Scott Burchill Et Al.: Theories of International Relations, Third Edition

Book Reviews ¶ Scott Burchill et al.: Theories of International Relations, Third Edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005, pp. 310. ISBN: 978-1403948663 (1403948666). Reviewed by Oldřich Bureš Like its two predecessors, the third edi- ory. After a brief exploration of the founda- tion of Theories of International Relations tions of International Relations as a separate provides a comprehensive survey of leading academic discipline they offer some explana- theoretical perspectives in the field. In con- tions for the ever-increasing diversity of IR trast to the second edition, the reviewed text Theories. They point out that until today, contains an entirely new chapter on Real- practitioners in the field ‘…do not agree ism written by Jack Donnelly, the chapter about what is involved in theorizing interna- on Rationalism has been has been replaced tional relations’ (pp. 12). As in many other with a chapter on the English School, and social sciences, IR has been traditionally di- the Feminism and Introduction chapters vided on the very basic question of its subject have been substantially revised. Perhaps most matter and fundamental differences persists importantly, however, all chapters have been regarding the appropriate methodology. Un- updated to take into account the recent de- like in other social sciences, however, the velopment in the ‘real world’, especially con- end of the Cold War and more recently the cerning the impact of the events of ‘9/11’ on 9/11 attacks, have led to a proliferation of International Relations theory. As such, the competing epistemological and ontological book makes a worthy contribution to the standpoints, as well as the importance of eth- burgeoning literature in the field. ics in the study of IR. According to Burchill The introduction, co-authored by Scott and Linklater, it is therefore possible to argue Burchill and Andrew Linklater, explains the that there is a fundamental division within nature, diversity and fundamental points of IR between theories, which seek to offer ex- disagreement in International Relations the- planatory accounts of world politics, and 106 Book reviews Contemporary European Studies 2/2007 perspectives, which regard theory as constitu- reach and size of the state in the name of na- tive of that reality (pp. 3). tional security after the 9/11 terrorist attacks Chapter 2 offers an exhaustive over- (pp. 80). view of both the well-known basic concepts In Chapter 4, Andrew Linklater analy- shared by most (neo-) realists and the some- ses the English School of IR. Also known times-overlooked points of division with- as International Society, this approach has a in the Realist school. Donelly is correct to long tradition but it has not enjoyed much point out that the writings of the early real- influence outside of Great Britain. Since the ists such as Carr and Morgenthau remain the beginning of the new millennium, however, key reference points in IR, more than fifty there has been much interest in the English years after their publication. He also offers a School and its idea of international society succinct summary of the imperfect nature of as a mid- or third-way between the arguably neorealist structural theory predictions and excessive pessimism of realism and, at times, argues that sometimes ‘exogenous variables’ too idealistic forms of idealism. From the are decisive in determining outcomes, thus contemporary hot topics, Linklater assesses overwhelming the otherwise theoretically the contributions of the leading figures of the correctly predicted pressures. Unlike several English School (Hedley Bull, John Vincent other chapters, however, Donelly’s account and Martin Wight) to the analysis of human of Realism directly addresses neither the sig- rights, humanitarian intervention and the nificance of 9/11 for realist IR theory, nor use of force in international relations. the reverse. Regarding the latter issue, for ex- Linklater is also the author of Chapter 5, ample, the outspoken critique of leading re- which offers a detailed account of Marxism. alist scholars to the US war in Iraq in 2003 is Building on the famous contention by Karl merely noted in one short sentence (pp. 37). Marx that his interest was not only to explain Scott Burchill in Chapter 3 discusses the the world but to change it, Linklater summa- liberal theory of IR and its development. rizes not only the well known Marx’s reflec- While recognizing the importance of free tions on the development of capitalism as a trade for both the early liberal thinkers and modern form of production but also the less contemporary neo-liberal accounts of the known analysis of globalisation by Marx and world market, Burchill also highlights the sa- Engles. Lenin, for whom globalisation and lience of the evolving human rights culture fragmentation were interrelated as capitalism and the immensely important discussion of continued to spread in the world unevenly, the liberal peace thesis. The chapter also con- also pursued the latter topic. This line of tains