Scribd
Upload
38 views14 pages

EIR Constructivism 2023

The document discusses constructivism as an approach in international relations that views states as social entities whose interests and identities emerge through interaction. It argues that interests are shaped by ideas and identities, rather than being fixed. The document uses ASEAN to illustrate how constructivism sees security communities developing through shared understandings and norms, allowing it to explain ASEAN's endurance where rational theories fall short. It outlines key constructivist thinkers like Wendt and distinguishes constructivism from rational theories in how it conceptualizes actors and the relationship between agents and structures.

Uploaded by

Fagbile Tomiwa
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
38 views14 pages

EIR Constructivism 2023

The document discusses constructivism as an approach in international relations that views states as social entities whose interests and identities emerge through interaction. It argues that interests are shaped by ideas and identities, rather than being fixed. The document uses ASEAN to illustrate how constructivism sees security communities developing through shared understandings and norms, allowing it to explain ASEAN's endurance where rational theories fall short. It outlines key constructivist thinkers like Wendt and distinguishes constructivism from rational theories in how it conceptualizes actors and the relationship between agents and structures.

Uploaded by

Fagbile Tomiwa
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 14

Constructivism: Ideas, Interests and

Identity in International Relations


The puzzle!

Why has ASEAN endured and


expanded as an international
organisation?

What is the ‘glue’ that holds


ASEAN together?
Learning Outcomes

• Understand the key principles of


social constructivism and how it
represents a challenge the
‘rational’ theories of
International Relations
• Understand how we can apply
social constructivism through an
analysis of ‘security
communities’
Introducing
constructivism

• Hugely diverse school of thought. ‘One would be hard pressed to find a


textbook on International Relations (IR)
• Arose in the wake of the end of the Cold of the 1980s that had a single
War, which neo-realism and neo- paragraph, let alone a single sentence,
liberalism did not predict. in which allowance was made for the
possibility of the Cold War and the
• An approach not a substantive theory Soviet Union coming to an end.’
(Rosenau 2003, p.10)
• Gives us a different way of viewing
(ontology) about how the basic units of
the international system interact.
Rational and Social
Theories

Rational Theories: Social Theories (Reflexivist)

• Humans / states behave • Humans / states behave


rationally according to social
• Weigh up material interests conventions
and select preferences • Interests are based on
• Interests are pre-determined identities and ideas
(fixed) • Interests are not pre-
• Rational egoists determined (fixed)
Rational Theories

Neo-realism: Neo-liberalism
• Neo-realists argue that because of • Neo-liberals by contrast argue that
anarchy and the security dilemma international institutions can mitigate
states will be interested in relative not the security dilemma.
absolute gains. • Why? They provide information and
• This means that states, despite verification (trust?)
potential benefits, are unlikely to • Complex interdependence =
cooperate. costly/irrational to defect.

In common:
• Rationalist theories see states as having pre-given
interests
• The identity of the actors is fixed and plays no
bearing on their interaction.
• Predictive and easy to formulate hypotheses
Social constructivism

• Social (reflexivist) ontology Key point:


The sovereign state and anarchy
• Distinction between ‘brute facts’ about the are something humans have
world and ‘social facts’ made. They are ideas or a
collection of ‘rules’ that we all
• Social facts are ideas, norms, rules that we hold
recognise (intersubjective
collectively to be true. understandings).
• States, international anarchy and international
institutions are examples of social facts in IR.
• Social facts = Institutions – ‘fundamentally
cognitive entities that do not exist apart from
actors’ ideas about how the world works’
(Wendt 1992, p.136).
Key arguments

• Actors’ interests cannot be assumed in State identity and interests fluctuate depending
advance of their interaction. States, like us, on who they are interacting with:
are social entities.
e.g. the US presents itself and behaves
• States’ interests are shaped by their identity differently towards the UK than towards Iran.
– which is in turn a product of states’ social
interaction. The ‘meaning’ of the balance of power
• Ideas can be just as powerful as material between the US and these states is radically
capabilities, and can shape actors interests different.
and identities In sum: interaction identity interests.
Key proponent:
Alexander Wendt

• ‘Anarchy is what states make of it!’ (Wendt


1992)
• There is no ‘logic’ of anarchy that forces states
to behave as if in a self-help system; self-help Wendt’s three forms of anarchy:
not a logical or causal consequence of anarchy
1. Hobbesian (enemies) (Saudi
• The self-help system = the result of state
practices and can be changed Arabia and Iran?)

• No such thing as an automatic security 2. Lockean (rivals) (states of


dilemma! UK does not fear French nuclear Southeast Asia?)
weapons + EU = anarchy but doesn't necessarily
produce security dilemma
3. Kantian (friends) (states of
Europe?)
Structure and Agency

• Classical liberal and realist theories argue that state


behaviour shapes the identity of the international
system
• Neo-realist and neo-liberal theories argue that the
international system shapes state behaviour.
• For constructivists - agents and structures are mutually
constituted (they depend on each other).
Collective Defence or
Security?

Collective Defence (Realist framework): Collective security (Liberal framework):

• An exclusionary arrangement of like-minded • Prior agreement on the willingness of all parties to


participate in the collective punishment of aggression
states.
against any member state.
• Reciprocal obligations of assistance during • No prior identification of enemy or threat.
military contingencies. • A collective physical capacity to punish aggression.
• Significant military interoperability and
integration.
The development of
security communities?

• A security community exists where a


group of states have developed long-term
habits of peaceful interaction and
therefore rule out the use of force as a
way of settling disputes.
• Security communities emerge when states
develop shared understandings and
common values - 'habits of dialogue' that
are inclusive.
• liberal security communities can exist just
as can illiberal security communities.
Why / how is ASEAN still here?

Failure for realists and liberals to explain


the survival and expansion of ASEAN

Constructivism = development of a
security community based on:

• Southeast Asia’s colonial legacy


• State-building and ethno-cultural
nationalism
• Reinscribing the key norms of ‘non-
intervention’ and ‘non-interference’

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy