advantages  because  follow.  required  qualities  objective  as  estimates  decisive.  one  powerful  the  "the  between  that  rough  is  unique  out,  grants  of  some  precision on  he  so  did  between equal  enough, not  share  the in  in his  Soviet a  bipolar  the  midst  present Union  and  system.  of view the Then,  the that United he  Vietnam the States argued  war  in  distribution was that  shifts  179  in  the  distribution  critical  in  over  or  the  generated  he  in  in  the  States,  the  external  ambitions  in  American  attributed  imbalance United  between  whether  "overreaction"  Conseguently, growing  power  determining  domestically  caution  of  of  the  predominated  encouraging  prudential  policy.  war  in  distribution  arguing  were  constraints  foreign  American  bipolar  superpowers  Vietnam  of  to  power  the  in  favour  that  national impulses shape foreign policy with lesser constraint than prevails when power is more evenly balanced...if the restraints of international politics press less closely, the guestion of internal restraint looms ever larger. To study the poli tics of peace, then, reguires examination of domestic politics, especially the politics of the powerful. 33  Thus system,  it  is  caution  constraints, and  not  results or  bipolar  that  systems polities  characterized  by of  distribution  of  recognized are on  in  important foreign  mere  numbers  behavioural  simply  shrinks the  of  Waltz's  the  and  tells  us  between and for the  stabi1i  the  external ty  of  multipolar  For  about and  of  if  the  the  if,  as  changes  strength  about markets  oligopoly.  them,  explanatory  bipolar  economic  nothing  actual  a  expectations  comparing  competition  accounting  in of  deriving  by  perceived  that,  predominance  uncritically  capabilities  in  case  compare  superpowers  1967,  and  the  can  policy-making,  Finally,  context  one  perfect  the  the  from  by  international  dominance  necessarily  in  Waltz  the  latter  "systemic  pay-off  in  forces" manipulating  correspondingly. implications  motivational assumption  of  Barry's  assumptions that  33. Kenneth N. Waltz, "The Politics Studies Quarterly, Vol. 11, No. 3  states  distinction can seek  be  between  examined to  of Peace," (September 1967),  in  the  survive. International pp.202,  207.  180 Although  he  minimum  to  recognizes world  fact  of  that  apply  to  "the  death  the  the  rate  of  over  reliability  in  states  of  firms  importance "whether  efforts,"  their  this as  the that  in  the  to  or  the  game  of  to  power  out  that  rationality order  to  virtues  on explain  the the  of precision  threats  and and  the  themselves.**  difference  between  survival  is  Waltz  depends not  on  based to  their  apply  survive poli  not concedes,  pointed  external  does  tend  does  manifest  principle  and  (p.95)  the  die  its  theory,  Waltz  permitting  prosper,  play  As  latter's  market-place,  admits,  power  increased  of to  the  than  markets  in  behavioural  whilst  live,  himself  the  them,  key  evolutionary  Waltz  ability  meet  important  assuming  for  source  bare  has  both  and i.e.  the  is  they  of it  this  low."  Keohane  multipolarity,  to  of system.  requires  evaluating  of  remarkably  balances,  importantly,  and  their  which,  he  requirements  More  principle  is  from  less  balance  rejection  elites,  bipolarity  that  states  formation  internal  of  vary  far  political  explicit  state  recurrent  logic  is  underdetermination,  Waltz's  part  the  evolutionary  for  goals  this  international  Regarding despite  state  domination,  underdetermination the  that  on  say own  to  states  regardless  of  tics.  Who is likely to be around 100 years from now the United States, the Soviet Union, France, Thai land, or Uganda? Or Ford, IBM, Shell, Unilever, and MasseyFerguson? I would bet on the states, perhaps even on Uganda, (p. 95) But which  Waltz  "seek"  34.  why?  to  Robert  This  prediction  justifies survive,  O.  making they  Keohane,  will  op.cit.,  is the "die."  an  anomaly  assumption If  p.173.  the  given that ability  the if  basis  states to  on do  generate  not  181 domestic  "capabilities"  essential  for  profits to  or  go  states  to  under,  what  distinguish  that  "I  "like  them  define  states?"  units",  He  coordination  among  sameness."  their  his  spare But  very  if  something  that  category because  systems,  but as  the  is  the  he the  this  by  enables of  Waltz does  recognizes, defining  also  is  are  for  the  reason  why  Waltz  that  "entail"  be  It  functional of  a  the  former  coherently  "like  argue  units,"  coexist  if  in  an  There states  cannot  must as  be  be  a  the  are  "sameness" 1y  of  their is  means  markets  the  the  and  cannot  identify  actors.  anarchy,  implies  anarchy.  to  as  political  they  structural  of  relations  international  to  say  them  of  There  he  and  at  entailment  states  Waltz  terms  "entails  Waltz  make  their  variable  assume  case,  characteristic  in  result  that  not  permits  treating  the  confusing.  can  must  is  is  logical  argues  not  this  is  actors  capabilities,  and  political  that  reason  units,  causes  characterized else  discrete  of  which  structures  writes,  one  is  "sameness"  states  he  between  this  firms  independent  language  anarchy  environment  is  an  definition  structural  system,  as  diplomacy  international  the  But  nevertheless,  structure.  then,  that  system's  The  skilful  political  "Anarchy,"  difference  implication;  about  other  of  out  a  in unlike  it  all  argues  (p.93)  substantial  which,  from  drops level.  their  is  undifferentiation.  international  that  survive,  regardless  therefore  given  engage  international  (p.94)  functional and  and  self-help self-help  of  firms  differentiated.  What,  states?  To call states "like units" is to say that each is like all other states in being an autonomous political unit. It is another way of saying that are sovereign... to say that a state is sovereign  state states means  182 that it internal  decides for and external  This  not  indeed  is  a  valid  what  statehood,  principle  of  principle, one.*  9  is  a  abstract  Moreover, states existential Vincent  In  short,  in  order  define  contradicts  nature.  Sovereign  Stankiewicz demolishes ceaseless  has the hunger  desires,  the  his  pointed basis for  by out,  of  of  the  "power  or  Waltz  for  of  categorising the as  the  state  national  states.  implicitly  relies  structures  in  to  are  existence  treated  because  commitment not of  hypothetical  state  after  is  power"  be  goals.  basis  other  definition,  to  concerning  political  "the  "seek" cannot  definition  ontological  states,  and  politics,"  which  international  constitutional  states  beliefs  very  this  behavioural  the  For ordering  and  motives,  the in  of  on  terms  state  one.  state  then  is  units."  but  states  as  existence  statehood,  legal  that  "international of  "like  fundamental  Sovereign  atomistic  sovereign  states,  assume  Waltz's  separate  a  its  sovereignty  system,  not  sovereignty  "part  the  to  with  of  as  the  is  to  reality  presupposes  to  mistake.  appeal  observes,  argued,  with  although  political  Waltz  individuals  undermines  is  categorical,  for  will cope (pp.95-96}  states  anarchy,  has  category  the  treating  not  therefore  it  means,  international  Thus  survive  for  Jackson  is  contingent.  as  the  as It  sovereignty  reason  sovereign  itself how problems.  nature, eliminated  of  of  As sovereignty for  the and  35. Robert H. Jackson, "Civil Science: A Rule-Based Paradigm for Comparative Government," Delivered at the Annual Conference of the American Political Science Association (Chicago, 3-6 September 19B7). 36. A. Vincent, "The Hegelian State and International Politics," Review of International Studies, Vol. 9 (1983), p. 193.  183 necessary  restraints  reliance  on  the  differentiate both  the of  of  of  and  states  logic  them  granted  in  behaviour,  by  on  which  For  that  international their  as  account "like  this  manner  even  by  which  mode  units." and  assumption,  from of  the As  Wendt  attributing  tries  amounts  undercuts rests,  argues,  the  his  external characteristics  (power  politics),  principle  which  taking motives  a de  and  separate  "given"  ordering  to  to  derives  them  implicit  to  theory  association  very  his  actors,  entire  subsequently  logic,  for  statehood  his  politics  asocial  through  political  which  he  Waltz,  sovereign  international  basis  coherently  defines  of  as  analysis.  structure  cannot  institution  ontological  destroys  Thus  37  states  the  levels  imposed."  facto  states  for  for supposition  that: sovereignty, and therefore the state, exist prior to the structure of the state system as a prestructural property of ontologically primitive state actors. In other words, states are assumed to be already differentiated and constituted as autonomous, sovereign subjects before they come together to form the" market" that is the structure of the international system. 30  37. W.J. Stankiewicz, Aspects of Political Theory (London: Macmi1lan, 1976), p.94. However, the word "imposed" is inappropriate. It is more apt to say that necessary restraints are accepted and institutionalized. As Ashley puts it, "the modern concept of sovereignty designates the collectively recognized competence of entities subject to international law and superior to municipal law. It thus involves not only the possession of self and the exclusion of others but also the 1 imitation of self in the respect of others, for its authority presupposes the recognition of others who, per force of their recognition, agree to be so excluded." Richard K. Ashley, "The Poverty of Neorealism," op. cit., p.272. 38. Alexander Wendt, "The Social Structure of The State System and The Production of North-South Conflict, " Delivered at the Annual Conference of the American Political Science Association (Chicago, 3-6 September 1987), p.26.  184 Explanation  Versus  Thus within  have  the  prescriptive  within  the  point  of  as  based  not  on  his  this  another  stabi1ity  allegedly  to  help  is  today  compared  to  reinforced  restrained  in  their  they  have  in  "constructive  in the  generated  mutual  a  system  He  their  conform  appeals  characterized  management"  prudential  incentives  particularly  the  United  by  of  which  to  global  States,  to  that  the  is  gradual increasingly  aside,  he  and status  argues  show than  domestical  in  1y in  inequality, is  peace its  the  system,  high  affairs  pay  of  conformity  such  Whether quite  become  their  this  encourage  stability.  and  hegemonic to  that  and  the  the system  however,  Rhetoric to  was  perpetuation  have  posed  contemporary  is,  eras,  relations.  to  which  and  weapons  "socialized"  system  ideologies.  past  for  problems  the  peace  which  conserving  the  does  final  "problem-solving"  argument  nuclear  superpowers,  became  interest  transforming  by  a  of  the  This  contradictions  solve  system that  the  as  systemic  believes  of  these  "theoretical"  bipolar  contradictions  perspective  Waltz  maturation  that,  Theory  Quo  politics.  defence  promotes  high  greater  of  Status  debilitating  of  particular  avowedly  matter.  relatively  that  the  The  international  departure.Waltz's  bipolarity/duopoly or  guide  of  some  implications  "a  terms  on  of  dimensions  i.e.  Legitimizing  focussed  description  considers  approach,  is  I  Waltz's  section the  far  Prescription:  facilitated  arguing the by  the  superpowers,  disproportionate  "costs"  39. Robert W. Cox, "Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory," in Robert O. Keohane, op. cit., p.207. Waltz has accepted this characterization of his theory, which is somewhat ironic since, within the terms of his perspective, it is difficult to see what "problems" Theory contributes to solving.  185 to  solve  "common"  environmental  the  its  out  Waltz  behaviour  that  generality,  or a  from  American  foreign  him  to  far  by  I  x  evaluations  traveller."*  the will are  the  the  should  it  so  as  there  a  is  would  [ReaganJ  how  regarding  given  the  that  of  phrase  regarding  up  a  vantage details  the  overall  that,  as  bipolar  Miller  lens on  of  and  Waltz  foolish  the  some  deterrence  kind  rather  focusses  contentious  nuclear  argues  conduct  "taken  question the  that  the  noted  given  of  to  explanatory  apt  obliterate  administration  i1lustrate  simply  be  to  legitimation  He  the  has  no  guarantees  for  Waltz as  ty  be  Minogue's  general,  fair  encourage"  also  maxims  borrow  only  theory's  Nevertheless,  0  is  evaluation  Furthermore,  the  course,  terrain  Theory,  serves  which  the  outside  his  the  "maturation"  superpowers.  First, the  to in  of  specific Of  1y  optimism.  