a timely treatment of several current analysis was subsequently pushed a step fur- hot topics, including a discussion of glo- ther by dependency and world-system neo- balisation, impact of foreign investment and Marxists who shifted their analyses from the ways of addressing the post 9/11 phenom- relations of production to unequal exchange enon of non-state terrorism. For example, between, and exploitation of, the third world Burchill points out the irony of economically ‘periphery’ by the first world core. Moreover, neo-liberal governments expanding both the by pushing this line of argument yet another Contemporary European Studies 2/2007 Book reviews 107 step further, Linklater also noted that: ‘Clas- other critical IR theorist, ‘is the argument sical Marxism may have defended the ideal that the greatest threat to world order may of universal human emancipation, but its vi- not be the terrorists who perpetrated such sion of the future assumed the non-Europe- inexcusable harm, but the reaction by the an would and should become the same as the United States’ (pp. 154). modern West. The issue then is whether its In Chapter 7, Richard Devetak the con- project of emancipation was always at heart a tributions of postmodernism, which he con- project of domination and assimilation.’ siders to be one of the ‘most controversial of In Chapter 6, Richard Devetak took up theories in the humanities and social scienc- the uneasy task to find common points in es’ (pp. 161). Devetak also noted that after the writings of a rather disparate group of 9/11, postmodernism was charged with ‘a actors who subscribe to critical theory. He dangerous tendency towards moral equivo- contends that the only idea that is shared by cation or even sympathy towards terrorism’ all critical theorists is ‘that the study of inter- (pp.161). To most postmodernists, however, national relations should be oriented by an these accusations only confirm that knowl- emancipatory politics’ (pp. 137). Little con- edge claims are intimately connected to sensus, however, exists even when it comes to politics and power. Devetak then proceeds the understanding of emancipation. Devetak to review the post-modernist critique of the traces the normative interest in identifying ‘Enlightenment project’ of human emanci- immanent possibilities for social transforma- pation, with a special focus on the writings tion back to Kant and argues that through of Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault and neo-Marxism it became closely associated Jean-Francois Lyotard. with the Frankfurt School. Until recently, Christian Reus-Smit begins his synopsis however, the representatives of the Frankfurt of constructivism in Chapter 8 by noting, School never addressed international rela- that since the end of the cold war, the hith- tions. Critical IR theory has become more erto dominant debates between neo-realists associated with Robert Cox’s critique of the and neo-liberals and between the rationalists traditional IR theories, which he described (both the neo-theories as well as some of the as “problem-solving” due to their legitimi- English School theorists) and critical theo- sation of the prevailing social and political rists have been displaced by two new debates: structures. Devetak also examines the contri- between rationalists and constructivists, and butions of Linklater, including his efforts to between constructivists and critical theorists. undertake a ‘sociology of states-system’ – a After examining the origins of constructiv- comparison of state-systems across time on ism and its principal theoretical premises the basis of how they deal with harm. In par- (an emphasis on the importance of norma- ticular, Linklater is concerned that the devel- tive as well as material structures, the role of opments since 9/11 could un-do the civiliz- identity in shaping political action and the ing gains made by modern state-system in mutually constitutive relationship between the last century. As Devetak noted, implicit structures and agents), Reus-Smit distin- in Linklater, and explicit in the writings of guishes between several competing construc- 108 Book reviews Contemporary European Studies 2/2007 tivist approaches. While some constructivists transnational actors and structures and their share the neo-realist focus on analysis of state transformations in global politics’ (pp. 213). processes (especially Alexander Wendt and As such, according to True, feminist perspec- his systemic approach), others see the states- tives on IR bring ‘fresh thinking and action system in connection with a range of nation- in the post-9/11 decentred and uncertain al, cultural and political phenomena (holistic world’ (pp. 213). approach). Interestingly, however, accord- The last Chapter, written by Matthew Pa- ing to Reus-Smit, the 9/11 events ‘have not terson, is devoted to analysis of arguably the sparked a tectonic shift in the nature of con- newest IR perspective – Green Politics. The structivism, or in the general terrain of In- chapter offers a discussion of two main streams ternational Relations theorizing’ (pp.

Load more