Realist avenues to global International Relations

Abstract

Realism has long been criticized by global IR, but the former can contribute to the latter and thereby improve explanations of international relations. Global IR criticizes that realism supposedly applies universally, sidelines non-Western perspectives, and misunderstands much of foreign policy, grand strategy, and international affairs. Reviewing global IR’s case against realism, however, exposes avenues for realism to complement global IR. Realism can contribute to a more global understanding of international relations through its most recent variant: neoclassical realism (NCR). This newest realism allows for contextualization and historicization of drivers of state behavior. It can embrace and has already been engaging global questions and cases; global thought and concepts; and global perspectives and scholarship. Mapping 149 NCR publications produced by 96 scholars reveals a slow shift in knowledge production away from North America toward Europe and to a lesser extent Asia and Africa. Creative research designs and scholarly collaboration can put realism in fruitful conversation with global IR. This has implications for theory building and inclusive knowledge production in realism, global IR, and the wider discipline. Only when we discover new avenues for realists to travel can they contribute to a more global IR. In turn, when global IR scholars engage realism, they may be better able to address the Western versus non-Western dichotomies they challenge.

The party scene: new directions for political party research in foreign policy analysis

“…Systemic conditions have been examined in some party research -notably within neoclassical realism. 102 The emphasis has usually been on the effect of the Cold War's end, but changes in systemic conditions and their implications for party politics have not been theorized much beyond this. Partly this is because initial research on political parties in FPA, needing to establish its relevance first, took aim at the structural theories which might now help us understand the interaction between parties and the changing international order.…”

Saudi Arabian strategy reassessment since 2003: The emergence of a regional leadership via Neoclassical Realist lenses

“…This way, it offers space for us to balance agency and structure as well as material and non-material elements – something that most IR structural theories have failed to do. Foulon and Meibauer (2020) had already claimed that NCR could, without provoking ontological dissonance, interact with other non-Western thought and disciplines, learning how to expand its explanative value and improving its relevance within IR. Agreeing with this statement and taking up the challenge, this article expands NCR's scope and range by showcasing the theory's utility to Middle East Studies.…”

“…Under these lenses, MBS’ Saudi Vision 2030 becomes a central tool for institutionalizing a new strategy that is, in fact, long in the making. Second, the article builds on current discussions about de-Westernizing the Realist intellectual canon by interacting with Middle East Studies literature, bringing Area Studies closer to IR (Foulon and Meibauer, 2020; Hurrell, 2016). The idea is that NCR has the needed flexible paradigmatic boundaries to add insights from MES scholars into the Realist worldview, providing a two-level theorization that emphasizes the importance of state-level factors – such as identity, perception and ideational preferences, issues that area specialists constantly stressed as vital to understanding the region.…”

Neorealism, neoclassical realism and the problem(s) of history

“…It presents an opportunity for scholars to contribute new puzzles, cases and concepts to a still-growing school of thought, and thereby recapture some of the broader realist tradition's dynamism. 119 While NCR is not geared towards any particular method, the above suggests two fruitful directions for neoclassical realist theorising.…”