Condensed PDF: Key Concepts in IR

Key concepts in IR Classical Realism: Anarchy: The international system lacks a central authority capable of enforcing rules or ensuring the security of states. State-Centrism: States → primary actors in international relations. Power Politics: States = primarily motivated →...

Key concepts in IR Classical Realism: Anarchy: The international system lacks a central authority capable of enforcing rules or ensuring the security of states. State-Centrism: States → primary actors in international relations. Power Politics: States = primarily motivated → pursuit of power + security. Survival: The ultimate goal of states → ensure their own survival → competitive + potentially hostile environment. Self-Help: States must rely on their own capabilities to achieve their interests + ensure their security, → cannot depend on international institutions or other states for protection. Raison d'État: The national interest, often defined in terms of power + security → guide state leaders' decisions above all other considerations. Dual Moral Standard: Realism acknowledges a difference between the moral principles that govern individuals + those that apply to states in their external relations. Neorealism (Structural Realism): Anarchy: Like classical realism, neorealism emphasizes anarchic structure → international system → defining characteristic of international relations. Systemic Focus: Neorealism shifts the focus from human nature → structure of the international system → primary determinant of state behavior. Security Dilemma: In an anarchic system, one state's pursuit of security → inadvertently threaten the security of others → spiral of mistrust and potential conflict. Power Distribution: The distribution of power → international system (e.g., unipolar, bipolar, multipolar) significantly influences the dynamics of international relations + likelihood of conflict or cooperation. Neoclassical Realism: Domestic Politics: Neoclassical realism incorporates domestic factors, such as state-society relations, leaders' perceptions + capacity of the state to mobilize resources, into its analysis of state behavior. Perceptions and Misperceptions: Neoclassical realists emphasize the role of leaders' perceptions of the international system + their interpretations of power distribution, acknowledging the potential for miscalculations and misjudgments. Status Quo vs. Revisionist States: Neoclassical realism distinguishes between states that are satisfied with the existing international order (status quo states) + those that seek to challenge or change it (revisionist states). Neoliberalism: Anarchy: While acknowledging the anarchic nature of the international system, neoliberalism argues that cooperation among states is possible + can be sustained. Rational Choice: Neoliberalism, like neorealism, utilizes rational choice theory as its methodological framework, assuming that states are rational actors pursuing their interests. Institutions: Neoliberal institutionalism emphasizes the role of international institutions in facilitating cooperation by reducing transaction costs, providing information, and enhancing transparency. Interdependence: Neoliberalism highlights the growing interdependence among states → areas of trade + economics, arguing → this interdependence → create incentives for cooperation. Constructivism: Social Construction of Reality: Constructivism argues → international relations → not determined solely by material factors + shaped by ideas, norms, and identities. Identity: Constructivism emphasizes the importance of identity, both individual + collective, in shaping state behavior + interests. Identities → not fixed → socially constructed through interactions. Norms: Constructivism highlights the role of norms, both regulative + constitutive, in shaping state behavior + international relations. Practices: Constructivists focus → role of practices in shaping how actors understand the world + relate to one another. Practices are socially meaningful patterns of action that both reflect and constitute shared understandings. Agent-Structure Debate: Constructivism attempts to bridge the agent-structure divide, arguing for a mutual constitution of agents + structures where both influence + shape each other. The English School: International System: The English School recognizes the anarchic nature of the international system, similar to realism. International Society: A core concept → English School, international society refers → shared norms, rules, + institutions that govern relations among states, even in the absence of a world government. World Society: The English School distinguishes between international society (relations among states) + world society, which encompasses broader global societal identities and norms that transcend state boundaries. Pluralism vs. Solidarism: The English School grapples with the tension between pluralist + solidarist conceptions of international society, reflecting debates about the scope of shared norms + potential for intervention. Marxism Historical Materialism: Marxism emphasizes materialist conception of history, arguing → economic forces + class relations → driving forces behind historical change + social relations. Capitalism: Marxism views capitalism → inherently exploitative system based