Realist international relations theory is the most influential theoretical approach in the discipline of international relations. Within the realist paradigm there are several realist approaches. Various approaches, including classical realism, neorealism, offensive realism, neo-classical realism, and game theory, are part of the realist paradigm but some make different theoretically relevant assumptions, notably about international politics, international actors and actors' motivations. The first part of this thesis seeks to demonstrate how, despite their other differences, a fundamental assumption that anarchy determines the nature of international politics is characteristic of realist theorists as notable and different as classical realists Thucydides, Niccolo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, Edward Hallett Carr and Hans Morgenthau, structural realist Kenneth Waltz, offensive realist John Mearsheimer, realist game theory analysis of international relations, and neoclassical realists Victor Cha, Thomas Christenson and Gideon Rose. This demonstration establishes the basis for proceeding to a critique of realists' fundamental anarchy assumption. The second part of this thesis presents an argument that realists' fundamental assumption that anarchy determines the nature of international politics has been responsible for theoretical shortcomings of realist analyses, and argues that a complexity basis for international relations theory would offer theoretical and analytical advantages. The cost of the assumption of anarchy for realist analyses is demonstrated in a critique of realist accounts of the outbreak of World War I, the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, and regional political integration in Europe. These major international developments should be readily addressed by the realist or any other paradigm of international relations theory. In all three cases, the factors involved leave realists struggling to re-visit their assumptions about international politics in order to explain what occurred. While such re-assessments have included a variety of efforts to broaden or redefine the factors considered, the role and implications of anarchy as a foundational assumption of realist theorising has rarely been questioned, and it remains a central realist premise. Complexity theory is being embraced in a variety of fields of social inquiry, including politics and international relations. This thesis proposes that the complexity of international politics is something that needs to be embraced and not sidelined. This is the case whether the international politics in question was in ancient times or the twenty-first century. The complexity of international politics, not anarchy, needs to be operationalised as the foundational assumption of international relations theory, in order to build international relations theorising on a more appropriate basis that can be applied more fruitfully in the descriptions and explanations of empirical international relations analyses. / Thesis (PhD)--University of South Australia, 2009
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ADTP/285657 |
| Date | January 2009 |
| Creators | Kissane, Dylan |
| Source Sets | Australiasian Digital Theses Program |
| Language | EN-AUS |
| Detected Language | English |
| Rights | Copyright 2009 Dylan Kissane |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds