Traditional Approaches to Security Marx VS Weber Social science can be predicable VS every event in history is unique Why we talk about theory: - Help to explain ow the world works below the surface phenomena - Helps us expose and analyze assumptions about how the world works - Also: - theories are used in foreign policy discussion - provide academics with a common language - help us analyze the transformation of the Asia-Pacific Analyzing security studies: Framework analysis: - The referent object (who?) - The scope of security (what?) - The approach to security (how?) Security Order - It is present when "a group of states conscious of certain common interests and common values .. conceive themselves to be bound by a common set of rules in their relations with one another" - Rules are important: - They make a predictable and stable environment - They may be codified or inferred from state practice - They must be acknowledged and followed Traditional approaches to security Realism: - emphasis on the role of power (military) - Classical realism - Structural realism/neorealism - Offensive realism - Defensive realism Liberalism: - ideas are important in shaping international affairs, and commerce is important in peaceful relations Wilson is influential to this theory - Economic liberalism - Institution/neoliberalism - Democratic peace thesis *these are positivist theories
What theory do you lean towards? a. Human nature is bad b. Human nature is calculating c. Human nature is basically good Realist theory assumptions - Whose security? - the nation-sate is the dominant political community, the most powerful actor in the international system, and the primary referent of security - States are assumed to be "black-boxes" - The core aim is survival of the nation-state in the international system - Characterized by anarchy - Power - sates pursue power from materials, etc. - Sates are rational actors, take into account how other states will react Seeking security FROM the threat of armed attack and coercion Classical realism - Key thinkers - Morgenthau and E.H Carr - Core assumption: - the desire for power is rooted in the flawed nature of humanity - How to secure? - because the international system is defined by anarchy, states aim to increase their power in order to increase their security - war is a constant possibility - this limits opportunities for cooperation between sates Structural Realism/Neorealism - Key thinkers - Kenneth Waltz - Core assumptions: - Material factors (distribution of power) are more important than ideational factors (leaders motivations/human nature) - the structure of the system is more important than the character of individual units - because states engage in self-help in the anarchical international system this leads to a "security dilemma": What one state may do to improve its own security, may lead to others feeling that their security is being threatened - so competition conflict and war are a constant possibility - one states gain is another's loss - How to secure/ what systems emerge? - instruments of security: