What are the major schools of international relations theory? What are the core views of each school of thought

1. There are three main schools of thought in the theory of international relations:

(1) The realist school of thought on international security.

(2), the idealist and neoliberal institutionalist view of international security.

(3), Constructivist view of security.

2. The core views of the three schools of thought:

(1) The realist school of thought on international security

Based on the great importance it attaches to the issue of international security, realism has been engaged in a long and in-depth reflection on the nature of international politics as well as the issue of war and peace.

In the view of the realist school, international security is scarce in nature, and the problem of international security can only be mitigated but not finally solved, and the most important means of obtaining security is to have strong power.

The relationship between states is therefore one that revolves around the struggle for power.

Anarchy becomes the basic starting point for understanding international politics, and the security dilemma is a reality that every state must face.

The main schools of realism are classical realism represented by Hans Morgenthau, neorealism represented by Kenneth Waltz and Robert Gilpin, and offensive realism represented by John Mearsheimer.

Hans Morgenthau lived through two world wars in his life, and his harrowing experiences of the wars made him always insist on the view that human nature is evil. He believed that it was impossible to fundamentally change the sinful nature that existed in man himself, and therefore it was impossible to build a safe international society.

In such an environment, people often feel precarious, and in order to be safe, they must protect themselves, and in order to do so, they must acquire power. And the power of the state is an extension and enlargement of this personal power.

In his view, power, primarily military power, was the goal of State behavior. In the international community, the foreign behavior of states is motivated by the pursuit of power.

The constant pursuit of power results in mutual suspicion and mistrust in the process of interactions between countries, leading to the "security dilemma" and "zero-sum game", the logical outcome of which is international conflict.

The most important means of obtaining national security is to have strong military power.

Kenneth Waltz emphasized that the world was in a state of anarchy, and that the first consideration of the state in an anarchic condition was survival.

He argued that in such a system the purpose of the state is not to gain and maintain power, but to try to ensure survival, and that bipolar parity is conducive to reducing the danger of war.

Robert Gilpin, another representative of neorealism, argued that in addition to international political aspects, international economic aspects should also be taken into account, especially in the wave of globalization, which is becoming more and more dominant.

In terms of international security, he emphasized that security can only be better obtained by upgrading the overall strength, including the country's economic power.

John Mearsheimer, a representative of offensive realism, emphasized that power is the root of great power politics, that great powers compete with each other in pursuit of power, that the anarchic character of the international system and the inequitable distribution of power lead to international conflicts, and that only by obtaining the maximization of power can one ensure one's own security as much as possible.

He also put forward five basic assumptions:

1. The international system is an anarchic system.

2. Great powers have the military power to harm and destroy each other.

3. States can never confirm the intentions of another state.

4. Survival is the first goal.

5. States are rational actors.

It can be seen that offensive realism is taking the basic proposition of realism to the extreme, that international security is extremely scarce, that international conflict is inevitable, and that only by wielding maximum power can one guarantee one's own security.

The logic of the realist school of international security is the "security dilemma".

In a state of anarchy, there is a high degree of suspicion between states, which makes them always expect the worst in each other's behavior.

International security is scarce, and an increase in armaments by one country in order to obtain security will inevitably cause another country to feel threatened, which in turn will cause the other country to increase its armaments by more and more, ultimately making an arms race unavoidable.

(2) Idealistic and neo-liberal institutionalist view of international security

"The strong can do what they want, and the weak suffer what they want" is still the real feeling of the state on the issue of security.

Self-help, alliance, and collective security have become the ways for countries to maintain their own security. The Idealist school of thought believes that, in addition to war, the state can also realize its own security through peaceful means.

With World War I as the demarcation point, the idealist tradition of international relations began to shift to what is now known as neoliberal institutionalism.

Idealism and neoliberal institutionalism focus more on collective security and interdependence than realism.

U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, a representative of the idealist school, believed that the establishment of international organizations, sound international law and international conventions could ensure peace and security.

On the issue of international security, the school put forward three important theoretical assumptions:

1. People are good by nature, and the reason why wars break out is because the lucrative nature of waging wars leads some people's conscience astray.

Once the conscience is awakened and the misunderstanding is removed, the world is saved.

