Lecture
Purpose: To reveal the interconnection and interaction of the theory of international relations as
a public science and the scientific nature of the theory of international relations. To analyze the role and
place of the theory of international relations in the system of social sciences. To examine the structure,
tasks, and functions of the theory of international relations.
The purpose of the theory of international relations has always been the scientific interpretation (explanation)
of the most significant phenomena, processes, and interrelations of the object of study. As T.G.
Knutsen states, "theory is an abstracted, hypothetical, or speculative reflection
of reality. To theorize – means to think with the purpose of understanding and explaining».
The desire to understand the reality of international relations exhaustively and logically
and to explain it has always been the driving force of scientific research and was based on the natural
curiosity of scholars. Explaining the content and mechanisms of international relations allows
the formulation of predictive hypotheses, that is, attempting to foresee their future states and
situations. The interpretation of phenomena and processes and the predictive hypotheses arising from them are
the main practical result of research in the theory of international relations.
International relations arose in the times of the ancient world, when a population of a territory
of several thousand people was considered great, and peoples had the opportunity to enter into
direct contact with one another: during migration, mass flight from natural disasters,
after territorial distribution between states. It was then that the phenomenon proper
of international relations arose, significantly different from the relations that formed within
an ethnic community. Analyzing this phenomenon, one should bear in mind that the very phenomenon
of international relations is not fixed once and for all, but is constantly changing, evolving.
Today it is not the same as it was two hundred and even more so two thousand years ago, and in a hundred years
it will be completely different from what it is today.
The theory of international relations is an interdisciplinary field of knowledge
that includes history, economics, culture, and law. It is based on the chronology of events,
usually associated with a certain notion of progress. In the development of the subject of the theory
of international relations, three stages are distinguished:
1) the idealist stage (progressive theories dominated) – the 1920s-1930s;
2) the realist period (conservative theories prevailed) – the 1930s-1940s;
3) the behaviorist stage (social-scientific theories dominated) – the 1950s-1960s.
The concept of «international relations» was introduced into scientific usage in English by
the philosopher Jeremy Bentham, who in 1789 first applied it in the treatise «An Introduction to
the Principles of Morals and Legislation». With its help, he defined the relations that
exist between monarchs and citizens of different states. The appearance of this concept at that time
was not accidental, since it was precisely the turn of the 18th-19th centuries that became an important stage in the evolution of the very
phenomenon of international relations. By that time, in Western Europe a
system of sovereign state countries had finally taken shape. Relations between reigning monarchs
and ruling dynasties were replaced by relations between statehood-organized peoples-nations. It is no coincidence that in the Western tradition the concepts of "nation" and "state" are synonyms.
In parallel with the formation of nations, the process of the formation of civil
society took place, which influenced the transformation of the state in accordance with its needs.
It was then that the model of international relations took shape which until recently was considered
standard and self-evident. According to it, the civil society of each country
endowed the state with all powers in the sphere of ensuring national security and
foreign relations. The government of one state, according to these powers, entered into official
relations with the government of another state, and it was precisely through this channel that most relations were carried out, not
only between state structures, but also between various subjects of the civil
society of these countries.
It can also be argued that the theory of international relations became an independent
discipline with the founding in 1919 of the department of international relations at the University
of Aberystwyth (Great Britain).
Thus, the sovereign state was recognized as the main participant in the system of international
relations. The state acted as the system-forming element, while interstate
ties were structure-forming. In this regard, the Polish researcher of international
relations Jozef Kukulka emphasized that it is states themselves that «materialize the possibility
of considering… relations international».
International relations are a very complex phenomenon. As Y. Kukulka notes,
the complexity of defining and studying them is explained by the following factors:
1) the sphere of international relations covers an extremely wide range of phenomena and
processes, which are difficult to analyze using the scientific apparatus of a single discipline;
2) international relations lack a single center of power and governance;
3) the researcher of international relations does not have access to all information, since
part of the data is protected by diplomatic secrecy and security reservations;
4) in international relations, it is very difficult to trace the cause-and-effect
relationships in the behavior of states on the international arena;
5) in the behavior of participants in international actions, chance and
the simultaneity of many interacting factors play a large role. That is why the famous French sociologist
Raymond Aron believed that international relations «do not have clearly marked boundaries
of reality; they are materially inseparable and cannot be separated from other
social phenomena».
In the hands of states dominant in the international hierarchy are concentrated the organization and
control over the processes of interaction of all participants in the system. According to Gilpin, despite
the fact that the modern art of statecraft has undergone changes in comparison with
previous eras, the fundamental nature of international relations has not changed
over the millennia. International relations continue to be a constantly
recurring struggle for wealth and power among independent actors in a state of anarchy.
Thucydides' classical history is just as significant a guide to the behavior of states
today as it was when it was written – in the 5th century BC.
According to Gilpin, throughout history international systems have been characterized by
three types of control:
1) imperial, or imperialist – a single powerful state
controls other weaker and smaller states;
2) bipolar – two powerful states control and regulate interactions within
their spheres of influence;
3) balance of power – three or more states control each other's actions through
diplomatic maneuvers, changes of alliances, and open conflicts.
Dominant states or empires organize and maintain a network of political,
economic and other relations within the system and especially in their own areas of influence.
They compose and implement the basic rules, norms and rights by which they themselves are guided, as well as
smaller and weaker states.
Disruption of equilibrium and a change of leaders in the international hierarchy leads to
economic, political and technological changes, as a result of which either the potential benefits
of one or several states significantly increase or their potential costs decrease.
Preventing losses or increasing the benefits of a given state or group of states becomes, in
their eyes, an incentive to promote changes in the system. Ultimately there occurs
a gap between the existing international system and the potential benefits (losses)
of specific states resulting from the changes taking place in it. This leads to a crisis in
the international system. Although the crisis can be resolved by peaceful means, still
the main mechanism for its resolution throughout history has been, as Gilpin said, a war for
hegemony, that is, a war intended to determine which state or group of states will occupy the
dominant position in the international system. The peace following a hegemonic war
is characterized by a restructuring of the political, territorial, and other foundations of the system. Thus,
the cycle of change concludes with the hegemonic war and the following peace
creating a new status quo and equilibrium, reflecting a new distribution of power in the system. As
a rule, in periods of stability and established order, the international system exists in a state of
some kind of homeostasis or dynamic equilibrium, although at the level of interstate relations
constant configurations of a tactical level occur.
It should be noted that a balance of power is in principle present in any political
process, including a global one. The main role in this process is played by the leading state,
which pursues a policy aimed at achieving equilibrium and international stability
of the system. Any large state jealously watches to make sure that no other great
state becomes even more powerful by absorbing smaller countries. Therefore,
conflicts and disputes between individual actors in the system do not undermine the defining
characteristics of the system.
Place in the system of sciences. The theory of international relations reveals complex socio-political, economic, and cultural processes through which the diversity of forms of exchange of
activity and its results between members of independent societies, separated from one another
solely by state borders, is realized.
Functions of the theory of international relations:
- explanation of the peculiarities of the ties of actors operating in international relations;
– forecasting the evolution of international relations.
- warning analysts against excessive self-confidence and hasty assessments, and
warning political decision-makers against hasty actions that may have large-scale
negative consequences.
The subject of the science of international relations comprises the activity of states on the international
arena, the core of which is the technique and theory of diplomacy. However, since the concepts "international
relations" and "international politics" include the interaction not only of states but also of other
subjects of the world community, the activity of these actors (among them a particularly weighty
role is played by international organizations of various scale and orientation) also falls within the
subject field of international relations. The subject of the science of international relations also includes
the problem of methods for analyzing the foreign-policy situation and foreign-policy activity, the study of the content of the main foreign-policy doctrines and
concepts.
It is especially important to include in the subject field of the science and academic discipline
of international relations the study of the concepts of the "international system" and the "international order".
In this regard, the education and training of theorists and practitioners of foreign policy and
international relations is based on understanding the leading tendency of contemporary international
politics. It consists in overcoming the conflict-confrontational style and gradually
transitioning to global cooperation. The study of this tendency, and hence of the place and
role of conflicts and cooperation in international relations – is another important component
of the subject of the sciences of international relations.
International relations are based on the interactions of an enormous number of participants,
each of whom is guided by their own interests and motivations. The specifics of their participation in
the processes taking place in the international environment depend directly on the type
of participant. Given this, it is possible to determine the limits of the functional activity and characteristics
of the activity of participants in international relations.
The typology of participants in international relations is a subject of fairly serious debate between
state-centrists (etatists) and transnationalists. It concerns not so much the
identification and definition of the types of active participants in international relations (actors),
as the relationship between them.
That said, there is no particular dispute over the claim that the participants
in international relations include states, international organizations, and social groups.
Individuals are added to this list considerably less often, and are mainly understood as
decision-makers — that is, persons who make decisions on behalf of particular social structures.
The concept of a "natural person", denoting a personified subject, is borrowed from
private international law. In legal scholarship this concept characterizes a human being who is a
subject of law — that is, one who exists in certain relationships with foreign citizens,
possesses legal capacity, and is governed by norms of law.
In the theory of international relations, a natural person is recognized as someone whose actions
give rise to certain consequences in the international environment. The most common view of
the role and place of the individual in international relations is its interpretation as a decision-maker in the sphere of
foreign policy or foreign economic activity. In this case, individuals
initiate and bring about the realization of certain actions in the international environment, while at the same time
becoming their object.
Types of international relations:
– political — these play the dominant role, because they refract, synthesize, and determine all
other types of relations. Political relations find their expression in the actual political
activity of the elements of the political system, above all the state. They guarantee security and
create the conditions for the development of all other relations.
– economic and scientific-technical. Foreign policy is generally aimed at
protecting economic relations that influence the formation of the world market and the international
division of labor. The state of economic relations is largely determined by the level of development
of production and productive forces in states, by different economic models, by the availability of
natural resources and other factors.
– ideological relations – a relatively independent part of political relations. The role and
significance of ideological relations changes depending on changes in the role of ideology in society.
But there is a general tendency – toward a growing role for ideology, and consequently for ideological
relations as well.
– international legal relations — these provide for the regulation of relations
among participants in international intercourse by means of legal norms and rules that these participants
have agreed upon. The international legal mechanism allows participants to protect their interests,
develop relations, prevent conflicts, resolve disputed issues, and maintain peace
and security in the interests of all nations.
– military-strategic relations, which cover a broad sphere of specific
social, international relations that are, in one way or another, connected with the direct or
indirect creation, buildup, or redistribution of military force.
Levels of international relations:
Vertically – scale-based levels:
– global international relations – relations among systems of states,
the largest states, reflecting the world political process as a whole.
– regional (subregional) relations – relations among states of a particular
political region in all spheres of social life, having more
specific manifestations and a multilateral character.
– local (for example, Eastern Europe).
Horizontally – group-based levels:
– group (coalition, inter-coalition) relations. These are realized through the
relations of groups of countries, international organizations, etc.
– bilateral relations. This is the most widespread form of international relations between
states and organizations.
With the emergence of states, international relations are divided into:
– formal (whose participants are, properly speaking, states);
- informal (whose participants are various social communities, non-state
institutions, economic entities, individuals).
Source base of international relations:
- historical sources and documents;
- official documents (legislative and regulatory acts, public speeches, statements,
conference addresses, interviews, and appeals and speeches of senior state officials);
- officially approved programs, strategies, doctrines, and concepts;
- reports from the mass media (news agencies, television,
the periodical press, official websites of state institutions and news outlets);
- statistical reference books, biographical reference books, encyclopedias;
- materials from scholarly conferences, results of scientific research (scholarly articles and
monographs) across various fields of knowledge;
– publicistic, memoir, and biographical publications.
Methods of researching international relations:
– chorological;
– historical;
– formational;
– civilizational;
– geopolitical;
– mixed;
– systemic;
– descriptive;
– comparative;
– statistical;
– cartographic;
– sociological;
– the method of induction and deduction;
– forecasting methods – extrapolation, expert assessment, and modeling.
Types of international relations are examined either on the basis of spheres of social life
(and, accordingly, the content of the relations) — economic, political, military-strategic,
cultural, ideological, etc., or on the basis of the interacting participants — interstate
relations, inter-party relations, relations among various international
organizations, transnational corporations, and so on.
Depending on the degree of development and intensity of particular types of international
relations, different levels are distinguished (high, low, or medium). However, it proves more fruitful
a definition is given of the levels of international relations based on the geopolitical
criterion: from this point of view, the global (or planet-wide),
regional (European, Asian, etc.), and subregional (for example, the countries
of the Black Sea basin) levels of international interaction are distinguished.
Finally, from the point of view of the degree of tension, one can speak of different states
of international relations: these are, for example, states of stability and instability, trust and
hostility, cooperation and conflict, war and peace, etc.
In turn, the entire set of the various types, levels, and states of international relations known to science
represents a special kind of social relations, differing in its own
features from another kind — social relations inherent in one or another social
community that acts as a participant in international relations. In this connection, international
relations can be defined as a special kind of social relations that go beyond
the intra-social interactions of territorial formations.
The main forms of international interaction are cooperation, rivalry, and conflict.
Cooperation is carried out through participation in various international organizational
structures, through bilateral and large-scale treaties of friendship and cooperation.