it  any  it  bipolari  "strong  vagueness,  since,  of  that  ty,  themselves.  his  analysis,  above  "it  through  of  bipolarity  policy.  thrust  observes,  of  of  rather,  so,  the  analytic  world."*  manifest  explanations  so  needed  will  offering  do  structural point  and  complacent  bipolari  argues  justifies  systemic  refrains  for  never  "pressures"  as  social,  unjustifiably  contemporary  virtues  the  scope  this  of  that  alleged  that of  criticizing  stability  point  economic,  problems.  Before of  international  one  term  the  system,  40.  K.R.  should  note  "stability," as  Minogue,  well  which as  op.  an  the cit.,  41. A.J. Miller, "Bipolar The Future of The State," (Summer 1984), p.661.  important refers  absence  of  ambiguity both  to  war  among  in  the  Waltz's  durability  its  use of  dominant  p.465. Perspectives: International  International Journal, Vol.  Theory 39, No.  and 3  186 members.  As  bipolarity  [in  durability]  contemporary  between  the  have  first,  been,  a great  factors  and  absence  of  deal  that  obviously  we can Unfor by  examine  tunately,  which  mutual  1y Recall  stressing  was  impossible  that,  terms a  One  distinguish  much  to  test  of  its  hedges  course, these in  he  would  since  bets,  the in  arguing that  of  argument  be  Reasoning  believes  constraints  the  irrelevant  bipolarity.  empirically,  but  coherence.  contradiction  and  second,  either,  his  internal  bipolarity  and of  completely  his  fundamental  -  a debate  help  is  stabi1ity  undertaking.  although the  answer  However,  such  is  thus  least  between  important.  not  Waltz  reinforce  invokes  to  (peace)  merely  is  could,  is  important,  in  force.  worthwhile  are  it  force  that  at  Waltz's  "systemic"  more  not  observing  encouraging  evidence,  stabi1ity  supportive  the  a  why?  of  the  peaceful,  is,  "either  terms on  in  remarkably  trying  which  there  Waltz  time  markets!  factors weapons  is  of  [in  correct  factors  -  microeconomics of  is  "unit-level"  probably  economic  nuclear It  from  meaning  both  the  because  depending  question  counter—factual  and  domestic  that  deciding  inconclusive analogy  a  stable,  been  The  arises  multipolarity  Waltz  bipolarity -  any  or  more  has  believes  weapons  second  being  superpowers. He  by  out  confusion  peace]  system  ambiguous.  waste  of  out,  Nevertheless,  s  nuclear  points  terms  comes  definition."* the  Ruggie  nuclear  in  deterrence  the  logic as  constraints. in  growing  opposition  to  interdependence  liberal  economic  between  arguments  states,  42. John G. Ruggie, "Continuity and Transformation Polity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis," in Robert cit., p. 154.  Waltz  in The World O. Keohane, op.  187 argues  that  the  vulnerability, it  or  tends  to  follows  politically  as  of  development  hastens  the  occasion  in  a  bipolar  sharply  than  security  reliance  on  also  to  allies  for  and  grows  at  in  the  argues  the that  therefore  security  domain,  declines  for  even  more  Consequently,  capabilities "internal  are  more  strengthening,"  protection  calculations  It  interdependence  (p.168)  by  that  a pace  then  identified,  responded  lessen  raises  Bipolarity  true  is  close  interdependence  clearly  external  "uncertainties  (p.138)  term  declines.  and  control,  interdependence."  are and  since  contact  this he  powers  Cit]  central  is  great  thing, of  "mi 1itary  economic  assessed  good  war."  This  threats  easily  of for  world,  of  conflict...if  the  stabi1ity.  a  of  Economically,  number  closeness  occasional  exceeds  promotes  the is  "means  definition  dependence.  bipolarity  interdependence prospects  mutual  diminish  that  pertinent  is are  reduced.  easier  and In  to  short,  make."  (p.168) Presumably world  other  virtues  than  of of  war  from  starting state  defeating invulnerable rests  on  wars."  punish  the  they  fact  that  completely  the  high is state  hypothetical he  fact  and  The  superpowers retaliations interdependent  the  states  logic  of  mutually each the  "enable  first  strikes  in  "make  weapons  first  from  the  encourage  without  are  bipolar that  they  nuclear  severely nuclear  argues  that  thus  because  forces. the  some  because  in  deterring  second-strike are  lie  another  whilst  to  one,  This  second-strike  debi1itating short,  present  frighteningly  any  it,"  refering  weapons  seem  to  is  the  nuclear  cost  one  Waltz  with  this  argument vulnerable  other. security  to  In sphere,  188 thus  totally  contradicting  the  logic  by  this  contradiction  which  Waltz  defends  bipolarity. Despite term  outright  interdependence,  wrong  with  his  stability,  one  substantive  which  condition  of  rests  mutual  "rationally"  can  still  on  a  argue  argument his  that  there  so  long  neither  war.  use  of  is  the nothing  deterrence  that  remains,  ful1-scale  Waltz's  linking  belief  deterrence  begin  in  and  as  the  side  will  Thus  i t is highly important, indeed useful, to think in "cataclysmic terms," to live in dread of all-out war, and to base mi 1itary calculations on the forces needed for the ultimate but unlikely crisis. That the United States does so, and that the Soviet Union apparently does too, makes the cataclysm less likely to occur, (p.186) Against  those  American  nuclear  powerful  police  is  not  force,  of  nuclear  force  that  seldom  weapons exist  used.  weapons authority at  all,  First, and  the  the  and through  to  limit  of  legitimacy. threat  three  police  Nuclear of  the  states  retaliation.  the  police  weak."  (p.185)  the  they  it  the  fact  will  "deter  escalation."  between the  that  a  when  question that  the of  useful  for  declares,  least)  analogy  "power"  the  stoutly  is  useful,  possibi1ity  he  very  saying  of  analogy  most to  violence  highly  the  serve the  to  "utility" the  is  therefore  employs  therefore  (at  force  "amounts  ever  against  also  are  and  the  invokes  that  to,  weapons,"  they  There argument.  if are  "Nuclear  Waltz  weapons  works  weapons;  question  arguing  resorted  utility  they  "naively"  establishment,  actually  Nuclear  who  that ever  be  nuclear  (p.188)  basic  problems  non-usability  conflates deter A  with of  coercion others, "powerful"  his nuclear  with if  they police  do  189 force  need  Waltz  refers  the  not to  simple  need  citizens.  The  whose  in,  it  rule  analogy  is  in  "ordered"  fear  hold  if  generally  and  obey  respected,  coercion is  not  in the  with  what  government,"  and  Waltz  but  society  respected  competent  Salvador,  not  an  and  through may  El  do  force  "competent  that  say,  and of  its  referring states  law  to such  out  for  of  the  as  Canada,  fear  of  execution. Second,  conflating  sides  Waltz  arising  possess  in  deterred  by  may this  However,  devising  be  an  of  the  this  support  may  idealistically To put  it  either  side  politely, is  fact  launches  for  rationally  the  undermine  pursuing  a  is  the  describes  strategy  of  passive  a  exist,  both to  nuclear  both  are  a  ful1-scale  superpowers but  first  sides  starting  balance  somewhat  as  vulnerable  that  technological the  in  all-out  "cataclysmic"  complacently is  that  error  weapons  an  from  this  Waltz  each  believing  mean  and  such  in  not  and  not  that  if  it  basic  strategy  and  does  and  active  correct  strategies  them  surprisingly  abundance,  situation  strategies  their  a  as  retribution Waltz  that  out  them  debilitating strike.  commits  deterrence  condition  war.  a  not  citizens  instant  to  as  reason  therefore  "police"  resort  are  unlikely  event,  capabilities of  naive minimal  to  terror  as  or  which  Waltz  "indestructible. himself  if  deterrence  he  thinks against  43. See Kenneth N. Waltz, "The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: More May Be Better," Adelphi Paper No. 171 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1981). Elsewhere, I have examined the relationship between deterrence as a condition and as a strategy, where I argue that the former is being dangerously undermined as a result of numerous "sub-systemic" factors which fuel the nuclear arms race, particularly in the United States. See Martin Griffiths, "A Dying Creed: The Erosion of Deterrence in American Nuclear Strategy," Millenium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Summer 1986), pp.223-251.  190 the  "ultimate"  crisis,  reaction  phenomenon.  he  the  think  his  think  they  Third,  that  as  well  are  nuclear  nuclear  as  weapons  so  (from rather  by  individuals  "deter,"  not  things.  As  for  whether  he  means  not  clear  deterrence  "deters"  believe,  deterring  response  capability.  the  latter,  and  therefore  the  balance This  of  the  If is  of  Suffice  not  the  have it  the  extremely  contentious  cannot  superficial  planning  place  to  problems  regarding  which  a  deter  assumes  after  for  Governments  "escalation," of  as  in the  a  superpowers  force small  or  flexible  minority.  "cataclysmic"  regarding  engage  in  it  minimal  the  counter  claims  of  being  governments.  is  nuclear  relationship,  strategy  he  does  instruments  explode  a  what  what?)  passive  whether,  share  the  If event,  stabi1ity  of  terror.  which  years.  that  former,  his  to  regarding  requires  hardly  contradicts  of  does  "deter"?  what?  point  or  the  not  not,  weapons  but  actionwhy  do  a psychological  order  his  escalation  this  is  the  escalation,  wel1-known  theories,  on  to  than  anything  launched  is  do  nuclear  an  stable,  obviously trying  is  so  they  "escalation"  "dp"  is  simply  and  that  deterrence  is  weapons,  "rationally"  cannot  race  many  since  agents,  Since  arms  deterrence  statement  active  governments.  the  have  are  Waltz's  they  that  Furthermore,  that  weapons,  If  superpowers  optimism?  he  or  to  stabi1ity  possibly manner.  associated  with  the  of  engaged say  that of  and be  a  minds  Waltz's  nuclear complex  adeguately  lengthy  regurgitation  rational nuclear  strategists  simplistic  statements  deterrence issues dealt  gloss in  deterrence  over  nuclear  with  in  strategy, such  a  for  191 Turning "maturation"  two  truly  of  the  management,"  I  short  First,  his  indeed  with  one  or  has  Second, of  just  Waltz's  only  unfounded,  as  it  to  diagnose  the  of  claims  any  of  "unambiguous"  the  failure the  that  "useful,"  be  so, is  to  of has  is  taken and  system,  he  is  which  improvement  which  between  been  preserved  complacency  one by  the  arising solid"  After  only  the  deterrence,  "increasingly  not  trend,  expect.  "problem-solving"  "problems,"  this  the  nuclear  the  dealings  relations,  counterproductive. a  by  differentiate  peace If  bipolarity  may  to  condition  former.  that  dangerous.  level  one  their  diplomatic  of  lead  superpowers  their  the  would  the  his  has  superpower  argue  major  the  is  learning  of  a  "systems-level"  of  and  but to  dynamics  kind  side  in  to  such  develop  All  raised  dynamics  Waltz's  view  moderate  to  in  each  ways  reference  at  to  restraint  certain  how  the  economism  than  by  myself  bipolarity.  guestions  self-  confine  that  more  Stranded  plausibly  from  become  the for  failure  of  to in  explained  any  given  rather  downright  not  bipolarity as  that  important  reflected  logical  latter  is to  will  demonstrate  answered  explore  hardly  impact  not  potential  examples  socialized  interaction. to  Waltz's  by  examined  strategic unable  do  The  cannot  given  Waltz's  "learned"  Waltz  place,  have  theory,  another.  however, forces.  points.  demonstrates  have  concerning  "constructive  "unambiguously"  discussion  discussions  superpowers  diplomacy  becoming  brief  the  systemic  superpower  can  Waltz's  and  interested making  to  all,  theory misleading  is  not insofar  that  fails but  192 Conclusion As some  with  Morgenthau,  fundamental  descriptive construct  a  politics.  Despite  and  presupposes realm  of  an  of  this  It  in  is  most  ty  illustrious  is  totally  perfectly  condition  of  rivalry. idealist,  "paradigmatic  terms of  turn,  basis his  on  theoretical  of  faith  nuclear  deterrence, Waltz  opposed  to  deserves the  predecessor."  of  ties  Waltz's  he  defence his  defends  on the  to  nostalgic  explain  bipolar  capabi1i  rests  and  to  which  treatment  concerning  a  similar  given  which  it  an  as  very  although  therefore,  Thus as  in  understandable  the  Ultimately, articles  is  his  and  presuppositions  In  contradicts  dubious  superpower  complacent  world.  understand  politics  which  stability  to  and  conceals  distribution  presuppositions,  precarious of  of  to  international  ontological  anarchic  interdependence. extremely  his  attempt  rigour,"  appeal  politics  the  international  "scientific  this  hierarchical  arrangement  idealistic bipolari  an  instrument  power  conceptualization the  a mere  highlighted  between  of  to  of  has  Waltz's  appeal  reality,  and  of  theory  interpretation  necessity  hegemony, possible  as  objective  Morgenthau's. Waltz's  realist"  Theory  and  dimensions  Waltz's  of  chapter  within  evaluative  "structural  presentation  critical  contradictions  and  external  this  some stabi1ity  the be  of  "mellowing"  labelled ideal  of  ism  as of  a his  a  193  CHAPTER HEDLEY  SEVEN  BULL;  THEORY  AS  dark  metaphysics  TRADITION  IntroducHon Avoiding as  well  as  Hedley  both the  Bull's  power  He  and [and]  the  divisions  whose our  is future  "is for  theorizing  reality,  "Grotian  tradition"  tradition  by  Kant). in  an  of  richer  that  in it  its can  warns conceals his  international  by  Hobbes),  He  is when  or  struggles  for across  and  constants.  thus Each  international  politics,  possibilities  than  comprehend." against and  the  own perspective as  concerned  a  danger  distorts  transcendental  underlying  element  cutting  thought,  particularly its  societal and  of order  society,  than of  classifies of  era  element  constantly  thought  war  nature  element  maintaining  society,  rather  about  Bull  (exemplified  (exemplified  be  the  this of  reality  human forces,"  calls in  element  The  x  to  in  he  practice,  variables  he  what  static  "systemic  transnational  complex  liable  a unity  heterogenous  "realism"  the  although  discovering  this  of  categories  a  states." are  in  "the  of  of  a  importance  that  element  part  is  its  with  order,  Nevertheless,  of  argues  among  international element  focus and  competes  of  determinism  society,  states.  coexists  the  structural theoretical  international among  the  of  a as  opposed  part to  "idealism" to  assumptions  maintain are  1. Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society (London: Macmi1lan Press, 1977), p.41. All page references in the text of this and the concluding chapter refer to this edition. 2. "Society and Anarchy in International Relations," in Herbert Butterfield and Martin Might, eds., Diplomatic Investigations (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1966), p.40.  194 threatened society  by from  rifts  the  global  its  between  expansion  European  East  and  Prescriptively,  base,  West,  Bull  of and  the  North  neither  contemporary  international  ideological  and  South.  aspires  to  and  cultural  value-freedom  like  \ Waltz,  nor  is  policy  requirements  Instead,  by  society,  Bull  on  the  to  practices,  or  argues  increasingly  Soviet  Union,  the  main  of  argument  simply more  of  thinking  narrowly  on  which  among  in  Anarchical deal  it  through."  what  I  call  be  towards  some  the  United  "a (p.x)  Bull's  turn,  broader  of  dealt his  with  in  life,  States  Bull  and  the  Irresponsibles."  3  more  detail  first  Society  with  in  In  and  end  great  and  rests.  raised the  depends  the  rules  each  international The  order  which  "Great  to  them.  to  within  with  the  international  interests  of  order  may  However,  approach  The  complex  justice  of  shared  the  Morgenthau.  particularly  their  framework  them  Bull's  attempt by  on  like  practice  states,  fragile  describes  connections  systematic  the  in  international  upon  disenchanted  chapter  dimensions  of  act  and  dubbing  and  maintaining  and  manner.  interest,  theory  wi11ingness  morality  decision-makers  national  a necessary  became  and  that  instruct  "institutions,"  incremental  This  the  extending  provides of  to  the  recognize and  an  of  and  upholding  questions  concerned  explicating  ability  powers,  order  he  large The  these  political section  ,  of  his and  summarises  most  ontological  3. "The Great Irresponsibles? The United States, Union, and World Order," International Journal, (Summer 1980), pp.437-447. See also Hedley Bull, International Anarchy in the 1980s," Australian No. 3 (December 1983), pp.127-131.  the  wel1-known  complex  second  theory,  section pluralism,  and  subject focuses and  the Soviet Vol. 35, No. "The Outlook, Vol.  3 37,  195 his  attempt  between  to  define  "realism"  and  competing  traditions  influence  of  colleague  and  charges of  presciptive  The  Anarchical The  in  universal fold,  and  security that for of  implications  all  activity  "via  transcend  the  and  final  media"  his  its  these  intellectual former  summarizes  ism  Bull's  this  Bull's  main  alleged  section  betrayal  briefly  notes  work.  of  social  apply  to  both  its  property  goals  is rather  purposive,  than  against  of  attached  will  be  Since a  intersubjective these  goals,  of  defined  primary  These  goals  international  some  are  three-  society  to,  Bull's  shared  and  a  system  on  the  they  definition  to  -  ensuring  exist,  agreement  "a  or  consensus to  order as  violence,  adhered  society  instrumental.  to  being  arbitrary  for  emphasising  value  and  rights.  maintenance  general  (p.5)  domestic  necessary  the  elementary,  life."  agreements  is  in  sustains  members and  study  order  that  goals  for  members  of  politics,  protecting  inherent  of  to  Might,  section  the  a  Society  constitutive is  and  to  Martin  behavioural  as  refusal  testifies  third  tradition,  contracts  these  The  American  problematigue  of  " His  historian  mentor.-*  international  pattern  perspective  thought  English  classical  the  Grotian  "idealism. of  the  against  the  his  value  are of  order  regarding  the  some  degree  by  society.  4. In the preface to The Anarchical Society, Bull writes that Might "first demonstrated to me that International Relations could be made a subject, and whose work in this field...stands out like a Roman masonry in a London suburb." See also his introduction to Martin Might, Systems of States (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1977); and "Martin Might and the Theory of International Relations," British Journal of International Studies. Vol. 2, No. 2 (Summer 1976), pp. 101-116.  196 Bull society  then  distinguishes  according  structural  to  the  environment,  Although  the  general,  international  preserving  above  the  political  goals  sovereign  coexistence  a pattern  of  activity  the  shared  members.  society. order  to  ground  expectations  them.  and  prevai1ing  peace  back round  the  any  form  the  social  goals terms  understandings  to  this  cohesion,  There  are  three  The  international  states,  thus  of  system  and  in  terms  of  its  of  atomistic a  society  conception of  states  of  one another, between them a necessary then we may  a  system,  exists  devoid  component  common  society. and thereby  interests Common  interpretations facilitating  and  interela  are values of  the refer  interests  communication  of  when  a group of states, conscious of certain common interests and common values...conceive themselves bound by a common set of rules in their relations one another, and share in the working of common institutions, (p. 13)  perceptions  is  Thus  contrast  definition.  of  normal  order  latter  where states are in regular contact with and where in addition there is interaction sufficient to make the behaviour of each element in the calculations of the other, speak of their farming a system, (p.10) In  of  and as  primary the  of  in  goals  International these  anarchy.  life  independence and  meaning  of  social  the  differentiates the  and  additional  as  the  sustains  Bull  the  system  international  a condition of  members,  among that  in  pursues  its  and  membership  constitutive  states  of  of  in  unique  maintaining  condition  society  are  domestic  states  society  sovereignty  international  latter's namely,  organization,  territorial  between  ted  parts  to be with  to  aforementioned to  one may  and  goals  basis be  this  on  shared  understanding.  of which  by But  197 i t  i s not  values,  the  in  the  homogeneity, (e.g.  only  one.  form  have  Western  nineteenth  centuries),  be  of  render the  it  provide  as  with  the  states  to  be  and  regulating  the  backing  with  their  and  identify  of  those  engaged  Although  of  it  may  derive  status,  to  and  a  "may  rational  sustain  the  elementary  rules  Bull  according  the  the  the sole  minimum  state states  are  in  not  of  conditions enabling  various in  and  concern  rights), issue enjoy himself  they  may have the status of international law, or rules, of custom or established practice, or be merely operational rules or "rules of the worked out without formal agreement or even verbal communication. It is not uncommon for emerge first as an operational rule, then to  their  primacy  property  embodied  does  to  members  violence,  among  that  which  conduct  reinforce  specify  Bull  means  of  as  affirming  arguing  does  interests  society. of  rules  religious  society  from  restricting  law,  and  common  are  states  and  and  (p.54)  affirm  that  these  eighteenth  principles  (i.e.  in,  international  precise  of  rules,  cooperation many  sense  complexes that  seventeenth  international  international  those  societies  cultural  reciprocal."  of  them  the  a  appropriate  common cultural  and  necessary  part,  three  among  contracts  areas.  be  goals  society,  coexistence  those  to  system  international  [or]  must  -  the  1 imitations  between scope  that global  fear  and  sixteenth in  For  some  international  culture holds  component  guidance  substantive  of  the life  distinguishes  the  of  second  consistent  of  he  meaningless.  social  The  the  contemporary  that  of  in  although  religious past  political  consequence  calculation goals  the  that  transnational  Christendom  European  not  of  argues  characterised  centuries,  diversity  Bull  moral they may game," without a rule to become  198 established practice, then moral principle and finally legal convention. (p.67) Unlike make,  domestic  communicate,  its  rules,  wherein  administer, functions  international  society,  states.  organizations  endowed  with  the  to  authoritatively  "rules"  states  of  are  its  international patterns interested  as  the  set  of  common  and  goals."  society  great  to  which  maintaining  Bull,  order  powers,  global  this  among  war.  main  of  force,  regarding terms,  members  among  fulfil He  and  self-  be  a number  similar  refers  towards  to  the  and  as  its  must  of  supranational  insofar  sum of  to  international  examined  separately,  relation  to  order  of  are  of  functions these  as  realization  The  main  "a of  both  of  their  historically  The  of  system  Anarchical  of  the  Society to  and  contemporary  analytical  although  the  functions  and  balance  contribution  For  overlap  the  in  managerial  society.  often  international  collaboration"  the  body  and  of  five-fold:  diplomacy,  institutions order,  institutions  "element  states  law,  and  these  international  no  members  organizational  there  help  shaped  the  express  international  describes  that  society.  practices  are  the  (p.74)  According  power,  argues  civil  by  interaction  which  vis-a-vis  the  out  1y  protect  functions  In  than  formal  and  monopoly  analogous  strategic  "institutions"  habits  timate  However,  more  Bull  enforce,  there  society.  is  short-term  state  legi  institutions.  players,  analogous  a  of a in a  institutions  carried  Here,  perform  society of  are  international only  state  interpret,  these  hence  all  society,  to attain the status to be incorporated  in  sometimes  the purposes,  they  fulfil  contradict  each in one  is  199  another.  Before  briefly  i1lustrating  two  fundamental  points  understand goals  of  international  involved  in  First, neither  the  these  They  peace  is  nor  are  of  states,  preservation  of  the  may  Second, interested of  he in  be  may  be  these  regarded  great  a  threat  to  order  may  balance  contrivance, Bull  points  continually but  and  is  part  not that  kind  exists  of  power,  out  functionalist society  uphold  he of  above emphasises,  the  element  in  and  maintenance  as  his  well  as  power  emerging  is  not  as  broader engaged  element state  of  far  the  form  of  one  goal  is  only  of war  societal  element  of  Each  order. it  it.  in  element  a  it.  The A  a  terminal  of and  so  on.  structuralwhich  members. international and  war  disorder.  institution,  to  Thus  towards  any  in  its  he  as  promote  lacking  from  so  momentarily  according  apart  the  undermining  well  therefore the  that  contributing  as  of  work to  in  than  order  a  political  to  of  problematigue only  rather  "the of  that  and  prevailing  relation  the  analysis, and  argues  subordinate  the  throughout  institution  latter  for  as  international  another.  