Constructivism and foreign policy

1. Constructivism and foreign policy January 16, 2014

2. Overview Rational vs Reflective theories Why ‘Constructivism’? Applied constructivism The key aspects of constructivism Constructivism meets foreign policy

3. Rational theories • Liberalism and realism • The two dominate theories • Much of the debate in traditional international politics has been between these two groups • Both sides make much of the differences between the two • Critical scholars argue that actually there isn’t much differences between them - really a very narrow debate

4. The “neo-neo” debate

5. Rational theories These theories all share some key points: • Problem-solving - take the world as it is and try to explain it and make run as best as possible • Positivist - use “scientific” approach, to discover the “truth”, make strong distinction between facts and values

6. Reflective theories • Diverse collection of theoretical approaches, which include: • Normative theory • Critical theory • Post-modernism • Feminist theory • United more by what they reject of rational approaches than what they have in common

7. Reflective theories • Constitutive - the way we think about and approach the world helps create the world, so can’t just observe the world in a neutral way • E.g. the belief that states are naturally aggressive helps create that reality - become self-confirming (constitutive)

8. Reflective theories • Challenge distinction rational approaches make between facts and values • Limits the study of politics - only how things work, but not asking why they are that way • Naturalizes the current system - no alternative • All theories reflect certain values, none are value neutral, by trying to make a distinction between facts and values, rational theories are putting the values embedded in them beyond discussion - hidden

9. Constructivism • Constructivism as an attempt to bridge the two camps • Attempt to take some of ideas of reflective approaches and apply them to more rational theories • So get Wendt making the argument that anarchy is what states make of it

10. Why constructivism? Failure of mainstream theories to predict end of Cold War and changing nature of global system creates space for new approaches to become more mainstream Constructivism appealing because not that far from mainstream approaches

11. Constructivism does not directly challenge either realism or liberalism, Instead offer alternative understanding to some of the most central themes in international relations. Can see the idea of trying to bridge between rational and reflective

12. Three cultures of anarchy Wendt - not just one way of looking at anarchy • Conflictual - based on self-help of realists • Competitive - based on rivalry of some liberal perspectives • Friendly - based on cooperation • See Box 4.1 p.82, Ego & Alter on a desert island, as illustration

13. Key point - both anarchy and culture can change • Changing culture isn’t easy because the system is self-reinforcing • E.g. if many see anarchy as a conflictual they will act in a way that makes it hard to see alternatives

14. Using constructivism Can help shed light on how old practices of rivalry and war-making may be changed through the institutionalization, of new identities, interests and practices, e.g. (European security).

15. According to constructivists, the only reason why we might be in a self-help system is because practice made it that way. So this means that practice could also ‘un-make’ a ‘conflictual’ culture. NATO and the EU could play important roles in these ‘un-makings’.

16. Need to understand how agents’ shared knowledge, identities and interests are inter-linked and may contribute to changing deeply embedded practices and structural conditions. But, to do this we need a fundamental break with some of the realist and liberal assumptions about how the world works.

17. The essence of constructivism The four key constructivist propositions : a belief in the social construction of reality and the importance of social facts a focus on ideational as well as material structures and the importance of norms and rules

18. The essence of constructivism a focus on the role of identity in shaping political action and the importance of ‘logics of action’ a belief in the mutual ‘constitutiveness’ of agents and structure, and a focus on practice and action

19. Social construction of reality • Facts can have different shared meanings • E.g. French nuclear warhead vs North Korean nuclear warhead • Some facts aren’t really facts at all, instead are social facts - only appear as facts through common agreement, reinforced through social practice • E.g. money

20. Social construction of reality • Argue that many of the most important concepts and understandings of international relations are social facts • Over time social facts become reified through practice and routine, so appear objective and independent from those that constructed them. • Thus, change is difficult

21. Ideational and material structures • Ideas matter • Ideas language, rules, symbols etc all shape how we interpret the material world and the actions of others • Structures are codified in rules and norms • Structural change is possible by changing norms

22. Identity, interests and ‘logics of action’ • Identity is important because it is tied to particular interests and preferences. • This means the social, cultural, historical and political contexts in which agents operate becomes important • Logics of action • Logic of consequence and logic of appropriateness

23. Agents, structure and practice • Agents and structures are mutually constituted • Agents are influenced by structures (e.g. states influenced by anarchy) • But agents also influence the structure through their practices So… • Change is possible but difficult

24. Constructivism meets foreign policy NATO’s post-Cold War roles could be defined as: still keeping member states safe from threats Shift from protecting territory to security still maintaining a common identity, shared knowledge and shared understandings among all NATO’s members Socialization of new members

25. still engaging in transforming relationships and practices between NATO members and former adversaries

26. Conclusion • Constructivism can be seen as an attempt bridge between rational and reflective theories • Looks at the role of things like identity, interests, norms and how they shape actions and understanding of the world • Provide important alternative perspectives for analyzing foreign policy