Strengths and Weaknesses of Neorealism, Neoliberalism and Constructivism
Strengths and Weaknesses of Neorealism, Neoliberalism and Constructivism
Introduction
Our world since its origination has been a ‘hotbed’ of activity. Activity in the sense, we humans have been showing activeness both mentally and physically, which have transformed our globe from an archaic one to an advanced one. That advancement is evident in every sphere of our life, as well as in the ‘sphere’, we live in. In addition, that advancement or development is seen in one of the important activities of the ‘sphere’, the activity of politics. With the advancement, humans spread out to new territories. In course of time that territories became cities, states, and eventually countries. Along with this evolution of humans and territories, the political setup, which ruled villages, also evolved and new political setups came into being, to rule cities, provinces or states and importantly countries. So, this evolution and establishment of different countries and their government setups have lead to the formulation of various theories and ideas by renowned thinkers and researchers, constituting under the International Relations domain. International Relations or IR for short, focuses on the relations between the countries of the world and how those relationship is handled from the diplomatic and military perspective. This handling of relationship under IR is further divided into three main theories, Neorealism, Neoliberalism and Constructivism. So, this paper will focus on these three theories and will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of Neorealism, Neoliberalism and Constructivism as theoretical approaches to the study of International Relations
Neorealism Neorealism or in other words structural realism was firstly formulated by Kenneth Waltz in his book, Theory of International Politics. The basis of this theory is that, the international political structure is defined by anarchy, which directly correlates to a decentralized setup. That is,
Introduction
Our world since its origination has been a ‘hotbed’ of activity. Activity in the sense, we humans have been showing activeness both mentally and physically, which have transformed our globe from an archaic one to an advanced one. That advancement is evident in every sphere of our life, as well as in the ‘sphere’, we live in. In addition, that advancement or development is seen in one of the important activities of the ‘sphere’, the activity of politics. With the advancement, humans spread out to new territories. In course of time that territories became cities, states, and eventually countries. Along with this evolution of humans and territories, the political setup, which ruled villages, also evolved and new political setups came into being, to rule cities, provinces or states and importantly countries. So, this evolution and establishment of different countries and their government setups have lead to the formulation of various theories and ideas by renowned thinkers and researchers, constituting under the International Relations domain. International Relations or IR for short, focuses on the relations between the countries of the world and how those relationship is handled from the diplomatic and military perspective. This handling of relationship under IR is further divided into three main theories, Neorealism, Neoliberalism and Constructivism. So, this paper will focus on these three theories and will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of Neorealism, Neoliberalism and Constructivism as theoretical approaches to the study of International Relations
Neorealism Neorealism or in other words structural realism was firstly formulated by Kenneth Waltz in his book, Theory of International Politics. The basis of this theory is that, the international political structure is defined by anarchy, which directly correlates to a decentralized setup. That is,
References: Baylis, J and Smith, S, 2001, The Globalization of World Politics, New York: Oxford University Press Best, A and Hanhimaki, J M, 2008, International History of the Twentieth Century and Beyond, New York: Routledge Brown, M. E, 1998, Theories of war and peace, Massachusetts: MIT Press, Erdem, E. I, 2004, Power and Identity in Flux: American Policy towards the Middle East. Turkish Journal of International Relations, Vol.3, No.4, 132-49 Harvey, D ,2005, A Brief History of Neoliberalism, New York: Oxford University Press Jackson and Sorensen, 2007, Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. New York: Oxford University Press