on class struggle + the pursuit of profit, with global implications. Imperialism: Marxist theories of imperialism explain how capitalist powers use their economic and military might to dominate and exploit other parts of the world. World-Systems Theory: Building on Marxist ideas, world-systems theory analyzes the global capitalist system as a hierarchical structure with a core, periphery, and semi-periphery, characterized by an exploitative relationship where wealth is transferred from the periphery to the core. Neo-Gramscianism: Hegemony: Neo-Gramscianism draws on Gramsci's concept of hegemony, which emphasizes the role of consent and ideology in maintaining power. Hegemonic powers not only use coercion but also shape the dominant ideas and norms that legitimize their rule. Critical Theory: Neo-Gramscianism incorporates elements of critical theory, challenging the status quo and seeking to understand and transform power relations in the international system. Feminist IR:  Gender: Feminist IR emphasizes the importance of analyzing how gender shapes international relations, challenging traditional IR's focus on male-dominated perspectives and experiences. Patriarchy: Feminist IR critiques patriarchy as a system of power that privileges men over women, influencing global politics, institutions, and social relations. Intersectionality: Feminist IR increasingly incorporates intersectional analysis, recognizing how gender intersects with other social categories (e.g., race, class, sexuality) to produce complex forms of inequality. Postcolonialism/Decolonialism: Colonialism and Imperialism: Postcolonialism and decolonialism focus on the legacies of colonialism and imperialism, analyzing how historical power relations continue to shape contemporary global politics, economic structures, and cultural representations. Eurocentrism: These approaches critique Eurocentrism—the tendency to view the world from a Western perspective and to privilege Western knowledge and experiences. Subaltern Perspectives: Postcolonialism and decolonialism emphasize the importance of understanding the world from the perspectives of those who have been marginalized and oppressed by colonialism and imperialism. Poststructuralism: Discourse: Poststructuralism emphasizes the role of language (discourse) in shaping our understanding of the world, arguing that language is not neutral but constructs meaning and power relations. Deconstruction: Poststructuralists utilize deconstruction to analyze and challenge binary oppositions (e.g., developed/underdeveloped, civilized/barbaric) that underpin traditional IR concepts and theories. Genealogy: Poststructuralism employs genealogy to trace the historical construction of knowledge, power, and identities, revealing how current understandings are shaped by past practices and discourses. Key Scholars Classical Realism: Thucydides: Considered a foundational figure in classical realism, Thucydides' account of the Peloponnesian War highlights the role of power politics, human nature, and the inevitability of conflict in international relations. Niccolò Machiavelli: Known for his emphasis on realpolitik, Machiavelli's writings, particularly "The Prince," stress the importance of pursuing national interests and the effective use of power by rulers. Thomas Hobbes: Hobbes's concept of the "state of nature," characterized by anarchy and the pursuit of self-preservation, is central to classical realist understandings of international relations. Jean-Jacques Rousseau : While not traditionally considered a realist, Rousseau's ideas about the social contract and the potential for conflict in the absence of a strong sovereign have influenced realist thinking. Hans Morgenthau]: A leading figure in modern realism, Morgenthau emphasized the importance of power politics, national interest, and the limits of morality in international relations. Neorealism (Structural Realism):  Kenneth Waltz: Waltz is credited with formalizing neorealism in his book "Theory of International Politics," shifting the focus from human nature to the anarchic structure of the international system as the primary determinant of state behavior. John Mearsheimer: A proponent of offensive realism, Mearsheimer argues that states are inherently power-maximizers and that the pursuit of hegemony is a rational strategy in the anarchic international system. Neoclassical Realism: Gideon Rose: Rose is a key figure in neoclassical realism, which incorporates both structural factors (like the distribution of power) and unit-level factors (such as domestic politics and leaders' perceptions) to explain state behavior. Randall Schweller: Schweller's work on neoclassical realism highlights the distinction between status quo and revisionist states, adding another layer of analysis to understanding international behavior. Neoliberalism: Robert Keohane: Keohane is a leading scholar in neoliberal institutionalism, emphasizing the role of institutions in facilitating cooperation among states and mitigating the effects of anarchy. Joseph Grieco: Grieco's work on neorealism and neoliberalism has contributed to the "neo-neo debate," which focuses on the relative importance of material versus ideational factors in international relations. Constructivism: Alexander Wendt: Wendt's book "Social Theory of International Politics" is considered a seminal work in constructivism. He argues that anarchy is what states make of it, highlighting the role of ideas, norms, and identities in shaping international relations. Nicholas Onuf: Though not mentioned in your provided texts, Onuf is considered a founding figure of constructivism in IR and coined the term "constructivism." The English School: Hedley Bull: Bull's work, particularly "The Anarchical Society," is foundational to the English School. He emphasized the concept of international society, the balance between order and justice, and the importance of a historical and interpretive approach to IR. Martin Wight: Wight's ideas about the three traditions of IR—Realism, Rationalism, and Revolutionism—have been highly influential in shaping the English School's tripartite distinction between international system, international society, and world society. Adam Watson: Watson's work, including "The Evolution of International Society," contributed to the English School's focus on historical analysis and the development of international society over time. Barry Buzan: Buzan has played a key role in revitalizing the English School and advocating for its continued relevance in IR. His work emphasizes the need for a more coherent research agenda, greater engagement with other IR theories, and a focus on the interplay between international system, international society, and world society. Marxism: Karl Marx: Marx's critique of capitalism and his theories of historical materialism, class struggle, and imperialism have profoundly influenced Marxist approaches to IR. Rosa Luxemburg: Luxemburg's work on imperialism, particularly her analysis of how capitalism relies on the exploitation of colonies, is central to Marxist understandings of global inequality. Neo-Gramscianism: Antonio Gramsci: Gramsci's concept of hegemony, which emphasizes the role of consent and ideology in maintaining power, has been highly influential in neo-Gramscian approaches to IR. Robert W. Cox: Cox is a leading figure in neo-Gramscian IR. He applied Gramsci's ideas to the global level, arguing that the international system is not a neutral arena but shaped by power relations and hegemonic ideas. World-Systems Theory: Immanuel Wallerstein: Wallerstein is the founder of world-systems theory, which emphasizes the exploitative relationship between the core, periphery, and semi-periphery in the capitalist world economy. Feminist IR: Sandra Whitworth: Whitworth's work, particularly her book "Feminism and International Relations," emphasizes the importance of gender analysis in understanding international relations, building on Robert Cox's framework of historical structures. Charlotte Hooper: Hooper's work has been crucial in highlighting the marginalization of women and gender issues within the discipline of International Relations. Iris Young: Drawing on Marxist and socialist thought, Young argues that women’s oppression is rooted in both patriarchy and class relations, advocating for an intersectional understanding of gender inequality. Maria Stern: Stern’s research underscores the importance of incorporating the experiences of marginalized groups, particularly women, into the study of global politics. Her work on violence against Mayan women exemplifies this approach. Postcolonialism/Decolonialism: Frantz Fanon: Fanon's work on colonialism emphasized the psychological and cultural dimensions of colonial domination, arguing for the need for decolonization as a process of liberation. Samir Amin: Amin was a key figure in dependency theory and a prominent critic of Eurocentrism, arguing that the global capitalist system perpetuates the underdevelopment of the Global South. Gayatri Spivak: A leading figure in postcolonial theory, Spivak's work focuses on the representation of subaltern groups, particularly women, and the challenges of giving voice to those marginalized by colonialism and patriarchy. Enrique Dussel: Dussel's work on modernity/coloniality argues that modernity is inherently linked to colonialism and that a decolonial perspective is necessary to understand global power relations. Walter Mignolo: Mignolo is a key figure in decolonial theory, emphasizing the importance of border thinking and challenging Eurocentric epistemologies. Poststructuralism: Michel Foucault: Foucault's concepts of discourse, power/knowledge, and genealogy have been highly influential in poststructuralist approaches to IR, challenging traditional notions of truth, power, and subjectivity. Jacques Derrida: Derrida's concept of deconstruction, which involves analyzing binary oppositions and their underlying power relations, is central to poststructuralist thought. Core Actors Realism States: Realism centers on states as the principal actors in international relations. [1-3] This emphasis stems from the realist understanding of the international system as anarchic, where states must prioritize their survival and security. Sources highlight the realist view of state sovereignty as paramount, granting states supreme authority within their territories. Neorealism (Structural Realism) States: Similar to classical realism, neorealism focuses on states as the primary units of analysis. [4, 5] Neorealists are interested in how the distribution of power among states, especially within the context of