tics,  an  is  the  are  to  territorial  The  phenomena  the  "fortuitous" struggle  as  society  Bull  turn  of  "institutions."  value  the  in  one  to  powers  equal  to  antinomies  as  of  system  emphasises  poli  contributes  real,  with  international  can  which  important  subseguent  international  organization.  conflict  the  of  preserving  states  political  well  they  is  discussion  hierarchically.  to  independence  universal  are  it  Bull's  phenomena  goals  arranged  subordinate  and  five  elemental  symbiotic,  society.  about  society,  treating  this,  of  international As  he society  transnational  is  200 loyalties  are  speak  as  if  real it  also,  and  annulled  the  to  reify  second  the  and  first  third,  element, is  or  an  to  illusion."  (p.51) Rather account  of  multiple  myself  that  these  briefly  to  of  them.  The  balance  no  one  Throughout being  the  states,  at  second both  into  a  goal  by  have  universal  function  of  peace.  requires served  the  when  states  political  dominant  use  with  On  of  lay  the the  of  has  the  the  balance  often  requires  though  it  reference  such  the  law  preserved  in  balance  a precondition  have  of  which of  some  the  power  other  has  preserving  and in  not  the  the  second  their the  powers.  interests  Finally,  contravening for  from  balances  Similarly,  great  to  it  independence  contrary,  to  society.  violated  among  confine  affairs  down  partitioned  balance  will  Local  force.  are  their  international  sovereignty  is  points  conditions  However,  of I  state  the  the  definitions,  order,  can  dense  rigorous  empire.  preserving  provided  operate.  the  latter  international to  function  all. International  to  and  balance  and  even  preponderant  a  a general  not  laws,  as  system,  goal  maintaining  defined  the  often  the  power,  above  of  can  territorial  international the  a  explications  institution  balance is  systematic  illustrating  simplify  with  primary  institutions the  to  the  and  served  to  is  transformed  served  attempt replete  and  of  power  is  or  institutions,  contribution  others,  of  regurgitate  distinctions,  ambivalent  each  than  have  the  status  law, of  a  body  law,  and  of  formal  therefore  rules  regarded  providing  by  states  authoritative  201 principles  of  contributes the  conduct  to  order  constitutional  basic  rules  these to  above,  it  conflicts  often power  intervention, also  hinder  various or  kinds  of  cosmopolitan  actors  and  extending  previously  "the  official  agents  indirect  functions  symbolises  the  presupposes  and  held  conduct by in  to  its  to  As  may  indicated  to  maintain  belong  the  war, It  interstate),  to  may  reflecting  scope  of  gathering,  and  of  reciprocal  human  to the  non-state sphere  states  arising  misunderstanding. in  twentieth  century,  international  and  fulfilling  society.  of  other  indicating  by  Diplomatic  However,  states  of  it  its  rules  notes  also  notes  the  of  "friction" and  the  functions decline  and  intel1igence  prejudice  Bull  he  practice  since  minimization  wider  fulfils  communication,  practical "a  also  agreements,  the  Morgenthau,  states...by  society  misperception,  these  order."  (p.162)  faci1itates  calls  from Like  diplomacy  means,"  acceptance  Bull  between  international  it  treaties what  relations  international  Practically,  negotiation  of  peaceful  existence  the  conventions.  of  and  law  and  opposed  the  mobilize  aggression.  promoting  (as  state  jurisdiction.  Diplomacy,  among  international  issues  domestic  by  identify  preventive  against  by,  to  help  required  outlawing  order  justice,  and  order.  sanctions  international  are  international  measures  example,  abide  society,  international  requiring  to  international  cooperation,  with  for  obliged  functions  However,  maintain  by,  and  and  rules.  measures  are  Its of  coexistence  with  of  states  indirectly.  hinder  balance  which  principles  of  compliance  to  decline in  in  the  the  that  of  conditions the  202 widespread world  acceptance  testifies  function  in  divided  of  to an  and  the  era  less  diplomatic  conventions  continual  when  importance  "states  are  unambiguously  more  throughout  of  its  symbolic  numerous,  participants  in  the  more  deeply  a common  culture."  (p.183) War, presents  or  organized  the  threatens  greatest  to  of  to  and  law  Bull  international  society  preserving laws  the  of  just  peaceful  threat  to  time  insti  that  nuclear  limited  and  to  rule  final  which has  of  of  international  ever  international  term  membership."  that  a means  of  and  even  to  mechanisms  representing hand,  "a  an  society's aspects  and  the  varies  strength  society.  Today,  Bull  a greater  threat  to  before,  of  international  other  these  war,  the  institution  international  technology  war  an  effective  the  the  limits.  aspect,  on  the  than  contain  self-defence,  a dual  to  made  to  it  Thus  certain  lacks  between  overriding  over of  the  argues  its  order.  institution a  of  contained;  have  is  since  enmity."  designed  enforcing  balance  weapons  to  powers, of  The  pure  provides  rights  war  states,  society,  of  itself  it  power,  realm  sovereign  acceptable  war  harnessed  society  contribution  great  be  tutions  international  The  a  are  as  legal  Thus  (p.198)  other  of  in  state  within  that  by  international  "a  insofar  change  on  war  argues  the  depending  into  of  to  instrumentality  to  diplomacy  change. be  purposes."  and  balance  pertaining  promote  it  conduct  Nevertheless,  waged  dangers  transform  institutions threat  violence  which  Bull  implies  (p.200)  These  "the are  examines  is  existence states  that of  at  the  of  a club front  the with rank  a  203 in  terms  of  and  duties  are  accorded  League  military regarding  not  the  particular  by  vis-a-vis  a whole.  The  as  general  balance  when  they  occur  advantage), The  each  other's  joint  action  common  extended  maintaining  (p.20)  These  global  scale,  their  influence,  and  their  through  are  these  contribution  as  the  excluding argues  1ing  for with  one  another.  predominance the  status  them  unilateral  legitimacy  sometimes  societal  the  of  undertaking  and  achieve  their  cooperation. of  of  control  regional  of  sustain  international of  wars  spheres  elementary  Bull  limiting  recognizing  defines  the  them  the  pursuing to  and  influence,  their  sustain  crises  and  by  they  international  preservation  exploiting  containing  discussion  Bull  society.  than  examination  and  avoiding  as  to  and  of  interests  society  include  rights Thus  such  but  other,  certain  security.  contribute  spheres  to  Bull's  which  by  involves  their  each  power,  (rather  and  latter  within  of  and  strength,  former  have  organizations  They  sheer  policies  society  in  Nations.  their  to  peace  status  United  just  recognized  international  privileged  and  order  strength,  institutions to  international  alternative "those or  constitutive the that  paths  patterns  primary  sped world  of  international order  towards  of  human  world  of  mankind  goals  of  social  goals  of  order,  activity  goals  fic  precedes  as life  that a  whole." on  a  international  order  is more fundamental and primordial than international order because the ultimate units of the great society of all mankind are not states (or nations, tribes, empires, classes or parties) but individual human beings, which are permanent and indestructible in a sense in which groupings of them of this or that sort are not. This is the moment for international relations, but the question of world order arises  an  204 whatever the political or social structure of the globe...it is necessary to state... that i f any value attaches to order in world politics, it is order among mankind which we must treat as being of primary value, not order within the society of states. If international order does have value, this can only be because it is instrumental to the goal of order in human society as a whole, (p.22) Of  course,  at  international the  case  system. in  the  future.  This  present  system  been  should is  put  forward  by  the  it  present  which  may  out  international that  states  multinational  who  and  fits"  for  and  global not  been  indefinite  because  the  that,  is  as  of one  of  classical  politics being  are  corporations  these he  change,  these  matters  is  treat not  is  achieve  theory  sharply  historical  eclipsed  of  He  what  should  world  order,  evidence  for  integration, disintegration, represent of  anomalies, international  state-centric.  both  scholars  transformed.  domestic  All  hand, for  be  regional  stubbornly  the  some  to  have  international  regardless  radical  such  that  the  should  arrangement  the  trends  are  has  blueprints  that  interdependence,  discussion  what  only  the  simply  various  possibility  unification.  On  the this  for  of  believe  trends  ism  sight  is  that  persist  examines  in  passing  that  lost  found  ambivalence. mistake  be  undergoing  which  Bull's  it  is  technological  relations,  need  system  transnational  "awkward  nor  a preferable  be  out  points  dysfunctional the  as  system  Bull  those  radically  investigates  replace  states  global.  critically  is  the  But  not  then  also  or  past,  Bull  system  and  present  new by given  reflects critical  turning as  all.  non-state extremely  of  points,  radically  at  a  new For  short  those  who  pointing departures  example,  actors  certain  the  in view  like shrift,  which  2 0 5  Bull  i1lustrates  sixteenth the  using  century  states  readily  system  absorb  integration,  of  and  its  Bull  the  necessity  immanence,  underlying  order  politics,  of  are  working  it  concept  insofar achieving  be,  the  international as  Thus  regional  only  failed  to  the  force  and  bigger  is  dilute  simply is  national  fewer often  the  result  self-determination,  in  the  no  and  form  of  well  and  of  sovereignty  of  that  of  maintains  be  the  moral  system.  of  not  political  individual,  their  the  justice  tensions  in  international  institutions  violate  and  order,  states,  contested yardstick Bull  are an  by  which  also  is  cosmopolitan  notions and  abstract one  holds  that  t o world a prerequisite or  the  ultimately  such  antithetical order  when  ordinary  international  However, totally  diagnoses  order...especially  among  however  premature  on  "the  exhortations  of  a chapter  necessarily value  as  of  dismissive  international  is  kind  In  both  conceptions  order, must  as  means  concedes  The  order  notions  by  properly,  states  some  critical,  change  sustain  World  evaluates  can  of  disintegration  of  various  protects  may  hegemony.  and  source  result  concerns.  (p.91)  derivative.  change,  that  a potential  not  sharply  is  readily  which  justice."  goals  he  and  Bull  mechanisms  holds  as  recognition  is  normative  between  he  the  autonomy.  whilst  regarding  its  from  viewed  demanding  political  to  to  logical  examples  Furthermore,  resilient  domestic  territorial Vet  has its  economic  nineteenth.  sometimes  groups  legal  and  challenges  is  but  secessionist  they  remarkably  Conversely,  their  of  is  apparent  nationalism,  and  the  transformation,  states. of  to  which  systemic  religious  order, for  distributive  206 justice.  In  0  on  the  meaning  among  mankind,  within  which  be  the  absence  and  political  the  states  some  approximated  of  a world reguisites  system  consensus  without  state,  on  is  for the  issues  violent  and  no  attaining  only  to  consensus  world  existing  relevant  change.  thus  order  basis  world  order  may  Furthermore:  Any regime that provides order in world poli tics will need to appease demands for just change, at least to some degree, if it is to endure; and thus an enlightened pursuit of the goal of order will take account also of the goal of justice. Likewise the demand for just change will need to take account of the goal of order; for it is only if the changes... can be incorporated in some regime that provides order, that they can be made secure, (p.95) Thus,  although  necessari1y of  fails  justice  that  remains  the  be  partial  even  recognizes  may  the can  undermine  pursued  of  the  it  need  to  reached  may  serve  within  through fact  deal  if the  uphold  with mankind  some  of and  international  societies,  it  these  ideals  so  on  as  may society  human  matters  consensus  constraints  notions  international  issues ty,  achieving  which  that  equali  encompass that  to  to  for  domestic  raising  racial  possibility be  within  The  society  potential  mechanism  legitimacy  on  international  any  attained.  