It is the most promising, adequately corresponding to the geostrategic interests of the subjects
of international relations, and is called strategic partnership. Strategic partnership
envisages the most large-scale and mutually beneficial way of interaction in various spheres
of public life.
Rivalry presupposes the peaceful nature of the struggle between states for the advantageous
realization of their national interest, ranging from the spread of their capital and
technologies to the placement of military bases. Rivalry takes place among countries that
are both in relations of strategic partnership and in relations of confrontation.
Conflicts at the international level arise when it is not possible to settle
incompatible interests of two countries or their groups. They can be expressed in the denunciation
of treaties, the severing of diplomatic relations, economic blockade, the provocation of
internal destabilization through information sabotage, terrorist acts,
military coups, civil and world wars.
From the point of view of the number of participants, international relations are: bilateral,
multilateral, and collective. Bilateral relations are the oldest,
basic form of international relations, widespread also in the modern world. Multilateral
(polylateral) relations are a form associated with the participation in relations of several, sometimes
many, parties, which may be connected with one another either directly or through one
of the participants, whose role among them is more important than that of the others. Participants of international
relations enter into such relations with one another when the solution of a particular problem, which
represents a common interest, is impossible or difficult without the participation of several parties.
Collective relations have the highest degree of integration compared to all other
forms, since for their realization an inter-subject center is formed that performs the
functions of coordinator and organizer of relations among the multitude of participants of international
relations.
The external environment has a significant influence on the dynamics of international relations,
both non-social and social. By the non-social environment of the system of international
relations is understood that which existed before the appearance of man and human society. This is
nature in its original form, undisturbed by external influence, which is the object of
study of geology, geography, meteorology, ecology, etc. Where the influence of the non-social
environment on international relations is especially noticeable, at the junction of the humanities and
natural disciplines, special, borderline sciences arise, for example geopolitics.
The influence of the social environment on international relations is much deeper and
more dynamic. The social environment is called everything that appeared together with man, and
that which determines the life of society. This is economics, politics, technology, technology, ideology,
culture, religion, etc. The authors of the well-known work on the influence of the external environment on
international relations, the spouses Herbert and Margaret Sprout, provided many interesting
concrete examples of such influence. Unlike the 20th century, when many international
problems could be resolved through negotiations using technical means
without personal contacts between the political leaders of different countries, Alexander the Great
could not do the same thing by calling the Persian king Darius by telephone, due to the
absence of such a device. Hitler, whose personal convictions permitted the use of any
terrible means of destroying man, never became the possessor of nuclear weapons. It is not hard to
imagine what the outcome of the Second World War might have been if Germany's «uranium project»
had been brought to completion. A special influence on the evolution of international relations in the
last century was made by the development of transport and information technologies.
The world is constantly changing, and this affects international relations as well. An important
characteristic of the current stage of international relations is above all their dynamism.
Contemporary international relations are characterized by the following tendencies.
The first tendency in the development of international relations is the dispersion of power.
The question of the future of the system of international relations remains open. Some political scientists
believe that a collective leadership of the USA, Western
Europe, and Japan is currently forming. Others argue that the USA should be recognized as the sole world leader.
Still others see the possibility of a revival of the bipolar system, in which, however, instead of the USSR, in
ideological and military-political confrontation with the USA there will be China.
However, the fundamental peculiarity of the contemporary era is that it is now impossible to speak
of the absolute leadership of this or that state in the system of international relations. Changes in
the alignment of political forces on the world stage, the formation of a multipolar world
create numerous alternatives for development and provide a broader field for the search for
resolution of international global and regional conflicts and interstate disputes.
The second tendency of contemporary international relations — a new understanding of the nuclear role
of weapons in the system of national security. Until now the system of international relations has been based
on nuclear deterrence, when the threat of a nuclear attack is neutralized by the threat of a retaliatory strike
inflicting irreparable harm on the attacking country. In the early 1980s, both Soviet and
American scientists calculated the consequences of such an exchange of nuclear strikes. There emerged
a picture that came to be called «nuclear winter», or «nuclear night», which essentially meant
the death of humanity. The result was the recognition that nuclear war cannot be a means of
achieving political, economic, ideological, or any other goals under conditions when
global interdependence of countries has sharply increased. It became clear that it is not enough
to limit the circle of states possessing nuclear weapons, it is not enough to prevent its
proliferation; the question arose of the need to take measures to destroy part of the
accumulated stockpiles of nuclear weapons. At the end of the 20th century, practical steps followed to implement
this understanding. Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and South Africa were the first in the world to eliminate their
nuclear weapons. Incidentally, Ukraine had the third most powerful nuclear potential in the world after
the USA and Russia.