anarchy, shapes their behavior. Neoclassical Realism States: Neoclassical realism retains a focus on states but acknowledges that domestic politics and leaders' perceptions play a role in shaping state actions on the international stage. It emphasizes the interplay between systemic pressures (like power distribution) and domestic factors in influencing foreign policy decisions. Neoliberalism States: Neoliberalism also concentrates on states as the central actors in international relations. However, unlike realism, neoliberalism emphasizes the potential for cooperation among states, particularly through institutions. [5, 7] Constructivism States and Non-State Actors: Constructivism broadens the scope of actors in IR, recognizing the influence of both states and non-state entities. [8, 9] It acknowledges the role of: International Organizations: Constructivists argue that international organizations are not merely tools of states but can develop their own identities and influence norms. Transnational Advocacy Networks: These networks play a role in promoting norms and shaping state behavior, as demonstrated by human rights activists. The English School States: The English School primarily focuses on states as the core actors in international society. It highlights the role of states, particularly dominant ones, in constructing and shaping international norms and institutions. However, the English School also acknowledges: Non-State Actors: The sources suggest a growing need for the English School to incorporate non-state actors, particularly given the rise of functionally differentiated international societies where states are not the only influential entities. Marxism Classes: Marxism centers on socioeconomic classes as the key actors in both domestic and international politics. It emphasizes how the capitalist system, driven by class struggle between the bourgeoisie (owners of capital) and the proletariat (working class), shapes global dynamics. [12, 13] Neo-Gramscianism States and Transnational Capitalist Class: Neo-Gramscianism, while acknowledging states, expands the focus to include the role of a transnational capitalist class in shaping  global hegemony. [14, 15] It examines how this class uses its economic and ideological power to influence international relations and maintain the existing world order. [14, 15] Feminist IR Multiple Actors: Feminist IR critiques traditional IR's state-centric focus and instead examines the roles of various actors often marginalized in mainstream analysis: Women: Feminist IR seeks to highlight the experiences and perspectives of women in international relations, challenging gender biases in traditional IR theories and policy-making. [16, 17] Gendered Institutions: Feminist IR analyzes how institutions, both domestic and international, are often gendered, reflecting and perpetuating gender inequalities. [18, 19] Postcolonialism/Decolonialism The Colonized and Marginalized: Postcolonial and decolonial approaches prioritize the experiences and perspectives of people and nations historically subjected to colonialism and imperialism. These approaches center their analysis on: Postcolonial States: They examine the unique challenges faced by postcolonial states in navigating the international system, particularly given the legacies of colonial power structures. Indigenous Peoples: Postcolonial and decolonial scholars emphasize the knowledge and perspectives of indigenous communities, challenging Eurocentric narratives of global politics. Poststructuralism Discourses and Power Relations: Poststructuralism shifts attention away from traditional actors like states and instead focuses on how power operates through discourses, which are systems of language and representation that shape our understanding of the world. It seeks to deconstruct taken-for-granted categories and identities, including the very concept of the state, to uncover underlying power relations. [22-24] Assumptions Classical Realism: Human Nature: Classical realists like Thucydides and Morgenthau believe that human nature is inherently self-interested and driven by a desire for power. [1-3] This assumption underpins their view of international politics as a competitive and conflict-ridden realm. State as Primary Actor: Classical realists focus on states as the primary actors in international relations. They often view states as unitary actors, meaning that internal divisions within a state are less important than its actions on the world stage. Anarchy: Similar to other realist theories, classical realism assumes that the international system is anarchic, meaning there is no overarching authority above states. This lack of a global sovereign leads to a self-help system where states must prioritize their own security and interests. Power and Security: Classical realists emphasize the pursuit of power and security as the primary goals of states. They argue that states are constantly seeking to enhance their power relative to others to ensure their survival. Limits of Morality: While not rejecting morality entirely, classical realists, particularly Morgenthau, argue that universal moral principles are often inapplicable to state actions in  the anarchic international system. [1, 2] They stress the need for prudence and a clear understanding of national interest when