World Politics

Lesson 2. Schools of International Relations

Juan Luis López, PhD.

 Lesson 2. Schools of International Relations

• 2.1 The realist school of IR

• 2.1.1 Realism: Main propositions, approaches and historical examples
• 2.1.2 Realism: Historical figures and their works

• 2.2 The idealist and liberal school of IR

• 2.3 Evolution, historical figures, and the League of Nations

Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
- Main question How to avoid the conflict?
a) Realism  Si vis pacem, para bellum
(increasing the cost of the conflict to an unacceptable level)
a) Idealism  One world, one system
(eliminating the possibility of the conflict through homogeneity)
a) Liberalism  International cooperation and mutual
dependence:
(reducing the relative benefit of a conflict through
interdependence)
1) ECONOMY: international trade (ideal free trade)

2) SOCIETY: Global social merging

3) CULTURE: common cultural framework

Questions that arise…

a) WHAT model is more preeminent nowadays?
b) ARE we transitioning from one model to another? Why?
c) WILL it be possible to avoid the conflict with these tools? In
other words…Is the War over?
 Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

Schools of IR:

Realism Explains IR in terms of POWER

Approach to IR based on the following propositions:
1) State-centered States are the central actors in international politics (rather
than individuals, transnational movements & international organizations)
2) Anarchy International political system is anarchic.  Because there is no
supranational coercive authority that can enforce rules over the states
3) Rationality Actors (states) in IR are rational their behavior pursues the
maximization of their own self-interest
4) Power  All actors (states) pursue power  in order to guarantee their own
survival in aforementioned anarchic international political system
 Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

Realism
Related concepts:
Realpolitik (from German: real, “realistic” and Politik, “politics”)
Practical guideline for Policy-making & diplomacy based on specific
circumstances and factors, instead of ideologies, ethical premises or
shared values.

Differences:
Realism: Intellectual theory (tries to describe the world)
Realpolitik: Practical guideline (tries to obtain a material outcome)
 Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

Realism in relations with other theories

- Emphasizes COMPETITION rather than COOPERATION (as
idealism/liberalism do)

- Not necessarily pursue WAR as an objective itself War is not a goal

in any theory. But doesn’t avoid conflict at any cost as other theories.
“Si vis pacem, para bellum”. (If you want peace, prepare for war.)
Flavio Vegecio (Roman author, 4th century BC).

- Realism theory = Interstate Politics (non-state actors are under the

rule of STATE actors. Ex: International NGOs must follow the rules of
the states)
 Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

Realism  Historical example of its manifestation

Mare clausum & the three-mile belt
• Mare clausum “closed sea”.  International law term to describe a
sea, ocean or other navigable body of water under the jurisdiction of
a state that is closed or not accessible to other states.
• In opposition to Mare liberum “open sea”.
• Attack range of the XVII century cannons  3 miles
• XVII century  International (European)
Mare clausum was 3 miles

Author of this formula:

Cornelius Bynkershoek (1702 Mare Clausum
Treaty
De Dominio Maris)
 Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

Realism
Historical figures:
1) Sun Tzu (孙子) (544-496) Chinese general,
military strategist, and philosopher. (lit. Master Sun).
• Lived in the Spring and Autumn period  Imperial
authority starts to decline, and new dukes and
marquesses obtained de facto autonomy (similar
to the Peloponnesian War period)
• The Art of War: Chinese military treatise.
• Abandoned the EPIC conception of the WAR 
Adopted practical and rational approach to it
• No heroism or epic  Rationality and organization
instead “Every battle is won BEFORE it is fought”
 Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

Realism
Historical figures:
2) Thucydides (460-400 BC) (Athenian historian
and general)
• History of the Peloponnesian War (war between the
rising power of Athens and the ruling power of
Sparta) (431-404 BC)
• Dubbed as the father of scientific history 
Empirical approach to the study of war:
• a) Impartiality despite being Athenian
• b) cause-effect analysis
• c) no reference to the intervention of the Greek
deities
 Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
Realism  Thucydides
• “The strong do what they have to do, and the
weak accept what they have to accept” 
Imperative behavior for BOTH
• War not only between city-states, but between
two alliance systems: Athens (Delian league) &
Sparta (Peloponnesian league) Chain effect
similar to World War I & II
 Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
Realism  Thucydides
• New term: Thucydides Trap:
theory that postulates that
war between a rising power
and an established power is
INEVITABLE
• Coined by Graham T. Allison
(American political scientist)
• Nowadays international
debate:
Is the Thucydides trap
inevitable between the rising
China and the ruling US?
 Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
Realism
Historical figures:
3) (Niccolo) Maquiavelly (1469-1527)
• (Florence) Italian diplomat, politician, historian
& philosopher  Civil and religious conflicts (Médici, Borgia)
• Considered by some scholars the father of the
modern political science
• Main work: The Prince (Il Principe) 1513
• Political treatise:  Recommendations for the rulers.
• The political goals of the princes can justify any mean
• Key Ideas:
• 1) State (1st sentence): “all forms of organization of supreme political power, whether
republican or princely”
• 2) Qualities of a Prince (=political order): a) military power, b) reputation, c) balance
generosity vs. parsimony, d) balance cruelty vs. mercy  Virtues are only tools
• 3) Moral justification:  Political stability is the greatest good, therefore everything
(even moral standards) can be sacrificed to achieve it.  Origin of real-politik
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
Realism
Historical figures:
4) Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)
• English philosopher One of the founders of modern political
philosophy  Written during the English civil war
(1642-1651) between Parliamentarians & Royalists (+200,000
deaths +40,000 civilian casualties)
• Main Work: Leviathan (1651)  State should be absolute
• Objective: avoid the state of nature  War of all against all (bellium
omnium contra omnes).

In such condition, there is no place for industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and
consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be
imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving, and removing, such things
as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no
letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the
life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

Leviathan should have all the power  Civil, military, judicial and ecclesiastical
In order to avoid the dangers of the eternal conflict  Like English Civil War
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
Realism
Historical figures:
4) Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)
• Frontispiece of the Leviathan
• Quote : "Non est potestas Super Terram quae
Comparetur ei. Iob. 41 . 24" ("There is no power
on earth to be compared to him. Job 41 . 24")
• Sword (Military power) + Cruisier (Religious
power)
• Castle + Church
• Crown + Mitre
• Cannon + Excommunication
• Weapons + Logic
• Battlefield + Religious courts

• Historical background  Henry VIII (1509-1547)

Separation from the Catholic Church
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
Realism
Historical figures & backgrounds:  Objective: a) identify the source of instability , & b) avoid it

Figure Country Conflict Years

Sun Tzu China Spring & 544-496 BC

Autumns Wars

Thucydides Greece Peloponnesian 460-400 BC

Wars

Maquiavelly Italy (Florence) North-Italian 1469-1527

conflicts

Thomas Hobbes England English Civil War 1588-1679

Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

Schools of IR:

Idealism  From ideas

- Sometimes called ‘utopianism’  Pejorative term employed by the
realists  Something perfect in theory, but unachievable.

- Approach to international politics that stresses the importance of moral

values and ideals, rather than the power and the pursuit of national
interests.

- But… which values and which ideals???  Maybe it’s not an end to the
conflict…
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

Schools of IR:

Idealism  From ideas

- Is Idealism = Liberalism??
- Similar but different: Liberalism appeared as a branch of Idealism AFTER
the failures of the League of Nations (idealism)
- Main difference:
A) For idealists  international anarchy should be overcome with global institutions
 end of national sovereignties  give away sovereignty to global institutions
Ideal  1 system  1 world
Cooperation is a TOOL
B) For liberals  international anarchy should be tempered with inter-state
cooperation  not the end of national sovereignties
Objective Many systems cooperating  1 world
Cooperation is a GOAL
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

Schools of IR:

Liberalism
4 Main principles:
• 1) Rejection of the idea of POWER as the only
variable in the international dimension
• 2) Rejection of the “state of nature” vision of
the strategical behavior of the states defended
by the Realism
• 3) It highlights the mutual benefits of
international cooperation
• 4) It incorporates new global actors (such as
international organizations and
nongovernmental actors) for shaping state
preferences (not for eliminating the states’
role).
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
IdealismLiberalism
- 1) Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924).
28th US President (1913-1921) – Nobel Peace Prize 1919
- Fourteen Points Statement of principles for peace employed to end
World War I.
1) Open covenants for peace (not secret alliances) Transparency.
Rational calculation of the cost of the conflict
2) Freedom of navigation US entered in the war because submarine
warfare
3) Equality of trade conditions Free trade
4) Guarantees for national armaments reduction
5) Impartial agreement of colonial claims
6-13) Territorial disputes resolutions (Alsace-Lorraine, etc)
14) “A general association of nations must be formed under specific
covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political
independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.”
League of Nations
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
- 1) Woddrow Wilson (1856-1924).
28th US President (1913-1921) – Nobel Peace Prize 1919
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
- 1) Woddrow Wilson (1856-1924).
28th US President (1913-1921) – Nobel Peace Prize 1919
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics
League of Nations Symbol of the failure of Idealism
• (Treaty of Versailles) End WWI and creation of the League of Nations
10 January 1920 – 20 April 1946 (co-existence with UN)
• Carthaginian peace Brutal “peace” achieved by completely crushing the enemy.
Derived peace imposed on Carthage by Rome after Second Punic War.
(Carthage: 1) lost all its colonies, 2) was forced to demilitarize, 3) pay constant
tribute to Rome & should ask permission to Rome to enter war).
• Causes of the Failure of the League of Nations:
• 1) Slow and unpractical institution  Unanimous vote for many decisions.
• 2) Lack of global representation  US didn’t join (US Senate voted no). Germany
initially was not allowed to join. USSR initially excluded. Japan began as a
permanent member of the Council, but withdrew in 1933 after opposition to its
Manchuria occupation.  Started to created their own alliances systems.
• 3) Conflict between national interest & collective security  The international
economic crisis of 1929  more importance national interest
• 4) Lack of armed force to enforce its resolutions Great Powers didn’t want to
share their forces on behalf of he League.  No coercive capacity.
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

League of Nations Symbol of the failure of Idealism

Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

League of Nations
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

League of Nations
Lesson 2. Theoretical Foundations of World Politics

League of Nations
The Treaty of Versailles, What Did the Big Three Want? 1/2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrYhLNQMRro

The 3 parts of the Treaty of Versailles: territorial, military,

and financial  mistakes in these 3 dimensions??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jycVFL8CNM

1) Do you think the original weaknesses of

the League of Nations could have been
avoided when it was created? If so, how?