boundaries  system,  be  viable 1y  consensus  raises  provide  redistribution,  national  order  to  only  the  economic some  contemporary  rights, testifies  to  transcending  a whole. on  It  issues  imposed  by  order  rather  also of the  world states than  it.  5. As Vincent puts it, the priori ty that Bull gives to order over justice reflects "the minimal endorsement of the doctrine that authority must reside somewhere i f order is to obtain anywhere." R.J. Vincent, "Hedley Bull and Order in International Politics," Millenium: Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Summer 1983), p.210.  207 Bull's  text  simply  reflects  this  "elements"  whose  capture or  the  of  subject  The  I  political  is  the  kind  it  is  nature  of  each, to  subsume one  International Bull's  to  Before  plural  ism  the  important  to  discourse  in  as  the  of to  of parts.  basis  recognize  these  to  international  influence  examining of  what  "international  which  "image"  claims  its  approach  indebted  of  to  Politics  earlier,  scope  one  whole  of  three  nature  their  the  view,  attempts  essential  belie  his  the  within  The  Might.  and  between  politics  into  In  frustrating  which  reality  Martin  ontological  approach,  tension  thought.  heavily  note.  constantly  attempting  out  historian  Bull's  by  pointed  ambivalent  international  eludes  of  theory  English  dynamic is  political  Heterogeneity As  of  an  international  by  international  on  interplay  matter  exhaustiveness  ends the  reality  tradition  the  thus  what  his  the  I  call  overall  both  scholars  theory,"  competing  of  and  traditions  meant thus  must  the be  understood. According ask  in  just  Wight,  international  as  the  state?"* theory  to  is  international speculation  6. Martin International  theory  central  This the  "the is,  question rests  tradition  of  about  the  may  be  society  fundamental  what  in  assertion  theory  most  on  is  supposed of  theory  belief  speculation  that  about to  you  international  political his  question  be  states,  Wight, "An Anatomy of International Studies, Vol 13, No. 3. (July  or  the a  society?, is, "if  what  is  family  a  political  state,  tradition the  can  then of of  Thought, " Review 1987), p.222.  of  208 nations,  or  the  same  question,  that  characterize  international from  international  Bull  7  which  what poli  community." ' flow  he  a  calls  series a  of  poses  exactly  subsidiary  "classical  the  inquiries  approach"  to  tics:  For example, does the collectivity of sovereign states constitute a political society or system, or does it not? If we can speak of a society of sovereign states, does i t presuppose a common culture or civilization? What is the place of war in international society? Is all private use of force anathema to society's working, or are there just wars which i t may tolerate or even require? Does a member state of international society enjoy a right of intervention in the internal affairs of another, and i f so, under what circumstances? Are sovereign states the sole members of international society, or does i t ultimately consist of individual human beings, whose rights and duties override those of the entities who act in their name? 3  Having  posed  international not  only  The  reason  political on  the  political  the  theory, by  paucity for  this  theorists state  as  the  experience."  central Might  but is  ontological argues  also  by  have  traditionally  site  of  progress  the  that  the  other  On  and the  one  focused and hand,  the  for  latter  intellectual  double-edged.  On  question  "is  marked,  moral hand,  poverty."  9  Western  almost  exclusively  "consummation  Wight  also  of  notes  a kind of recalcitrance of international politics to being theorized about. The reason for this is that the theorizing has to be done in the language of political theory and law. But this is appropriate to man's control of his social life...international theory is the theory of survival.* 0  7. Martin Wight, "Why is there no International Theory?" in Butterfield and Wight, eds., Diplomatic Investigations, op. cit., p.19. 8. Hedley Bull, "International Theory: The Case for a Classical Approach," in Klaus Knorr and James N. Rosenau, eds., Con tending Approaches to International Politics, p.27. 9. "Why is there no International Theory?" op. cit., p.20. 10. Ibid., p.33.  209 Thus as  Might  very  there  in  by  terms  international careful in  it.  and  how and  order  emphasise  to and  analogous  it  cover historical  range  of  answer  should  be  how  broadly  noted  as  political  that  his  vast  1iterature,  the  three  embodied  in  and  briefly  looking  at  central  question  Might  is  typology  range well  of  extremely  is  of as  theory  between "as  Before  they  a  international  thought,  statesmen."  simplify  of  distinguishes  of  why  just and  body  he  traditions  writers of  contained  Instead,  theory, to  legal,  self  historical  down  these  no  conceives  broad  handed  is  constructed  philosophical,  to  codify  an  practice:  If we speak of each of these three types of international theory as patterns of thought we approach them from a philosophical standpoint. Me shall be likely to note the... logical coherence of the complex of thought and how acceptance of any one unit-idea is likely to entail logically most of the others, so that the whole is capable of being a system of political philosophy. If we speak of them as traditions of thought...we are likely to notice illogicalities and discontinuities because exigencies of political life often override logic. Me shall find all kinds of intermediate positions. J  Mith the -  this  distinguishing  realism,  why  they  answer one  absence of  Medded  to  the  society  of  a contract  nature.  As  Hobbesian  international "An Anatomy  stated,  characteristics  extreme  international  state  firmly  rationalism,  At  11.  caveat  1  and  what  he -  on  to  dubs  in  describe  the  terms  three  of  how  R's and  guestion.  realism. is  of  goes  revolutionism  central is  Might  a  According  contradiction  between between  states,  in they  individuals,  assumptions,  politics  as  a  of  International  this  zero-sum  to  this terms.  are this  struggle  is  the  a a  pre-societal state  of  views for  op.  In  in  tradition  Thought,"  tradition,  power,  cit.,  and  p.226.  war.  210 peace  as  the  fragile  deterrence. and of  The  outcome  state  is  its  interests  other  states,  apart  pursuit  of  rational environment.  whose  preclude  the  classical  from  of  realism's  skepticism  view  of  the  true  man  in  towards  the  "civitas  morally  glorifying,  system,  Revolutionists  "Hence  the  Jacobins,  the  whole  of  now,  and  that  God...is  at As  these  political 12. Martin Butter field  maxima."  of  is  in  that varying  President  diplomatic  history  be  real  a  of perfectionist  of  struggle  surrendering in  to, a  radically  and  groaned  mankind,  the  society to  degrees  has  states  Conceding  survival  Wilson  of  to  process  it  mankind,  epiphenomenal  wedded  of  tradition  contrary  than  tradition  of  international  necessities  Mazzini,  like  to  self-help revised.  the  Huguenots,  the  Communists,  and  travailed  the  or  kingdom  that until of  3  i1 lustrations  arrangement  realm  This  society.  Rather  demand  hand."*  the  contingent  community  the  hostile  a  Kant.  are  that  thought  common  those  and  perpetual  society  an  a historically  the  and  by  of  regarding  belief,  the  Dante  members  of  a  revolutionism,  dynamics  the  the  for  necessity.  realization  tradition  authority,  prudence  in  international  pathological  interests  this  full  existential  political  by  is  and  consideration  dictated  lies  are an  of  self-interest  extreme  its  whose  states,  that  any  strategic  posits  prevented  form  politics  forbears  teleologically  insecurity  embodying  from  and  opposite  mutual  highest  egoistic  survival  system,  the  International  violence, fit  of  of  Wight, "Western and Wight, op.  demonstrate, the  future,  Values cit.,  neither nor  the  the  means  in International p.94.  precise of  Relations,"  in  211 transforming as  many  for  its  their for  the  different necessity.  its  and  is  and  Hume  of  the  defined  social  them.  than  the  Hobbes  chaotic by  man  interaction  nor  is  must  be  and  As  articulated  plurality politics an  of to  and  sovereign a state  appeals  of  to  characteristics  stripe  their  the  a static  "domestic  as  a  of  social  is  demand  war  render is  its  society, analogy" dynamics.  it  and  not  whose  continual  best their  customs  authoritative  provide  the by  principles  the  constituent the  members.  coexistence  condemn  barrier  members.  in  of  of  a  international  meaningless a  "nature." in  are  regulated  state,  whose  asocial  animal,  their  above  creature,  life  Locke tradition  the  through  of  of  neither  both  social  are  extremes,  this  is  and  these  does  Nor  to  evolution  states,  among  a unique  and  by  two  metaphysics  atomistic  codified  and  the  that  an  a world  these  nature  and  governance,  society.  as  of  societies  of  intercourse  understood  and  adherents  as  obiigations  absence  international  economic  Kant,  historical and  which  rights the  or  Forms  of  through  Thus  by  man  the  institutions  reciprocal  Informed  blissful,  others.  tracing  conduct  are  justifications every  system  between  understood  by  of  There  are of  lies  determined  understood  societal  there  political  state  postulating  with  norms.  as  a priori.  revolutionists  precontractual  behaviour  Instead,  unites  tradition  rather  err  determined  salvation  existing  against  substantively schools  are  overhaul.  rationalist  that  to  What  radical  The  one,  routes  rejection  argue  present  the to  However, autonomy  understanding  notion  social it  must  severely its  of  and be weakens basic  212 Might's eclectic,  trialectic not  simply  "traditions"  with  also  of  because  them,  or  to  single  one.  the  truth,  which  international  any his  the  solidarity.  "When  to  find  Hobbes,  analytically  Grotian  of  the  and  each  legal  theorist  also  categories  between  he  century  The  different the  work  of  a  exemplifies  each  theorist,  transcend  or  paradigms his  "I  3  in  legal  alleged locates  me."*  to best  moral wrote,  uses  tradition  these  theory,  he  to  namely,  once  Wight's  refuses  as  transnational he  of of  uses  within  seventeeth  Bull  elements  thought  who  of  a monopoly  postulates,  although  tying  transcend  parameters  claim  my own psyche," ways  to  tradition  underlying  but  own  of  work  within  tradition. in  strokes,  arranging  each  these  precision,  broad  can  intercourse,  the  political  Bearing broad  and  delineate  between  which  elsewhere,  and  arbitrate  them  appropriates  them,  Although  international the  and  of  extremely  either  the  interplay  its  three  openly  Kant,  Grotius.  of  to  is  analytic  within  practice  political  refusal  reluctance  none  the  thought  and  views  scrutinize  identify  particular  Hugo  view,  I  Society to  -  his  these  Bull  Anarchical  one  own  habitual  all  Hedley  labels  his  validity  anarchy,  his  personal  reflects  structural  seem  deep  In  of  philosophical  political for  international  because  locate  any  evidence  of  of  mind and  the  the  observer,"**  13.  "An Anatomy  that  that  stars it of  Wight's it  in  should  trialectic  serves,  as  Porter  constellations... be  International  14. Brian Porter, "Patterns of Wight's International Theory," Reason of States (London: Allen  noted  is  that  Thought,"  painted  puts for  Bull's op.  it,  the  like  such "the  convenience  positing cit.,  Thought and Practice: in Michael Donelan, & Unwin, 1978), p.  with  ed., 71.  of p.227. Martin The  of a  213 Grotian  tradition  does  not  correspondence  or  contrary.  himself  explores  sources  of  Bull  concerning and  the  morality,  Christian  and  which divine  Grotius  with  ambiguities  and of  his  nineteenth  retain  apply  confusing  explicitly  indebted  adaptation  and  international argues  that  of  seminal  role  society  as  a unique  writers  of  the  society  was  discover based,  not  and  of  jurisdiction.  in  yet  work  in  light  whose reason  of  and  Thus  the it  when use  "The  of on  not  in  an  is  is  force which scope  surprising  talks  it  is  neither  it  immune  from  the  intellectual the  latter's international  defined  only  centuries." * sought  by  to  princes,  international  that  of pp.  a  justify  sovereign  regarding  the  Such  x  Grotian Conception and Might, op. cit.,  rapid  understand.  of  by  of  to  often  of  the  fully  era  to  simply  Grotius  is  evolution seeks  attempt  Bull  nor  it  nineteenth  latter's is  ism  thought,  the  eighteenth of  latter's  conception  that  the  although  law  Comparing  the  attributing  obiigation  delimit  15. See Hedley Bull, Society," in Butterfield 16. Ibid., p.66.  