Introduction: Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511811869.001

1 - Introduction: Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012

Jeffrey W. Taliaferro ,

Steven E. Lobell and

Norrin M. Ripsman

Edited by

Steven E. Lobell ,

Norrin M. Ripsman and

Jeffrey W. Taliaferro

Show author details

Jeffrey W. Taliaferro: Affiliation:
Tufts University
Steven E. Lobell: Affiliation:
University of Utah
Norrin M. Ripsman: Affiliation:
Concordia University
Steven E. Lobell: Affiliation:
University of Utah
Norrin M. Ripsman: Affiliation:
Concordia University, Montréal
Jeffrey W. Taliaferro: Affiliation:
Tufts University, Massachusetts

Book contents

Get access

Summary

How do states, or more specifically the decision-makers and institutions that act on their behalf, assess international threats and opportunities? What happens when there is disagreement about the nature of foreign threats? Who ultimately decides the range of acceptable and unacceptable foreign policy alternatives? To what extent, and under what conditions, can domestic actors bargain with state leaders and influence foreign or security policies? How and under what circumstances will domestic factors impede states from pursuing the types of strategies predicted by balance of power theory and balance of threat theory? Finally, how do states go about extracting and mobilizing resources necessary to implement foreign and security policies? These are important questions that cannot be answered by the dominant neorealist or liberal theories of international politics.

Consider the following: in 1945, and again in 1990, the United States emerged victorious from a major war or an enduring rivalry. In each postwar period, officials in Washington faced the daunting task of assessing and responding to new and unfamiliar international threats. However, the resulting shifts in grand strategy were not predictable solely based upon an analysis of relative power distributions or the dynamics of American domestic politics at the time.

The bipolar distribution of power following the Second World War does not explain why the United States embarked upon a grand strategy of containment, which eventually mixed both realpolitik and liberal internationalist ends and means, over the alternative of competitive cooperation with the Soviet Union through a sphere-of-influence arrangement in Europe.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Neoclassical Realism, the State, and Foreign Policy , pp. 1 - 41

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811869.001 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Wohlforth, William C., “The Stability of a Unipolar World,” International Security 21, no. 1 (summer 1999), pp. 1–36Google Scholar

Brooks, Stephen G. and Wohlforth, William C., “American Primacy in Perspective,” Foreign Affairs 81, no. 4 (July/August 2002), pp. 20–33CrossRef Google Scholar

Wohlforth, , “US Strategy in a Unipolar World,” in Ikenberry, G. John, ed., America Unrivaled: The Future of the Balance of Power (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002), pp. 98–120Google Scholar

Waltz, , Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979), pp. 39, 48–9, 58–9, 72, 78, 87, and 121–3Google Scholar

Waltz, , “Reflections on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critics,” in Keohane, Robert O., ed., Neorealism and its Critics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), pp. 328, 339–40, and 343Google Scholar

Layne, Christopher, Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the Present (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Dueck, Colin, Reluctant Crusaders: Power, Culture, and Change in American Grand Strategy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Larson, Deborah Welch, Origins of Containment: A Psychological Explanation (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, 1985), p. 3Google Scholar

Jervis, Robert, System Effects: Complexity in Political and Social Life (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), pp. 118–22Google Scholar

Friedberg, Aaron L., In the Shadow of the Garrison State: America's Anti-Statism and its Cold War Grand Strategy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000), esp. chap. 2CrossRef Google Scholar

Mearsheimer, John J., Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: W. W. Norton, 2001)Google Scholar

Mearsheimer, , “Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War,” International Security 15, no. 1 (summer 1990), pp. 5–56CrossRef Google Scholar

Mearsheimer, , “The False Promise of International Institutions,” International Security 19, no. 3 (winter 1994/5), pp. 5–49CrossRef Google Scholar

Labs, Eric J., “Beyond Victory: Offensive Realism and the Expansion of War Aims,” Security Studies 6, no. 4 (summer 1997), pp. 1–49CrossRef Google Scholar

Jervis, Robert, “Understanding the Bush Doctrine,” Political Science Quarterly 118, no. 3 (fall 2003), pp. 365–88CrossRef Google Scholar

Kaufmann, Chaim, “Threat Inflation and the Failure of the Marketplace for Ideas: The Selling of the Iraq War,” International Security 29, no. 4 (summer 2004), pp. 5–48CrossRef Google Scholar

Dueck, Colin, “Ideas and Alternatives in US Grand Strategy, 2000–2004,” Review of International Studies 30, no. 3 (October 2004), pp. 511–35CrossRef Google Scholar

Monten, Jonathan, “The Roots of the Bush Doctrine: Power, Nationalism, and Democracy Promotion in Grand Strategy,” International Security 29, no. 4 (spring 2005), pp. 112–56CrossRef Google Scholar

Thucydides, , History of the Peloponnesian War, trans. Warner, Rex (1954; reprint New York: Penguin, 1988), p. 402Google Scholar

Rose, Gideon, “Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy,” World Politics 51, no. 1 (October 1998), pp. 144–77CrossRef Google Scholar

Brown, Michael E. et al., eds., The Perils of Anarchy: Contemporary Realism and International Security (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995)

Christensen, Thomas J., Useful Adversaries: Grand Strategy, Domestic Mobilization, and Sino-American Conflict, 1947–1958 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996)Google Scholar

Schweller, Randall L., Deadly Imbalances: Tripolarity and Hitler's Strategy for World Conquest (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998)Google Scholar

Wohlforth, William C., The Elusive Balance: Power and Perceptions during the Cold War (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993)Google Scholar

Zakaria, Fareed, From Wealth to Power: The Unusual Origins of America's World Role (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998)Google Scholar

Rose, identifies Friedberg, Aaron L., The Weary Titan: Britain and the Experience of Relative Decline, 1895–1905 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988)Google Scholar

Leffler, Melvin P., A Preponderance of Power: National Security, the Truman Administration, and the Cold War (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1992)Google Scholar

George, Alexander L. and Bennett, Andrew, Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005), pp. 113–20Google Scholar

Trachtenberg, Marc I., “The Question of Realism: A Historian's View,” Security Studies 13, no. 1 (autumn 2003), pp. 156–94CrossRef Google Scholar

Putnam, Robert D., “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two Level Games,” International Organization 42, no. 3 (summer 1988), pp. 427–61CrossRef Google Scholar

Schweller, Randall L., Unanswered Threats: Political Constraints on the Balance of Power (Princeton, NJ: University Press, 2006)Google Scholar

Lobell, Steven E., The Challenge of Hegemony: Grand Strategy, Trade, and Domestic Politics (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2003)CrossRef Google Scholar

Davidson, Jason W., “The Roots of Revisionism: Fascist Italy, 1922–39,” Security Studies 11, no. 4 (summer 2002), pp. 125–59CrossRef Google Scholar

Davidson, , The Origins of Revisionist and Status Quo States (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006)CrossRef Google Scholar

Taliaferro, Jeffrey W., Balancing Risks: Great Power Intervention in the Periphery (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2004)Google Scholar

Edelstein, David M., “Managing Uncertainty: Beliefs about Intentions and the Rise of Great Powers,” Security Studies 12, no. 1 (autumn 2002), pp. 1–40CrossRef Google Scholar

Schweller, Randall L., “Bandwagoning for Profit: Bringing the Revisionist State Back In,” International Security 19, no. 1 (summer 1994), pp. 72–107CrossRef Google Scholar

Schweller, , “The Twenty Years' Crisis, 1919–39: Why a Concert Didn't Arise,” in Elman, Colin and Elman, Miriam Fendius, eds., Bridges and Boundaries: Historians, Political Scientists, and the Study of International Relations (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001), pp. 181–212Google Scholar

Byman, Daniel L. and Pollack, Kenneth M., “Let Us Now Praise Great Men: Bringing the Statesman Back In,” International Security 25, no. 4 (spring 2001), pp. 107–46CrossRef Google Scholar

Ripsman, Norrin M., Peacemaking by Democracies: The Effects of State Autonomy on the Post-World War Settlements (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2002)Google Scholar

Ripsman, , “The Curious Case of German Rearmament: Democracy and Foreign Security Policy,” Security Studies 10, no. 2 (winter 2001), pp. 1–47CrossRef Google Scholar

McAllister, James, No Exit: America and the German Problem, 1943–1954 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 2002)Google Scholar

Brooks, Stephen G. and Wohlforth, William C. “Power, Globalization, and the End of the Cold War: Re-Evaluating a Landmark Case for Ideas,” International Security 25, no. 3 (winter 2000/1), pp. 5–53CrossRef Google Scholar

Cha, Victor D., “Abandonment, Entrapment, and Neoclassical Realism in Asia: The United States, Japan, and Korea,” International Studies Quarterly 44, no. 2 (June 2000), pp. 261–91CrossRef Google Scholar

Cha, , “Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Peninsula,” International Security 27, no. 1 (summer 2002), pp. 40–78CrossRef Google Scholar

Sterling-Folker, Jennifer, Theories of International Cooperation and the Primacy of Anarchy: Explaining US International Monetary Policy-Making after Bretton Woods (New York: State University of New York Press, 2002)Google Scholar

Sterling-Folker, Jennifer, “Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading,” International Studies Review 4, no. 1 (spring 2002), pp. 73–97CrossRef Google Scholar

Sterling-Folker, , “Realist-Constructivism and Morality,” International Studies Review 6, no. 2 (June 2004), pp. 341–43CrossRef Google Scholar

Schweller, Randall L., “The Progressive Power of Neoclassical Realism,” in Elman, Colin and Elman, Miriam Fendius, eds., Progress in International Relations Theory: Appraising the Field (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003), pp. 311–47Google Scholar

Schweller, , “New Realist Research on Alliances: Refining, Not Refuting Waltz's Balancing Proposition,” American Political Science Review 91, no. 4 (December 1997), pp. 927–30CrossRef Google Scholar

Wohlforth, William C., “Measuring Power – and the Power of Theories,” in Vasquez, John A. and Elman, Colin, eds., Realism and the Balancing of Power: A New Debate (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2003), pp. 250–79Google Scholar

Sterling-Folker, Jennifer, “Realist Environment, Liberal Process, and Domestic-Level Variables,” International Studies Quarterly 41, no. 1 (March 1997), pp. 1–25CrossRef Google Scholar

Doyle, Michael, “Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs, part 1,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 12, no. 3 (1983), pp. 205–35Google Scholar

Russett, Bruce M., Grasping the Democratic Peace (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993)Google Scholar

Elman, Miriam Fendius, “Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, and Theories of Democratic Peace,” Security Studies 9, no. 4 (summer 2000), pp. 91–126CrossRef Google Scholar

Peterson, Susan, “How Democracies Differ: Public Opinion, State Structure, and the Lessons of the Fashoda Crisis,” Security Studies 5, no. 1 (autumn 1995), pp. 3–37CrossRef Google Scholar

Ripsman, Norrin M., “Moving Beyond (or Beneath) the Democratic Peace Theory: Rediscovering Intermediate-Level Institutions in the Foreign Security Policy Literature,” in Lecours, Andre, ed., New Institutionalism: Theory and Analysis (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005), pp. 301–18Google Scholar

Moravcsik, Andrew, “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics,” International Organization 51, no. 4 (autumn 1997), pp. 513–53, esp. pp. 516–20CrossRef Google Scholar

Elman, Miriam Fendius, “The Need for a Qualitative Test of the Democratic Peace Theory,” in Elman, Miriam Fendius, ed., Paths to Peace: Is Democracy the Answer? (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997), pp. 1–57Google Scholar

Levi, Margaret, “The State of the Study of the State,” in Katznelson, Ira and Milner, Helen V., eds., Political Science: The State of the Discipline (New York: W. W. Norton), pp. 33–55

Buzan, Barry, Jones, Charles, and Little, Richard, The Logic of Anarchy: Neorealism to Structural Realism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993), pp. 114–31Google Scholar

Cox, Robert W., “Social Forces, States, and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory,” in Keohane, Neorealism and its Critics, pp. 204–54

Ruggie, John Gerard, “Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis,” in Keohane, Neorealism and its Critics, pp. 131–57

Spruyt, Hendrik, The Sovereign State and its Competitors: An Analysis of Systems Change (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994)Google Scholar

Wendt, Alexander, “Anarchy is What States Make of It,” International Organization 42, no. 2 (spring 1992), pp. 391–426CrossRef Google Scholar

Doyle, Michael W., Ways of War and Peace: Realism, Liberalism, and Socialism (New York: W. W. Norton, 1997), p. 43Google Scholar

Carr, Edward Hallett, The Twenty Years' Crisis, 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations (New York: Harper and Row, 1964), pp. 64–5Google Scholar

Schweller, Randall L., “Realism and the Present Great Power System: Growth and Positional Conflict over Scarce Resources,” in Kapstein, Ethan B. and Mastanduno, Michael, eds., Unipolar Politics: Realism and State Strategies after the Cold War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), chap. 2Google Scholar

Markey, Daniel, “Prestige and the Origins of War: Returning to Realism's Roots,” Security Studies 8, no. 4 (summer 1999), pp. 126–72CrossRef Google Scholar

Gilpin, Robert G., “No One Loves a Political Realist,” in Frankel, Benjamin, Realism: Restatements and Renewal (London: Frank Cass, 1996), pp. 3–26, esp. pp. 6–8Google Scholar

Gilpin, , “The Richness of the Tradition of Political Realism,” in Keohane, Neorealism and its Critics, pp. 304–8

Spirtas, Michael, “A House Divided: Tragedy and Evil in Realist Theory,” in Frankel, Realism: Restatements and Renewal, pp. 385–423

Taliaferro, Jeffrey W., “Security Seeking under Anarchy: Defensive Realism Revisited,” International Security 25, no. 3 (winter 2000/1), pp. 128–61CrossRef Google Scholar

Jervis, Robert, “Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the Debate,” International Security 24, no. 1 (summer 1999), pp. 42–63CrossRef Google Scholar

Brooks, Stephen G., “Dueling Realisms,” International Organization 51, no. 3 (summer 1997), pp. 445–77CrossRef Google Scholar

Gilpin, Robert, War and Change in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981)CrossRef Google Scholar

Gilpin, , “Theory of Hegemonic War,” in Rotberg, Robert I. and Rabb, Theodore K., eds., Origins and Prevention of Major War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp. 15–37Google Scholar

Organski, A. F. K., World Politics (New York: Knopf, 1958)Google Scholar

Kugler, Jacek and Organski, A. F. K., The War Ledger (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980)Google Scholar

DiCicco, Jonathan M. and Levy, Jack S., “The Power Transition Research Program: A Lakatosian Analysis,” in Elman and Elman, Progress in International Relations Theory, pp. 109–57

Ashley, Richard K., “The Poverty of Neorealism,” in Keohane, Neorealism and its Critics, pp. 255–300

Smith, Michael Joseph, Realist Thought from Weber to Kissinger (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1986)Google Scholar

Waltz, Kenneth N., “Realist Thought and Neorealist Theory,” in Rothstein, Robert L., ed., The Evolution of Theory in International Relations (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1992), pp. 31–8Google Scholar

Tellis, Ashley J., “Reconstructing Political Realism: The Long March Toward Scientific Theory,” in Frankel, Realism: Restatements and Renewal, pp. 3–104

Donnelly, Jack, Realism and International Relations (Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 2000)CrossRef Google Scholar

Jervis, Robert, “Cooperation under the Security Dilemma,” World Politics 30, no. 2 (January 1978), pp. 167–214CrossRef Google Scholar

Snyder, Glenn H., Alliance Politics (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 1997)Google Scholar

Snyder, , “The Security Dilemma in Alliance Politics,” World Politics 36, no. 4 (July 1984), pp. 461–95CrossRef Google Scholar

Grieco, Joseph, Cooperation among Nations: Europe, America, and Non-Tariff Barriers to Trade (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 1990)Google Scholar

Miller, Benjamin, When Opponents Cooperate (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995)CrossRef Google Scholar

Glaser, Charles L., “Realists as Optimists: Cooperation as Self-Help,” International Security 19, no. 3 (winter 1994/5), pp. 50–90CrossRef Google Scholar

Hobson, John M., The State and International Relations (Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 2000), pp. 17–63CrossRef Google Scholar

Layne, Christopher, “The ‘Poster Child for Offensive Realism’: America as Global Hegemon,” Security Studies 12, no. 2 (winter 2002/03), pp. 119–63CrossRef Google Scholar

Lee, Gerald Geunwook, “To Be Long or Not to Be Long: The Contradiction of Time Horizons in Offensive Realism,” Security Studies 12, no. 2 (winter 2002/3), pp. 196–217CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Lobell, Steven E., “War Is Politics: Offensive Realism, Domestic Politics, and Security Strategies,” Security Studies 12, no. 2 (winter 2002/3), pp. 165–95CrossRef Google Scholar