making foreign policy decisions. Neorealism (Structural Realism): Anarchy: Neorealists, like classical realists, view the international system as anarchic, lacking a central authority to enforce rules or protect states from each other. [3-5] Rational Unitary Actors: Neorealism assumes that states are rational, unitary actors primarily concerned with maximizing their security. [4-6] They see states as acting predictably based on calculations of power and self-interest within the constraints of the international system. Security Maximization: Neorealists argue that states, operating in an anarchic system, prioritize survival. [6, 7] While some, like Mearsheimer, argue that states are power-maximizers, others, like Waltz, suggest that states are security-maximizers and will often seek to maintain the balance of power to ensure their survival. [7, 8] Power as Central: Neorealists consider the distribution of power in the international system as the key factor shaping state behavior. [7, 9, 10] They focus on material capabilities, such as military strength and economic power, as the primary determinants of state power. Neoclassical Realism: Systemic and Domestic Factors: Unlike strict structural realists, neoclassical realists believe that both the international system's structure (e.g., the distribution of power) and unit-level factors (e.g., domestic politics, leaders' perceptions) shape state behavior. Leaders' Perceptions: Neoclassical realism emphasizes the importance of how state leaders perceive the distribution of power. They argue that leaders' interpretations of power dynamics can significantly influence their foreign policy decisions. State Capacity: Schweller, a prominent neoclassical realist, highlights that states vary in their capacity to translate national power into state power. This means that states with similar resources might behave differently in international relations based on their internal characteristics and ability to mobilize those resources. Neoliberalism: Anarchy: Like realists, neoliberal institutionalists acknowledge that the international system is anarchic. However, they are more optimistic about the possibilities for cooperation within this system. Rational, Self-Interested States: Neoliberals assume that states are rational actors primarily concerned with maximizing their own interests. This assumption is shared with neorealism, leading to the "neo-neo debate" about the conditions under which cooperation is possible. Institutions and Cooperation: A key assumption of neoliberalism is that international institutions, such as international organizations and treaties, can facilitate cooperation among states, even in an anarchic system. [11, 13] They believe that institutions can reduce uncertainty, enhance transparency, and provide incentives for states to cooperate for mutual benefit. Constructivism: Socially Constructed Reality: A core assumption of constructivism is that the international system is not objective but rather socially constructed. [14-16] This means that the meanings of concepts like "anarchy," "power," and "security" are not fixed but shaped by social interaction, norms, and identities.  Mutual Constitution of Agents and Structures: Constructivists argue that agents (like states) and structures (like the international system) mutually constitute each other. [15-18] They reject the idea that actors have fixed, pre-given interests, proposing instead that identities and interests are shaped by social interaction and can change over time. The Power of Ideas and Norms: Constructivists emphasize the importance of ideas, norms, and culture in shaping state behavior and international relations. [14-16, 19] They argue that material factors alone cannot fully explain patterns of conflict and cooperation without considering the influence of shared beliefs, values, and practices. The English School: International Society: A central assumption of the English School is that states form an international society, meaning they share certain norms, rules, and institutions that govern their interactions. [20-23] This concept attempts to find a middle ground between the realist emphasis on anarchy and the liberal focus on cooperation. Pluralism vs. Solidarism: The English School recognizes a tension between pluralist and solidarist conceptions of international society. [24-26] Pluralism emphasizes state sovereignty and the diversity of values, while solidarism envisions a more integrated international society with shared norms, potentially even at the expense of some state sovereignty. Historical and Interpretive Approach: The English School emphasizes a historical and interpretive approach to understanding international relations. [20, 21, 27] They believe that studying the evolution of norms, institutions, and state practices over time is crucial for understanding contemporary global politics. Marxism: Materialist Conception of History: Marxists view material factors, particularly economic forces, as the driving force behind historical change and international relations. [28-30] They argue that the mode of production (e.g., capitalism) shapes the relations of production (e.g., between capitalists and workers) and the broader political and social structures of society. Class Struggle: Marxists emphasize class struggle as a