of  writing  law,  series  Grotius,  Grotius  and  to  of  "the  place  Thus  x = l  for  society...  resort  universal  practices  to  in  to  international  the  encouraging  a whole due  of  of  eighteenth  sources  be  successors  tradition  in  the  law.  change.  the  origins  on  this  volitional  Grotius  the  international  or  vestiges  society  underlying  notes  On  Grotius'  human  of  revision  in  natural  Bull  to  tensions  Bull.  medieval  positivistic  "tradition"  and  direct  of  more  the  a  blend  and  work  is  Grotius  obiigation  a  historical  a Grotian  limits  are  there  the  law,  the  that  between  centuries, in  and  Bull  lineage  mean  law its  Grotius  could subjects  failed  International 51-73.  to  214 perceive work are  the  is  infused  more  itself  in  to  well  his  to  result  of  two  writing  at  and  related  his  tools  a  more Bull  time  strand  solidarist the  explicate  the  Distinguishing century  the  of  17.  more  of  the  the  latter's  universal  the  to  of  and notes is  however,  have  predominantly  Ibid.  the  Bull,  normative  was embryonic,  intellectual  international  school,  be  of  Grotian  tradition  origins  in  twentieth-  only  "the and  with  moved  the  an  centuries  behind  international  to  states.  normal,  more  has  which  himself,  spoken  society  with  seeking  calls  still  three  and in  Grotius  is  and  dispenses  analogy  for  what  neo-Grotians,  to  the  was  whom he  that  The  of  In  are  pluralist  society  those  can  practice  ambiguity  the  law  a  relations  and  so  as  theorist  which  domestic  international  theory  force  work  the  natural  the  state  scope  era.  features  Bull  of  society.  system  tradition,  Grotius  manifests  broader  with  that  source  to  legal  states  dispense  of  distinctive  the  this  sympathetic  of  resort  Grotius'  that  Grotian  a  international in  bygone  1 imitations  a  extend  of  According its  is  as  and  European  a  law  the  his  This  divine  of  fact  to  to  "neo-Grotians,"  language  the the  between  terminology  effort.  -  assumptions  recognizes  war,  tensions  reluctance  himself  in  that  assumptions  tradition.  for  members  when  applicable  positivist  use  resultant  factors  to  reasons  constituent the  and  law,  and  solidarist  Kantian  natural  its  society,  calls  the  legitimate  the view,  to  nascent  Bull  of  regulate  Bull's  this  international  legislate as  what  appeal  in  regarding  the  with  of  characteristic  obligation as  uniqueness  of them."*  away legal  7,  from  215 thought  towards  dimensions  of  development from  its  theory  to  embrace  to  similar  or  international  philosophical  and right  sources  sovereign  in  of  international Oriental Just  be  recognized  not  subject  and  became rather  kingdoms,  Islamic  doctrines  as to  the  law  paid  mechanisms  among  states,  special  role  of  neither  the  idea,  became  such  as  the  as the  the  the  its  the state, the  principle  the of  to  powers,  and  reality  of  more consent  in  determining Similarly,  of  membership  African resort  "such  chieftaincies." to  war  came  a political sources  balance  to  decision  and  scope  of  attention of of  was order  power,  institutions.  international  in  entities  maintenance  other  and  become and  more  the  to  theological  political  circumscribed, to  than  law.  or  the  tradition.  consensus  As  central  great  nor  more  in reflected  practice  emirates  of  revisions  law  other  declined  ideological  according  criterion  adjudication.  international other  Divine  than  expansion,  Kantian  shed  the  expanded  and  conduct the  sole  has  rather  international  monopoly  legal  state  the  parallels  increasingly  theological in  political  Its  and  practice  and  it  cultural  customary  society,  war  This  natural  obiigation  statehood  globe.  thought  pluralistic; reason  as  befitting  legal  roots  positivistic succeeded  more  itself  adaptations  evaluate  the  evolution  growing  political  change  on  This  the  society.  doctrines  Thus  and  international  universalist  to  society  international  attempting  [p.34]  base  reguired  in  focus  society.  secularization,  of  changes  empirical  international  European  heterogeneity  as  broader  international  of  concomitant  the  a  society  the Thus is  216 immune  from  historical  relationship Jn  between sum,  politics as  is  pluralistic,  extension that  international  may  be  the  been  taken  they  reformulation  and  on  his of  and  his  element  of  but  of  what  the  own  relation  as  his the  reality  of  traditions  international main  positions  are  requiring to  idiom  work  international  dynamic,  changing  and  these  about  "in  the  thought  although  controversies  restatement  of  changing the  times."**  Science interpretation  traditional  characterization  of  from  history,  philosophy,  one  explanations  static,  traditions  notwithstanding  only  past,  three  identifies  Furthermore,  not  Versus  Bull  focuses  the  the  international  Might's  tradition,  in  to  international  Might,  and...in  Given  approach  central  although  reversed.  Grotian  in  up  are  circumstances,  analogue  the this  have  been  of  3  conduct,"  Tradition  unlike  "what  conditioning,  appropriating  politics.*  phenomena that  has  paradigms  of  constitute  and  ontological  However,  admission  them  Bull's  metatheoretical  practice. an  change  the  of  international  political  theory,  classical  approach  and  law,"  it  theory and  is  as not  as  the  his one  "that  surprising  derives that  IB. As Keenes has recently expressed it, "each [paradigm] expresses the world as a more or less distinctive, yet not exclusive, political space. The form of politics or of political space created by each paradigm expresses historical phenomena and therefore each is layered over the other. They overlap in time." Ernie Keenes, "Paradigms and International Relations: Bringing the Politics Back In," Presented to the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association (Mindsor, Ontario: June 1988), p. 2. 19. Hedley Bull, "The Theory of International Politics 19191969," in Brian Porter, ed. , The Aberystwyth Papers: International Politics 1919-1969 (London: Oxford University Press, 1972), p. 51.  217 Bull  adopts  concedes  an  to  "scientific between  as  an  approach."  In  his  approaches  transatlantic  dispute  that  all  international logical  or  the  to  the  sciences on  the  represents  a  "false  threat  to  rooted  as in  his  international  20. op. 21.  and former  so  to  a  he  theory  based  of  either  upon  this  of  knowledge  of  is  inspired in  piines  by  some  within  that to  of social  explanation  argues  a  applies  this  which  "we  should  of  "International cit., p.21. Ibid., p. 38.  its  an  seek  the  The  Case  for  latter  dispense  a  he  Classical  firmly  "reality"  of  and precludes  procedures as  is with  is  necessarily  methodological theory  to  contested  This  to  the  literature,"  1y  practice.  distinction that  regarding  essential  central  Theory:  claim  "wisdom  beliefs  human  his  Bull's  proponents  scientific  guestions  that.  and  speculative  as of  1  science, when  much  realm  the  contrast  empirical  appeals  understand  ontological  application  answering  to  politics  heterogenous  theory,  the  academics,  as  logic  and  predominantly  American  disci  Bull  to 3  important  the  the  to,  deaf." -  tradition  tradition  the  path"  a  strict,  certain  that  which  are  growth as  refers  anti-classical  "aspire  upon  subject-matter,  resolutely  between  well  assumption  the  and  Insofar  cumulative as  of  propositions or  he  in  form  latter  120  emulate  is  the  what  article,  the  verification."  of  It  of  proof,  regardless  remain  many  of  and  British  mathematical  natural  science,  takes  whose  of  1966  between  too  view  alternative  relations  procedures desire  negative  represent,  these  argues  extremely  in  conceived  of  Approach,"  it.  a  218 As  he points  of  the  out  in  light  classical  of  the  series  of  questions  constitutive  tradition:  Some of these are at least in part moral questions, which cannot by their very nature be given any sort of objective answer, and which can only be probed, clarified, reformulated, and tentatively answered from some arbitrary standpoint, according to the method of philosophy. Others of them are empirical questions, but of so elusive a nature that any answer we provide to them will leave some things unsaid, will be no more than an item in a conversation that has yet to be coneluded. 33  This  direct  understanding theory  as  relationship of  international  an open-ended  important  to  grasp.  methodological interested  in  over  interpretation  no  whom Bull refer  to  to  arguments.  Instead,  to  forsworn  because  of  to  with  deal  "the the  own terms."  22. 23.  Ibid., Ibid.,  this  33  p.26. p.28.  means  congenital crux  of  There  of  of  his  mantle  the  coming  the  subject  are  two basic  of  up any  while  his their  political  to  grips  theory that with  scientific yet  reasons  they them"  approach  remaining for  he  his  of  he argues  the  does  to  has Waltz,  of  relevance  directly  inabi1ity  (unlike  science  international  Furthermore,  opponents Bull  camp)  of  doubts  not  American  nor  back  of is  enterprise.  science,  to  nature  the  definitely  fic  field  the  discourse,  "traditionalist"  of  it.  mode  with  of  the  concerns  understand the  its  in  hence  is  scienti  he simply  core  he and Might  the  the  and  in  Bull  an argument  in  substantive  participants  1960s,  conceding  approach  the  the  of  authorities  counterparts,  "have  in  places  American  as  of  some  be a philosopher  wrongly any  and multifarious  engaging  pretentions  Bull's  politics,  Unlike  debate  their  between  this.  true  to  219 First,  Bull  continually  international  politics  determination  according  detailed  knowledge  history the  is  scope  sensitizes  reduced  general  of  to  in  itself.  conditions  out  both  response,  "cases  theory,  and  or  as  which  provides  "an a  the  of  appreciate  the  the  this  theory  or  for  the  materials himself,  It  which one  can  or  never  another  contingency  of  grows,  on  spatial  historical  understanding  theorist  constraints  and  of  the  to  of  historical  which  it  criticism  provides  a  diplomatic,  field.  temporal  the  Thus  1y  situations,  as  than  behaviour.  especial  in  of  rather  i1 lustrations  well  vital  for  to  autonomy  and  political  Thus of  laws  generalization  proposition,"  theorizing  to  the volition  given  order  historical mere  any  of  international,  scholar,  of  a realm  to  empirical  the  singularity be  as  essential of  emphasises  is  of  the  a that  correction  of  self-knowledge. Bull  believes  appreciated general  by  those  empirical  merely  partial,  theory  but  ambi Hons sources its  that  wishing  the  that  a  dimensions  subject-matter.  technigue, regards  24. "The p. 32. 25. Ibid.,  as  to  of  In  gain  turn,  a deplorable  distortion  p.33.  International  is  structure  comprehensive  and  not  results for of  Politics  as  of its  in  an  " ~* 3  tradi  of not  merely  relations.  well  fetish  sufficiently  a coherent  acceptance  as  this a  points  abandonment  theory  and  of  is  international  methodology,  Theory  discover  regressive of  these  "that  would  theory  constitute and  of  propositions and  as  neither  as Such tional  alienation undue  1919-1969,"  from  emphasis  quantification  academic  a  that  on Bull  priorities.  op.  cit.,  220 Second, naive  he  assumption  dichotomous.  be  role their  theory  the  support  or  giving axioms,  to  Bull  context of  purely stresses  the  dynamical  1y  On  the  way  hand, of  Ibid.,  our  whose Whereas  p.34.  and  of  source  or  and of  s  a public  and  from  definitions  between  a  private  and  which  political  of  derived  general  to  verifiable  the  instrumental  propositions  is  reality.  Rather,  practice  overlap  judged he  and  other. reality about More  of  even  important,  at nor  politics the is  understandings  constitutes  scientific  international  it,  intersubjective  the  the  practice  law." *  "given"  ideas  conduct  turn,  of  theoretical  observation. the  In  strength  of  assertions  theory  the  of  26.  which  one  independent  discipline.  in  a  each  and  actors  with  terms  extrapolations,  dichotomy  "useful"  in  can  variables. and  hypotheses  according  less  latter  evaluation,  discovery  influence  independent  the  of  fit  description  of  assumed  direction  language  which  into  the  a  and  behaviour, up  on and  unproblematic  behaviour.  