2. The fundamental interests of sovereign states are harmonized and international security is abundant.

End secret diplomacy and establish an international organization (League of Nations) to resolve all kinds of differences and conflicts.

3. State sovereignty is not unlimited and international security must be guaranteed by a system of collective national security.

In the 1970s, there was a great divergence and combination in international relations, and at one time there was talk of the decline of the U.S. national power.

In response, the neoliberal institutionalist school represented by Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye began to launch a strong challenge to realism.

Neoliberal institutionalism argues that while conflict is a product of the anarchic nature of international society, international conflict can be suppressed and that force is not an effective policy tool.

Members of the international community can achieve international cooperation through the establishment of international organizations, the development of international institutions, and so on.

Material power does not play an absolute role in maintaining world stability; non-material factors such as institutions must be added.

The significance of institutions for international security lies in:

1. In a state of anarchy, there is a high degree of mistrust among members of the international community,

and the establishment of an international system and the creation of an international organization can enhance the understanding among members and promote communication and cooperation among them. Thus reducing this sense of mistrust in anarchy.

2. In an interdependent international society, the cost of war is getting higher and higher, and the statute effect of the international system established between international actors can reduce the chance of the outbreak of war and strengthen the cooperation between countries.

In short, international regimes that operate on the basis of reciprocity are, at the very least, an important force for peacekeeping.

The collective security system is what idealism and neoliberal institutionalism have been advocating.

The term "collective security" refers to "the legally binding and treaty-based commitment of all states and regions to deter and counter acts of aggression wherever and whenever they occur.

"The League of Nations and the United Nations are examples of the implementation of international collective security. The "international security dilemma" can be alleviated through a system of collective security, which shifts the task and responsibility of preventing any one state to every state.

But in the practice of collective security, there are often such problems: collective security is unable to implement effective sanctions against the big powers, but also unable to deal with the allies or the big powers to support the country, in the face of aggression and aggression, member states on whether or how to intervene to reach a consensus on whether or how to intervene, and so on.

(3) The Constructivist View of Security

The neo-liberal institutionalist school's emphasis on the international system has broken through the hard core of realism, which is material power, and brought institutions and norms, which are non-material contents belonging to the social sphere, into the study of the international relations system, and made them the most important variables of study.

The constructivist school, then, has elevated the role of immaterial factors in international relations to an unprecedented level.

Alexander Winter's 1992 paper, "Anarchy is State-Made: The Social Construction of Power Politics," has been recognized by academics as a manifesto for a social constructivist theory of international relations.

Constructivism gives a different reading of the problem of international security: that international cooperation is entirely possible, and that international cooperation is facilitated by an international political culture, which in turn is constructed by interactions between states.

Anarchy is not the first impulse in international relations, because anarchy itself is constructed by the members of the international community in their mutual practical activities.

Anarchy itself has a variety of connotations: it can be a Hobbesian cultural state of hostile conflict, a Lockean cultural state of competitive ****survival, or a Kantian cultural state of friendship and cooperation.

It fundamentally depends on how members of the international community construct and interact with each other.

Intersubjective practices construct international political culture, concepts, and culture determines the identity and behavior of international social actors.

Kantian culture, characterized by peace and friendship, will fundamentally eliminate international conflicts and create international peace. The trend in the development of international society is toward the Kantian model.

Constructivism also holds that the "security dilemma" is a product of inter-subjective mutual construction, and can therefore be deconstructed. The deconstruction of the "security dilemma" is through the construction of an international "security ****-symbol".

This "security ****some" is based on the international political culture of "one country for all, all for one country".

By constructing the international "security ****some", the vicious circle of one country's security for another country's insecurity is broken, and the relativity of national security is transformed into absoluteness.

Your security is my security, in sharp contrast to the "security dilemma" of "your security is my threat".

National security is no longer competitive, but cooperative.

Through the international "security ****some" can effectively resolve international conflicts to achieve international harmony.

Extended information:

Representative figures and writings of the various schools of contemporary Western international relations theory:

New realism: Waltz, "International Political Theory. The.

Neoliberalism: Keohane, Josephine, Power and Interdependence, After Hegemony.

Constructivism: Winter, A Social Theory of International Politics.

References

Baidu Encyclopedia-Realist School

Baidu Encyclopedia-Theory of International Relations