fundamental dynamic in both domestic and international politics. [28, 30] They argue that capitalism inherently creates antagonistic classes (e.g., the bourgeoisie and the proletariat) whose interests are in conflict, leading to social and political tensions. Imperialism: Marxist theories of imperialism, such as those by Rosa Luxemburg and Rudolf Hilferding, highlight the expansionary nature of capitalism and its tendency to lead to imperialism as capitalist states seek new markets, resources, and investment opportunities. Neo-Gramscianism: Hegemony: Neo-Gramscians, drawing on the work of Antonio Gramsci, emphasize the concept of hegemony, which refers to the dominance of a particular set of ideas and values that legitimize and maintain the existing social and political order. [32, 33] Role of Consent and Coercion: Neo-Gramscians argue that hegemony is maintained not solely through coercion but also through the consent of the subordinate groups. [32, 33] This consent is achieved through the spread of dominant ideologies that shape people's understanding of their own interests. World-Systems Theory:  Capitalist World-System: World-systems theorists, like Immanuel Wallerstein, argue that the modern world system is a capitalist world-economy characterized by a hierarchical division of labor between the core, periphery, and semi-periphery. [34, 35] Exploitative Relationships: World-systems theory emphasizes the exploitative relationships between these zones, arguing that wealth is extracted from the periphery to the core, perpetuating global inequality. They see the structure of the world-system as benefiting the core at the expense of the periphery. Feminist IR: Gender as a Social Construct: Feminist IR theorists view gender as a social construct rather than a biological given. They argue that gender roles and expectations are not natural but created and maintained by social, cultural, and political forces. Gendered Power Relations: Feminist IR emphasizes the pervasiveness of gendered power relations in international politics. [38-40] They examine how gender shapes the distribution of power, resources, and opportunities in global affairs, often highlighting the subordination of women and the privileging of masculine norms. Intersectionality: Feminist IR, particularly critical feminism, acknowledges the intersectionality of gender with other forms of identity, such as race, class, and nationality. They argue that analyzing gender in isolation from these other factors provides an incomplete understanding of power dynamics. Postcolonialism/Decolonialism: Eurocentrism: Postcolonial and decolonial approaches challenge the Eurocentric biases inherent in many traditional IR theories. [42, 43] They argue that these theories often present a Western-centric view of world politics, ignoring the experiences and perspectives of the Global South. Colonialism and Power: These approaches emphasize the enduring legacies of colonialism and imperialism in shaping contemporary international relations. [44, 45] They argue that colonialism was not just a historical event but a system of power that continues to influence global politics through economic, political, and cultural structures. Knowledge and Power: Postcolonial and decolonial scholars highlight the link between knowledge production and power. They argue that knowledge is not neutral but shaped by power relations, and they seek to decolonize knowledge by recovering and valuing marginalized voices and perspectives. Poststructuralism: Discourse and Power: Poststructuralists emphasize the role of discourse in shaping our understanding of world politics and the operation of power. [46, 47] They argue that language is not neutral but constructs meaning, shapes identities, and influences how we perceive and act in international relations. Deconstruction: Drawing on the work of Jacques Derrida, poststructuralists use deconstruction to challenge taken-for-granted assumptions and binary oppositions in IR. By deconstructing concepts like "sovereignty" or "security," they aim to reveal the underlying power relations and the ways in which language shapes our understanding of these concepts. Problematizing the State: Poststructuralists challenge the centrality of the state in IR. [49, 50] They argue that the state is not a fixed, objective entity but a socially constructed actor whose identity and interests are shaped by discourses and power relations. Theoretical Claims Classical Realism: Power and Self-Interest: Classical realism posits that states are primarily motivated by self-interest, which they pursue by seeking power and security in a competitive international system. Human Nature: This school of thought often grounds its analysis in assumptions about human nature, viewing individuals as inherently self-interested and power-seeking, traits that translate to the behavior of states. Anarchy and Conflict: Classical realists emphasize the anarchic nature of the international system, where there is no overarching authority to enforce rules or prevent conflict. This absence of a global sovereign leads to a constant struggle for power and security among states. Limits of Morality: While not rejecting morality altogether, classical realists argue that universal moral principles often conflict with national interests and that states should