empirical  and  justification,  their  of  rests  separate  divided  the  ascertainments the  or  and  timeless  deductions  more  by  "a  are  observable  theoretical  theory,  an  discover  laws  for  context of  of  to  plus of  rejects  theoretical  as  explaining  connections,  value  then  falsification  logical  causal  is  arbiter  rise  latter  realm  approach  practice  measured  conditions  becomes  scientific  and  the  relationship,  antecedent  not  posits  classified,  of  the  theory  untainted  therefore The  that  that  It  theoretically  of  argues  the  approach  level  and  be  of  it  subject-matter may  is  intentions of appropriate  the  221 for  explaining  the  determined  system,  the  traditional  conduct  of  states  within  making.  As  Nardin  has  ressurrect be  the  whose  thought  understood  informed  by  may  be  excellent  practice  as  understandings and is  comprehensible heterogenous  they of  are  human  27. Terry (Princeton,  and  meaningful  the  "tools" other  also nature,  Nardin, N.J.:  do  hand, in  society,  the  not  should  guality  to  (or  conduct."^^  are  content the  with  of  rules  of  an  themselves  and  scope  "facts"  both  that  theory  As  within  it.  and  the Each rendering  problematic theories  merely  suggested  by  we  self-  and  all  of  of  subject-matter,  function as  (the  them  inherently  means  devices, or  rooted  an  This and  change of  conduct  actors'  around  for  to  theory-dependent.  embody  world  constitutive  heuristic of  or  political  opportunities  partial,  instrumental  practice,  reflect  attempt  maxims  the  own  accordance  and  fundamentally  the  "reality."  necessarily  On  they  partly  or  regarding  traditions  regarding  constraints tradition  are three  insofar  in  institutions ideas  his  responding  rules,  political  Might's  poor)  larger the  their  agents  situation,  practices,  politics,  seen,  or  of  in  a  interpret  society,  thinking  practices,  conduct,  out  within  to  society  pointed  of  states  necessary  international  activity  various  international  metaphors  of  theoretical  appropriate  have  recently  an  these  is  of  historical  misunderstood)  of)  Since  an  "as  (or  violation  approach  concept  understood  behaviour  and are  as  optional  the  and  ubiquitous  "maps." as  traditions  very and  different political  Law, Morality, and Princeton University  of  international  thought,  metaphysical morality.  conceptions The  the Relations of Press, 1985),  scientific States p.32.  222 approach,  in  contrast,  divorces  theorizing.  Furthermore,  it  by  "values"  equating  preferences,  hoping  translating of  them  predictive "empirical"  is,  as  into  and  scienti  foundation  fic  of  the  be,  He  instead  that  a more  indefinitely  Of  future  in  philosophical  the  [and]  that  will  their  place  partial  and  take  uncertain  is  the  to  an  Bull's  attack  regards  discipline, the  of  this  linear  of  the  as  view  of  arguing "will  constant  new  earlier  essential  firm better  discipline  stage  works  a  policy  this that  That  "the  the  alongside  guides  side. toward  fewer Bull  form between  empirical  rejects in  likely  fundamentals;  theorists  the  by  gap  propositions,  vehemently  development  the  the  course,  former  tractable  cumulates  therefore  SB  them  more  bridging from  the  subjective  "the  integrated  and  have."  scientific  calls  thereby  to  between  progressively 1y  latter  and  "normative"  knowledge  idealistic.  progressive  Singer  normative  the  conflicts  and  we will  hopelessly  about  what  will  disagreements  subordinates  resolve  theoretical  predictions  remain  to  and  noncognitive  conflicts,"  the  our  with  empirical  scientific  works  1y  debate  as  intractable  subject. Having will  conelude  relationship his  recent  summed this between testimonial  28. J. David Singer, Evidence," in Knorr 29. "International op. cit., p.JO.  up  section  by  substance to  Bull,  briefly and  on  American  behavioural  commenting method  Hoffmann  in  on  I  the  Bull's  describes  ism,  own his  "The Incompleat Theorist: Insight and Rosenau, op. cit., pp.66-67. Theory: The Case for a Classical  work.  In  approach  without Approach,"  223 as  one  of  of  structural-functional  society  in  norms an  "Weberian  of  of  conduct  of  the  the  diplomatic  in  they  which  the  stipulation,  meaning  of  used  from  by  Bull  others,  and  infused  with  broader  discourse  vis-a-vis  the  in  is  observable  endows  have  an  never  normative  other  kinds  international  practices  to  the  and  latter  empathize  in  concepts the  practical  the  scientific  1anguage  linked  in  the  from  with  the  way  social  so  defined Thus  to  "great  interaction, particular  identifying  requires  a  practice,  fixed  by  by  "thick power,"  but  although  certain  reference Its  not  via  hermeneutic  demarcate  which  of  hypotheses  indices.  ficance  with  is  far  world  and  a more  exclusively  material signi  a  too  dynamic  theory  terms,  of  stray  approach of  reflects  concept  defined  and  empirical  Geertz's  empirical  never  concepts to  work  of  states.  all  on  analyses  attempt  theoretical  measurable  actors  an  the  or,  Thus  33  focus  of  3  Bull's  explication  his  Bull  theoretical  of  rejection  involved. *  deductively  description." is  in  between  operationalization, method  states,  Whereas  separation  his  intersubjective  actors  discourse.  radical  by  his  meaning  and  evolving  shared  Consequently, from  the  perspective,  perspectives  Given  30  analysis,  terms  historical  humanism."  states to  meaning only  also  is  presupposes embodies  rights a class  it  and of  states  a and  duties with  JO. Stanley Hoffmann, "Hedley Bull and his Contribution to International Relations," International Affairs, Vol. 62, No. 2 (Spring 1936), p. 182. Jl. For example, see Hedley Bull, "The Emergence of a Universal International Society," in Hedley Bull and Adam Watson, eds., The Expansion of International Society (Ox ford: Oxford University Press, 1984), pp. 117-127. J2. Clifford Geertz, "Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture," Chapter One of Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 197J).  224 such  a  status  exercise. be  an  inherently  Similarly,  shorn  of  meaning  its  and  the  in  by  but  institution,  to  clarify  but  in  order  to  arrive  emerges  international  from  politics  complexity  and  essential  and  recalcitrant  subject-matter.  theoretically At  formulating,  a he  structure  of  content of path  to  thought  faithful  to  what  33. "The p. 32.  Theory  Might of  it  and  types  out  an  for  identifiable calls  International  "the  to  imposed  upon  these  be  particularly ranges  along  ("identifying, assumptions  attempts the  ambiguity  on  proceeds"). "to  latter,  content  extremes,  Politics  it  and  politics  intractable  its  regarding  and  of  its  to  transcend  against  ambitious  all  phrase  approach  theorizing  is  Bull  confusing  criticism  Bull  an  of  construction  international  others,  just  definition.  from  view,  involves  which, two  and  to  claims  involves  of  to  can,  is  knowledge.Skeptical  leave  between  his  One  questioning...general  discussion  firm  tradition  it and  extreme  never  a  assertions  the  speaks  not  final  abstracted  In  a minimum,  everyday opposite  middle  and  bold  its  conduct,  attempt  or  He  enough,  refining,  the  is  models  innovative.  continuum.  At  dynamics,  elegant  often  into  distorting  of  and  work  no  cannot  is  meanings  and  power  it  maintained.  Bull's  either  underlying  For  fixed  makes  of  without  ubiquitous  a  reading  retreat,  of  which  at  that  manipulation  temptations  be  this  order  What  to  ambiguous  balance  a principle  different  in  not  also  between  balance  the  history.  a goal  differentiate  of  and  stipulation  diplomatic  condition,  societal  problematic  concept  ambiguity  role  existential  does,  is  erect which  to  maintain  a  in  steering  a  may  be  more  anomalies 1919-1969,"  and op.  cit.,  225 anfractuosities them.  3  of  and  Finally,  this  section  of  symbiotic  relationship  society.  Bull's  Before  regards  argues theorizing. Realism,  and  This  is  in  the  E.H.  Carr's  that  "the a more  by  In  The time  has  central  consequent  guestions  at  been  to  of  normative  34. See Martin Might, Relations," op. cit., 35. "The Twenty Years Journal, Vol. 24, No.  Crisis  in  the  study  the  role  of policy,  of  influence  of  epiphenomena  1,  out  of  the  or  which  they  positivist  rather  than  relevance by  of  arguing  normative  element  international  actually  raising "  post-war  concludes  moral  of He  in  and  Bull  to  aspects.  contemporary  the  played  by  guestions  about  them  himself  never  engages  that  unlike  in  ; 3 f ^ ,  however, theory  ,  that  understanding  theories  the  restore  enough,  serve,"  out  subordinate  conditions  they  to  legitimacy  as  explanatory  Years  come  dominant  the  reviewing  as  the  international  pointed  ignored  ideals  purposes  be  normative  the  from  and  our  largely  to  toward  theory  enhance its  derives  order should  of  to  reference  place  the  is  and  1969,  it  role  both  recognizing  Interestingly  this,  values  Twenty  values...and  attempt  due  ulterior  ones.  on  have  discipline  relations...by  any  of  prescriptive  which  between  incuding  treats  the  posits  which  latter  them  normative  to  either  the  approach,  prescriptive  the  which  "explaining  bias  he  politics,  that  explores  theoretical  function,  international  briefly  commenting  the  primary  arise  than  Prescription  dimension  its  experience"  *  Explanation  Bull  international  per  Bull se,  "Western Values in p.96. Crisis Thirty Years 4 (August 1969),  claiming  International On," pp.632-633.  International  in  226  order,  the  meaning  subjective.  to  would  be,  recognizing  forward  by  [or]  on others by  compatibi1ity  with from  1y  states),  of  of  the  to  means  achieve  never  lead  to  detailed achieve conclusions  of  that the  his  goals  of  given that  for  confined  goals. can  be  represented  their he  notes,  Bull  "because  of  whom in  the  the the  of  very  is the  real  far  or  by  more  the  or he  the  means  holds as  that  "solutions"  for efficiency  dynamics and  of modest.  comprehensive  behaviour  regarding  and  the  a  state  of  Waltz,  reticent  constitutes of  purpose moral  enhancing  dictated  causes  Indeed,  put  order,  interest, to  ends  policy,  been  37  prescriptions foreign  work  statesmen." "  national  approach  his  change"  Hoffmann  statesmen  is  "just  because  just criteria  of  have  both  by  Bull  underlying  policy-relevant  any  is  system,  claims  explanation  the  pre-given  international  and  what  the  examines  As  Morgenthau,  function  that  generalization,  of  of  international  3  "rational"  of  some  for  and  them. *  faced  unlike  requirements  of  of  justice  of  situations  instruct  social  He  moral  choices  Consequently,  the  any  inherently  vision  devotes  demands  maintenance  endorsing  difficulty  whom its  of  World  is  analysis he  notions  tics  "private  Although  Third the  poli  philosophical  in  concrete  political  no  embodied  critical  to  world  and  of  is  any (p.78)  complexity  theory  in  offers  various  (particularly  refrains  he  it."  elaborating  general  justice  Therefore,  conduct for  of  either by "the  which  can  the  which  it  search or  might for "practical  36. See, for example, Hedley Bull, Justice in International Relations, Hagey Lectures, 12-13 October, 1983 (Waterloo, Ont.: University of Waterloo, 1984). 37. Stanley Hoffmann, "Hedley Bull and his Contribution to International Relations," op. cit., p.184.  227 advice"  is  world  a corrupting  politics,  which  activity  and  although  he concedes  defence  of  focuses value  not  the  containing  from  also  involves, of  "to  human  study  would  as  be  former,  if  only  aspects  of  his  contemporary that factors of are  broad  transnational the  for  kind  of  his  is  clear  from  hand,  in  trends  individual society  of  on  the  basis  provided  as  it whose  sustained  in  what of in  that  any  broader  that  Bull  reasons. his  Bull  contributed society  order  idea  international  one  that  order  no  contention  stem  of  out  the  implicit  be construed  politics,  world  that  instrumental  approach  have  international  as  an  by  general. the  latter  an  examination  the  present  (p.319)  it  historical of  has  entertaining  order,  international  control of  given  points  which to  he  intellectual  could  Bull  of  Furthermore,  international  unwarranted."  On the  that  that  incomplete  decline  decline.  of  an  represents  therefore  contributes  for  world  and  recommendations  a prerequisite  regarding  perspective  contribution  admits  Nevertheless, is  element the  make  goals  his  is  study  (pp.319-320)  recommendations, one  contemporary  understood  system,  society  Bull  the  one."  that  states  on only  international  in  properly  a practical  certain  derives  Since  element  to the which  states. and  international ambi does  of  society,  and  twentieth are  These  concomi  cultural  homogeneity  "that  underpinning  enjoyed  by  smaller  can  sources  of  series  of  institutions Some  the the  tant  the  the  century.  include  the  the  a whole of  beyond  the  prescriptive  analysis  erosion  Hons  value  The  identifies  the  order  of  these  immediate global  lack  of  provide  expansion any [itj  international  with  228 societies  of  states  in  economic  the  the and  cleavages  between  It  is  with  For the  great  politics.  which  Bull  as  the  early  with  in the  their  mutual  as  well  the of...  their  the  world,  order, as  the  of  mid-1970s,  that  not  early  "to  international  with  they  the it  shown  in  arguing  had  by  as  one  negated detente  regarded  much  a  another,  awareness  others whole." nor of  maintaining  difficulties their  roles  became  of  towards  growing was  1980s  society  relationship  Bull  regard,  period be  the  never  of  this  the  himself  other  life,  in  most  international  fulfil  the  his  and  during  is  in  collapse  superpowers 1970s  the  society,  Bull  of  ("duties")  despite fact  end  that  approach  actors  do  the  the  Bull's  although  prevent  had  radically  factors  and  none  responsibilities  international so,  to  their  international  then  late  ideological  from  of  powers  nurtured  conducting of  the  the  managers  rest  to  new  Western  deep  these  of  great  them,  of  1960s  of  argued,  Toward  carefully  responsible  Neither  the  the  many  systems.  agents  be  of  against  arising  last  also  to  in  and  institutions  function  conduct  claims,  from  if  critical  their  revolt  dimension  could  society.  increasingly  the  are  it  that  international  their  the  powers  can  their  political  to  attributes  institutions  that  and  all  far,  enfranchisement  powers  evaluative  Indeed, this  and  great  regard  of  the  domination; the  and  evident.  World,  economic  prescriptive  goes  Third  (p.317);  political  incompatible  only  past"  in  long-term  doing self-  interest.  38. "The Great Irresponsibles? Union, and World Order," op.  The cit.,  United p.437.  States,  the  Soviet  33  229 Two brief  points  criticisms.  First,  in  and  detente,  and  political  the  late  1940s  the  the  passing  references Europe  growing  he  the  and  the of  reaction  of  the  domestic  their  particular,  he  reserves  constructed  more  is  foreign  makes power of  of  the  the  problems.  criticisms  vis-  the  towards  leaders  strongest  he  American  criticisms  on  structural  although of  in  emphasis  stagnation  political  breakdown economic  long-term  continued  and  his  had  decline  his  the  post-war  far  Thus  relative  thrust  to  on  of  the  places  than  Bull's  analyses  States  system.  Japan,  superpowers  States,  1950s,  about  of  United  factors  the  some  fragility the  early  to  economy,  short-sighted  to  international  and  mentioning  contrast  political  in  worth  which  and  changes  Soviet  in  order  idiosyncratic  a-vis  are  In for  the  United  which through its bel1igerent statements and preparations for renewed mi 1itary intervention, its policies evidently fashioned to express moods rather than to achieve results, its inability to withstand domestic forces of chauvinism and greed, has done much to undermine its own position as the leader of the West and to accentuate the ugliness of the face it turns towards the Third World. * 3  Although  one  do  reflect  of  the  their  regard  Bull's  states'  at  present.  in  a  The  ruinous  Ibid.,  for  p.  447.  as  overly  insofar  as  the  a margin  policy, the  latter  arms  comments  that  possess  foreign  concern  such  belief  superpowers  greater  39.  can  race,  it  is  of  is  not  escalate  of  served  choice  their  in  the  on  them  international  when  they  political  incumbent  requirements  polemical,  they  ideological  continue  leadership conduct to  of  embody  order to  than engage  differences,  230 and  attempt  to  upset  the  balance  of  power  between  them  by  seeking  superiority. Second,  Bull  recommendations that  he  to  in  and  the  and  decline  Instead,  he  urging  increased  a  pitches  his  international  to and  to  order  remarks  some  at  kind  cooperation  independence  preserve  an  of  financial  more  efforts  policy  international  return  states,  continued  specific in  economic  industrialized  NATO,  stake  explicit the  level,  detente,  Western  within  today.  abstract  superpower  no  reverse  diagnoses  extremely  among  draws  the  for  Europe  Third  World's  system.  Conclusion As  with  Morgenthau  summary  of  Hedley  theory,  in  which  its  scholars  sustained  the  historical it.  attempt  to  theory,  which  nature  real  Bull's  ontological of  international prescriptive  he  international political implications  Bull's  of  practices  choice Grotian  of  work  defends  "Kantian the  politics,  of  help  heterogenous  a  approach  maintain  order  Bull's  international the  as  in  stressing  from  extremes  third  tradition"  Finally, Bull's  in  to  The  well  previous  distinctive  derives  against  as  a  between  the  and  idealism."  the  is  of  "classical  regarding  theory.  focus  links  Unlike  tradition  and  provided political  and  dimensions.  which  and  ism  nature  and  portrays  defence plural  the  thesis,  has  international  society,  the  ism"  chapter  international  this  maintain  "Hobbesian linked  on  turn,  described  this  customs In  this to  prescriptive  in  focus  Waltz,  approach  have  and  examined  its  within  Bull's I  descriptive  and  section  to  his  and the  brief  contested  nature summary  linked  of  these  of of to  the his  231  concern his  belief  status poli  for  of tical  the that  decline the  in  contemporary  superpowers,  traditional responsibi1ities  great  insofar  powers, as  were  custodians  international as not of  they  order, inherited  exercising international  and the  their order.  232  CHAPTER HEDLEY  The story Scotland, Edinburgh. shouldn't  BULL:  is sometimes and asked a "Oh sir," start from  EIGHT  A CRITICAL  ANALYSIS  told of the man who was lost somewhere farmer if he could tell him the way to the farmer replied, "if I were you, I here." Hedley  in  Bull  Introduction  At  the  approach  beginning  to  studying  approximation Morgenthau to  and  universal  the  attempt.  realm be  to or  attempt  of  Waltz.  ism  between  merits  the  cannot  be  relations  within  Prescriptively, I  have  imaginative international  states Bull  called idealism). political  is  by  of the  the  nostalgia,  think  of  describe contested  forces  and the  his separatism  to  enough.  to  either  True,  realism  cannot  of Bull  a is  freedom  that  autonomy  of  Leviathan.  characteristic  I  of  parameters  forms  complacency  theory,  that  pulls  necessity  were  closer  dialectical  central  Berki  a  Bull's  essentially  realistic  a  that  enough.  apposing  appealing  lacking  If  close  intellectual  between  avoids  than  whose  thought"  merely  realism  of  the  dialectic  is  attribution  politics,  suspended among  the  suggested  politics  not  recognition  of  the  but  a path  "tradition  I  of  Closer,  Bull's  to  study,  ideal-type  contained  sensitive  which  the  steer  this  international  international  safely  single  of  to  and apply he  would  of  ideal  utopianism his  ism (or  analysis also  select  to  233 Bull's  approach  said,  without  to  to  international  his  realism  in  conceived  -  Martin has  from  the  reification  which Bull I  will  major  -  the  chapter,  I  to  -  realism  judge  himself  the does  weaknesses  what  not  presuposses Wendt  in of  has  -  as  the  his  failure  his  analysis.  international a dialectic  recently  opposed  one  hand, -  "Truth"  that  this  not  merely  called  it  his  on  do  Second, society  as  relationship the  "social  can  and a mislabel  on  the  led other,  freedom.  In of  exercise.  either in  it a  of  view  side  of  this  way,  the  source  contributes synthetic  between structure"  It  Bull's  point  is  be  idealistic  establishes  this  of  descriptive  semantic  perspective to  it  redescription  transcendental  not  embodiment  and  a  due  merely  both  and  of  deviations  present  view,  show  does  But  the  First,  idealist  demonstrate,  understanding which  implications.  the  judge  argue is  than  himself  as  necessity  to  of  rather  of  the  want  shortcomings  point  reification will  I  Bull  be  presupposition  politics.  on  of  "traditions"  important  perspective  of,  must  trialectic  it  course,  to  a  grave  perspective  which  as  Wight's  international  distortions  Wight's  two  Of  it  Bull's  chapter,  beyond  transcendental  "revolutionism" short  it.  about  prescriptive, and  go  not,  called  same  this  Martin to  I  certain  "Brotian"  the  the  In  and  within  thought as  "realism"  quite  suffers.from  allegedly  deviations  not  transcend  himself  defend  this  is  thought  orienting  and  ism  approach  failure  But What  heterogeneity.  Bull's his  starting-point.  qualifications.  plural  ontological  that  a good  some  ontological of  as  from  it. and of  some  to  an  concept states of  as  and the  234 states  sytem.  x  As  Bhaskar  puts  unconditioned  creation  does  exist  independently  neither  completely  it  action completely  determined  prescriptive  New  or  necessity  as  politics.  Conversely,  the  unconstrained  is  the  the  social  Bull's realism  neither  And  (determinism)  realist,  this the  complacency  is  referent  ism)  individual nor  forms."  The  s  made  is  possible  by  this  a  possibi1ity  prescriptive  is the  the  given.  ism  reality  morality  thought  and  heterogenous.  purposive  is  ism  based  in  politics  realism of  ideal  Realism, of  and  international  of  international  dynamic  on  thinking"  referent.  attribute  based  in  "wishful  Furthermore, and  ideal  manifestation  dominant  that  instead  of  for or  transcendental  is  the  stances,  utopianism  as  but is  are  evaluative  presupposition  whole,  of  but  (reification). (individual  necessity  "Truth"  unitary  both  the  (voluntarism),  determines  of  dominant  by  putative  on  it  not  Mine  and  manifestations,  based  agency  is  3  Bottles,  contrast,  "society  presupposition.  Nostalgia  on  human of  by  dimension  ontological Old  of  i t ,  the action  conduct is  not  For  a the  acceptance toward  1. Alexander E. Wendt, "The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory," International Organization, Vol. 41, No. 3 (Summer 1997), pp. 335-370. 2. Roy Bhaskar, "Emergence, Explanation, and Emancipation," in Paul Secord, ed., Explaining Human Behaviour (Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1982), p.296. 3. David Dessler provides an excel lent conceptual analysis of the relationship between states and the "social structure" of the states system. As he points out, "rules are not concrete girders constraining action but, instead, are media through which action becomes possible and which action itself reproduces and transforms. Action is constrained and enabled by rules; the rules are the outcome as well as the medium of that action." David Dessler, "What's at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate?" International Organization, Vol. 43, No. 3 (Summer 1999), p. 467.  235 the  achievement  denotes  the  change  the  must  be  the  means  acceptance  limited,  Adequate  in  his  "would a  is  or  in  and of  a new  retort  to  True  the  enough. -  is  attribute  But  that  which  is  at  well of the  the  of  both  ideal level  to  the  of  ism  are  of  ideological  belief  and  to  this  abstract, in  between  polities as  and  Waltz  the  theorists,  we have  to  unless  one  abstraction  strives  exuberance nostalgia  to  Realism  imaginative  and  complacency. from  become  in  is  for  of  deviations  live  of  thought.  which  the  remarks  "critical"  -  and  is  of  conservative  failing  by  dialectic  mean  an  the  languishes  meanwhile  conduct  youthful  senility  by  not  is  of  neither  surrender  and  the  of  is; does  hallmark  thought  as  it  work  and  subject-matter.  which  idealists,  his  "living"  we have  avoiding as  as  realism  partial,  the  it  achieved,  the  reinvention  Imaginative  world  be  Thus  only  being  resolve  the  of  cannot  recognition  realistic; to  criticisms  to  Thought  not  through  world.  transcend  ty  stranded  freedom  action  subject-matter;  itself."*  designed  also  reality.  to  "the  escape  is  realism  then,  is  the  understanding  complacency  ends  "adequate"  understanding  action  forms  the  which  necessi  These  of  thought  dead  idealism  of  identity  of  can  maturity,  or  Descriptively,  almost  the  that  terms  contradiction  hand,  proposition  them.  r