Mesquita, Bruce Bueno, The War Trap (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1981)Google Scholar

Mesquita, Bruce Bueno and Lalman, David, War and Reason (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992)Google Scholar

Vasquez, John, “The Realist Paradigm and Degenerative versus Progressive Research Programs,” American Political Science Review 91, no. 4 (December 1997), pp. 899–912CrossRef Google Scholar

Waltz, Kenneth N., Foreign Policy and Domestic Politics: The American and British Experience (1967; reprint, Berkeley: University of California, Institute of Governmental Studies, 1992)Google Scholar

Legro, Jeffrey W. and Moravcsik, Andrew, “Is Anybody Still a Realist?” International Security 24, no. 2 (fall 1999), pp. 5–55 at pp. 13–15CrossRef Google Scholar

Moravcsik, Andrew, “Liberal International Relations Theory: A Scientific Assessment,” in Elman and Elman, Progress in International Relations Theory, pp. 190–3

Keohane, , “Theory of World Politics,” in Keohane, Neorealism and its Critics, pp. 164–5

Copeland, Dale, The Origins of Major War (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2000), chap. 2Google Scholar

Wohlforth, William C., “Power Test: Evaluating Realism in Response to the End of the Cold War,” Security Studies 9, no. 3 (spring 2000), pp. 60–107, at p. 70Google Scholar

Kahler, Miles, “Rationality in International Relations,” International Organization 52, no. 4 (autumn 1998), pp. 919–41, at pp. 924–5CrossRef Google Scholar

Morgenthau, Hans J., Scientific Man versus Power Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946), p. 71Google Scholar

Walt, Stephen M., “The Enduring Relevance of the Realist Tradition,” in Katznelson and Milner, Political Science: The State of the Discipline, p. 211

James, Patrick, International Relations and Scientific Progress: Structural Realism Reconsidered (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2002)Google Scholar

Evera, Stephen, Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1997), pp. 17–21Google Scholar

Sterling-Folker, , “Realism and the Constructivist Challenge”; Bradley A. Thayer, “Bringing in Darwin: Evolutionary Theory, Realism, and International Politics,” International Security 25, no. 2 (fall 2000), pp. 124–51Google Scholar

Mercer, Jonathan, “Anarchy and Identity,” International Organization 49, no. 2 (summer 1995), pp. 229–52CrossRef Google Scholar

Weber, Max, Economy and Society, vol. II, ed. Roth, Guenther and Wittich, Claus (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), pp. 904–05Google Scholar

Desch, Michael C., “War and Strong States, Peace and Weak States?” International Organization 50, no. 2 (spring 2006), pp. 237–68, at p. 240 (emphasis added)CrossRef Google Scholar

Hermann, Margaret G., Hermann, Charles F., and Hagan, Joe D., “How Decision Units Shape Foreign Policy Behavior,” in Hermann, Charles F., Kegley, Charles W., and Rosenau, James N., eds., New Directions in the Study of Foreign Policy (Boston: Allen and Unwin, 1987), pp. 309–36Google Scholar

Krasner, Stephen D., Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999), chap. 1CrossRef Google Scholar

Hintze, Otto, “Military Organization and the Organization of the State,” in Gilbert, Felix, ed., Historical Essays of Otto Hintze (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), pp. 180–215Google Scholar

Ranke, Leopold, “A Dialogue on Politics,” reprinted in Laue, Theodore H., Leopold Ranke: The Formative Years (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1950), pp. 152–80Google Scholar

Kissinger, Henry A., World Restored: Metternich, Castlereagh, and the Problems of Peace, 1812–1822 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1957), pp. 324–30Google Scholar

Barnett, Michael N., Confronting the Costs of War (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992)Google Scholar

Dessler, David, “What's at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate?” International Organization 43, no. 3 (summer 1989), pp. 441–73, at p. 466CrossRef Google Scholar

Christensen, Thomas J., “Perceptions and Alliances in Europe, 1860–1940,” International Organization 51, no. 1 (winter 1997), pp. 65–97CrossRef Google Scholar

Waltz, Kenneth N., Man, the State, and War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959)Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.