prioritize their own survival and well-being. Cyclical History: Classical realists often view history as cyclical, with patterns of conflict and cooperation repeating themselves as states rise and fall in power. Neorealism (Structural Realism): Anarchy as the Ordering Principle: Unlike classical realism, neorealism places less emphasis on human nature and instead focuses on the anarchic structure of the international system as the primary determinant of state behavior. States as Rational Actors: Neorealism assumes that states are rational actors primarily concerned with their own survival. In the self-help system that is international anarchy, states have to prioritize survival. Security Dilemma: Because states are uncertain about the intentions of others, they take steps to increase their own security, which can paradoxically lead to greater insecurity for all, creating a security dilemma. Distribution of Power: Neorealists argue that the distribution of power in the international system is a key factor in determining the likelihood of conflict and cooperation. The number of great powers (polarity) in the international system determines the dynamics of interaction. Offensive vs. Defensive Realism: Within neorealism, there is a debate between offensive realists, who argue that states should maximize their power and pursue hegemony, and defensive realists, who believe that states should prioritize balancing against threats and that excessive power can be counterproductive. Neoclassical Realism: Bridging Structure and Agency: Neoclassical realism seeks to bridge the gap between neorealism's focus on structure and the importance of unit-level factors, such as domestic politics and leaders' perceptions. Perceptions and Miscalculations: It highlights that states' perceptions of the distribution of power and their own interests can vary, leading to miscalculations and conflict. State Capacity: Neoclassical realism also emphasizes that states differ in their ability to translate national power into state power, suggesting that domestic factors can significantly influence a state's behavior on the international stage. Neoliberalism: [14-17]  Cooperation Under Anarchy: Neoliberalism argues that cooperation is possible even in an anarchic international system, challenging the realist emphasis on conflict. Institutions and Interdependence: It highlights the role of international institutions and economic interdependence in fostering cooperation, reducing uncertainty, and promoting common interests. Rational Choice and Game Theory: Neoliberals often employ rational choice theory and game theory to explain how states can cooperate to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes. Constructivism: [7, 11, 12, 18-39] Socially Constructed Reality: Constructivism emphasizes that international relations are not solely determined by material factors but are also shaped by ideas, norms, and identities, which are socially constructed. The Power of Ideas: Constructivists argue that ideas can shape how actors define their interests, perceive threats, and conceive of possible actions. Ideas shape the meaning of material realities. Identity and Interests: They highlight the importance of identity, arguing that states' identities shape their interests and behavior. Who actors are shapes what they want. Norms and Rules: Constructivists emphasize the role of norms and rules in shaping state behavior, suggesting that states often comply with international norms not just out of self-interest but also because they see those norms as legitimate. Socialization and Change: Constructivism pays attention to how agents are socialized into existing norms and how those norms can change over time through processes of interaction and diffusion. The English School: [6, 14, 18, 40-57] International Society: The English School emphasizes the concept of international society, arguing that states form a society with shared norms, rules, and institutions that govern their interactions. Order and Justice: It is concerned with both order and justice in international relations, exploring how international society seeks to balance the interests of states with broader ethical concerns. Historical and Interpretive Approach: The English School often adopts a historical and interpretive approach, examining how international society has evolved over time and how shared norms and institutions shape state behavior. International System, Society, and World Society: It distinguishes between the international system (anarchy), international society (shared norms and institutions), and world society (global societal identities and values), exploring the interplay between these three elements. Pluralism and Solidarism: The English School debates the relative importance of pluralism (coexistence based on respect for state sovereignty) and solidarism (cooperation based on shared values and common interests) in international society, examining how these different principles shape the development of international order. Marxism: [58-67] Economic Base and Superstructure: Marxism argues that the economic base of society (the mode of production) shapes the superstructure, which includes political institutions, ideas, and culture.  