Understanding International Relations, Third Edition

Conclusion
The aim of this chapter has been to provide an overview of contemporary
International Relations theory. As with any other sketch-map, it may not be
possible to find a particular location by employing it – the further reading
suggestions provide the information needed for that task – but the reader
ought now to have some sense of how the often bewildering variety of IR
theories relate to each other. As the above discussion suggests, one answer
is ‘not very closely’. As suggested in the introduction to this chapter, IR
theory since 1980 has involved a dialogue with the work of Kenneth Waltz –
at times ‘running battle’ would be more appropriate – and the authors
discussed in the second half of the chapter agree in their rejection of neo-
realism, but they agree on little else. Perhaps the only features post-positivist
writers have in common is their post-positivism – that is, their rejection of
the epistemological stance of rational choice theory, and, more generally,
their rejection of a ‘foundationalist’ account of the world, in which knowl-
edge can be grounded by the correspondence of theory to a knowable
reality. Contrary to the occasional slur of their opponents, post-positivists
do not deny the existence of a ‘real world’ but they do deny our ability to
grasp that world without the aid of theoretical categories which cannot
themselves be validated by an untheorized reality. Beyond these epistemo-
logical commonalities, it is difficult to characterize the opponents of the
‘neo–neo’ consensus.
However, the hope is that when, in future chapters, a particular theoretical
position is mentioned it will now to be possible for the reader to have a
sense of what conceptual baggage is associated with that position, and
where he or she needs to go to find a fuller account. With this in mind, it is
58
Understanding International Relations

---

now possible to turn away, for the time being at least, from an emphasis on
theory and look to the actual picture of the world that these theories have
created. In the following three chapters the issues with which realism is
concerned will be examined, then the next three chapters will open up the
debate to include the agendas of the theories which challenge the realist
orthodoxy: looking at global forces and at the theoretical issues specifically
oriented towards globalization.
International Relations Theory Today
59
Further reading
Although the books referred to in the main body of this chapter obviously have
been significant for the debate between pluralists, neorealists and neoliberals,
the most interesting contributions to this debate have been in the form of jour-
nal articles, generally in International Organization, World Politics and
International Security. These articles are also available in a number of conve-
nient collections, with some overlap in terms of contents.
Robert O. Keohane (ed.) Neorealism and its Critics (1986) contains exten-
sive extracts from Waltz, Theory of International Politics (1979), in addition to
critiques by J. G. Ruggie, ‘Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity:
Towards a NeoRealist Synthesis’ (1983), Robert Cox, ‘Social Forces, States and
World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory’ (1981) and an edited
version of Richard K. Ashley, ‘The Poverty of Neorealism’ (1984), as well as
papers by Keohane himself, Robert Gilpin’s response to Ashley, ‘The Richness
of the Tradition of Political Realism’ (1984), and a response to his critics by
Kenneth Waltz. This is certainly the best collection on the early stages of the
debate.
David A. Baldwin (ed.) Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary
Debate (1993) is the best collection; it is largely shaped around Joseph M.
Grieco, ‘Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the
Newest Liberal Institutionalism’ (1988), and also contains, amongst other
important papers, Robert Axelrod and Robert O. Keohane, ‘Achieving
Cooperation under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions’ (1985); Robert
Powell, ‘Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relations Theory’
(1991); and Arthur Stein, ‘Coordination and Collaboration: Regimes in an
Anarchic World’ (1982); as well as a valuable summary of the debate by
Baldwin, and reflections on the reaction to his original article by Grieco.
Friedrich Kratochwil and Edward D. Mansfield (eds) International