The third tendency in the development of international relations is the recent formation of
a new conception of the ways of ensuring the national security of an individual
state under conditions where it becomes an inseparable part of the problem of creating
common security. A new term appeared in the lexicon of world politics — «comprehensive
system of international security». Since the mid-1980s, a considerable number of
specific international agreements have already been reached, which translate the new understanding of security tasks
into the channel of practical actions. Reliance on power pressure for the purposes of ensuring national
self-defense is ceasing to be effective. On the other hand, there is no need, in order to
ensure national security, to rely solely on one's own national resources.
The system of collective security allows one to count, in the struggle against an aggressor, on
multinational forces, the military and economic potential of other countries. This means that
national expenditures on military purposes can be substantially reduced, limiting them to a level
of reasonable sufficiency.
The fourth tendency in the development of international relations is the development of political
instruments of preventive influence by the world community on the participants in conflicts,
non-military guarantees of peace, and measures to prevent military conflicts.
Centers for the prevention of armed conflicts are being created. A new situation
is observed in international negotiations. Now negotiations are increasingly viewed
not as a means of achieving unilateral advantages, but as a process of joint decision-making,
in which the parties are initially aimed at cooperation, seeking a solution acceptable to all parties.
The fifth tendency in the development of international relations is the inclusion, in the circle of
security of the world community, besides military ones, of problems of a different nature as well. These are such
problems as climate change and the destruction of the natural environment, the fight against hunger,
disproportions in economic and scientific-technical development.
The sixth tendency in the development of international relations is their democratization.
Democratic control over foreign policy and the system of
international relations is necessary in order to avoid situations dangerous for peace. Such democratization
is expressed in the fact that, by expressing (in elections) their attitude toward the government's foreign-policy course, people thereby influence international relations.
An effective means of influencing the positions of states' government courses are also the appeals
and recommendations adopted in the course of international public dialogue.
The seventh tendency in the development of international relations is the emergence of an influential but
destructive player in international relations — international terrorism, which has covered
almost all countries of the world with its network of terrorist organizations and has begun to actively
influence the foreign policy of certain states.
The complex system of contemporary international relations requires each
subject of international relations to observe certain principles enshrined in the UN Charter and
designed to stabilize international relations, limiting them within certain normative
frameworks. They cannot be abolished by states unilaterally or by
agreement. They are recognized by all states, and all documents that fix
international agreements and arrangements are based on them.
The main principles include:
– the principle of sovereign equality of states: each state is obliged to respect
the sovereignty of other participants in international relations, that is, their right within their own
territory to exercise state power without any interference from other states, and
also to independently conduct their foreign policy;
– the principle of non-use of force and the threat of force, meaning that all states
must refrain, in their international relations, from the threat of force or its use against
the territorial integrity and independence of any state;
– the principle of the inviolability of state borders, which comes down to three elements:
recognition of already existing borders, refusal of any territorial claims now and in
the future, refusal of any other encroachments on borders;
– the principle of territorial integrity of the state indicates that states must
refrain from any actions aimed at violating the national unity and
territorial integrity of any other state; the territory of a state must not be an object of
acquisition by another state as a result of the threat of force or its use;
– the principle of self-determination of peoples and nations declares unconditional respect for the right of every
people to freely choose the paths and forms of their development;
– the principle of cooperation holds that states are obliged to carry out international
cooperation in resolving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, and
humanitarian character, and must also maintain international peace and security.
The UN Charter also enshrines: the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of
states; the principle of the peaceful settlement of international disputes; the principle of universal respect
for human rights; and the principle of the conscientious fulfillment of international obligations. From
these principles it can be concluded that the core idea of a state’s foreign-policy
activity is peaceful coexistence and the provision of collective security.
Thus, we can conclude that by international relations
is meant the totality of economic, political, legal, scientific-technical, monetary-financial, social, diplomatic, military, humanitarian, communicative, and
other ties and relations among states, and social, economic, political
forces, organizations, and social movements operating on the world stage.
International relations are a multifaceted and complexly structured socio-political phenomenon of great importance for contemporary civilization, for states, and for the people
living on planet Earth — an inseparable element of politics, and therefore requiring heightened attention
from the state and civil society.
1. Identify the main stages in the formation of the science of international relations.
2. Characterize the contemporary trends in the development of the methodological base of the theory of international
relations.
3. Describe the structure of international relations.
4. Formulate a definition and the subject of the theory of international relations.
5. Analyze the methodology of empirical research in IR theory.
6. Reveal the essence of political activity.
Comments