Class Struggle: Central to Marxist thought is the concept of class struggle, with capitalism inherently creating tensions between the bourgeoisie (owners of capital) and the proletariat (working class). This struggle plays out on a global scale. Imperialism and Capitalism: Marxists often view imperialism as a product of capitalism, with capitalist states driven to expand their markets and exploit resources in other parts of the world. Unequal Exchange: They highlight the unequal exchange between core and peripheral countries in the global capitalist system, perpetuating global inequalities. Historical Materialism: Marxist approaches often employ historical materialism, analyzing historical development and social change in terms of material conditions and economic forces. Neo-Gramscianism: [61, 68, 69] Hegemony and Consent: Neo-Gramscianism builds on Antonio Gramsci's concept of hegemony, arguing that dominant groups maintain power not just through coercion but also through consent, shaping the ideas and beliefs of subordinate groups. Role of Ideas and Culture: It emphasizes the role of ideas and culture in maintaining power, suggesting that dominant ideologies often legitimize existing power structures. Historical Structures: Neo-Gramscians, like Robert Cox, advocate for a historical structures approach to IR, examining how historical power relations and dominant ideologies shape the international system and state behavior. World-Systems Theory: Core-Periphery Hierarchy: World-systems theory argues that the capitalist world economy is structured as a hierarchy with a core, periphery, and semi-periphery, characterized by an exploitative relationship between these zones. Unequal Development: It emphasizes that the development of the core is often achieved at the expense of the periphery, perpetuating global inequalities. Historical Capitalism: World-systems theorists analyze capitalism as a historical system with a beginning, middle, and end, often viewing globalization as a continuation of long-term processes of capitalist expansion that began in the 16th century. Feminist IR: Gender as a Social Construct: Feminist IR theories challenge the assumption that gender is a natural or biological given, arguing that it is a social construct that shapes power relations, identities, and experiences. Gendered Power Relations: Feminist scholars explore how gendered power relations operate in international politics, influencing state behavior, global governance, and the distribution of resources. Intersectional Analysis: They often employ intersectional analysis, recognizing that gender intersects with other forms of identity, such as race, class, and sexuality, shaping experiences of inequality and oppression. Critique of Gendered Concepts: Feminist IR critiques traditional IR concepts, such as the state, security, and sovereignty, arguing that these concepts are often gendered and reflect masculine perspectives. Diverse Theoretical Approaches: Feminist IR encompasses various theoretical perspectives, including liberal feminism, critical feminism, poststructural feminism, and postcolonial feminism, each offering different insights into how gender shapes world politics. Postcolonialism/Decolonialism:  Legacies of Colonialism: Postcolonial and decolonial approaches emphasize the enduring legacies of colonialism and imperialism in shaping global power relations, knowledge production, and international institutions. Eurocentrism and Alternative Perspectives: They challenge Eurocentric perspectives, which dominate traditional IR theory, and advocate for centering the experiences and perspectives of marginalized groups in the Global South. Knowledge and Power: Postcolonial and decolonial scholars explore the relationship between knowledge and power, arguing that knowledge production is often embedded in colonial power relations and that alternative epistemologies are needed to decolonize knowledge. Race and Racism: These approaches highlight the importance of race and racism in shaping international relations, a topic often neglected in other IR theories. Decolonizing IR: Postcolonial and decolonial scholars seek to decolonize IR by challenging Eurocentric assumptions, incorporating alternative perspectives, and advocating for a more just and equitable global order. Poststructuralism: Discourse and Power: Poststructuralism emphasizes the role of discourse (language and representation) in shaping how we understand the world and how power operates through discourse. Deconstructing Binary Oppositions: It involves deconstructing binary oppositions, such as state/non-state, inside/outside, and self/other, to reveal how these categories are constructed and often reinforce power relations. Problematizing the State: Poststructuralists problematize the state, challenging its status as the primary actor in international relations and exploring how state identity and sovereignty are constructed through discourse. Genealogy and History: They often employ genealogy, a method of historical analysis that traces the origins of concepts and practices to uncover how they have changed over time and how power relations have shaped their development. Subjectivity and Identity: Poststructuralists explore how subjectivity and identity are constructed through discourse, challenging essentialist notions of identity and emphasizing the fluidity and contingency of identity formations.