One Paradigm Many Orders: Realists’ Conceptualizations of International Order

Öz

As the relative decline of the United States and the rise of China have become the focus of international relations studies, the concept of "international order" has also been frequently debated in recent years. These debates touch on very different points in the IR discipline and are addressed at different levels. The main reason for this situation is that the concept of order, like any other concept, is portrayed in different ways by students of international politics. Despite being a paradigm that has lost favour in recent years, Realist theories have been at the centre of these debates for a long time. This study will explore how Realists conceive of international order. Considering the fact that Realism contains hundreds of large and small theories and approaches, the study selects theorists and homogeneous theories that clearly conceptualise order. For this reason, Hans Morgenthau, Robert Gilpin and Patrick Porter from Classical Realism and Kenneth Waltz and John Mearsheimer from Structural Realism will be selected and their conceptualisations of order will be discussed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• International Order
• Classical Realism
• Structural Realism

Tek Paradigma Birçok Düzen: Realistlerin Düzen Kavramlaştırmaları

Öz

Görece ABD’nin gerileyişi, Çin’in yükselişi gibi konuların uluslararası ilişkiler çalışmalarının merkezini oluşturmaya başladığı bu dönemde “uluslararası düzen” kavramı da buna paralel olarak son yıllarda sıklıkla tartışılan bir kavram olmuştur. Bu tartışmalar IR disiplininde çok farklı noktalara değinmekte ve yine farklı seviyelerde ele alınmaktadır. Bu durumun asıl sebebi her kavramda olduğu gibi düzen kavramının da IR çalışanları tarafından farklı şekillerde tasvir edilmesidir. Her ne kadar son yıllarda gözden düşmüş bir paradigma da olsa, Realist teoriler bu tartışmaların uzun süredir merkezinde yer almaktadır. Bu çalışmada da Realistlerin uluslararası düzeni nasıl tasavvur ettiği incelenecektir. Realizm içinde irili ufaklı yüzlerce teori ve yaklaşım barındırması hasebiyle düzen kavramlaştırmalarını net bir şekilde yapan teorisyenler ve homojen teoriler seçilmiştir. Bu sebeple Klasik Realistlerden Hans Morgenthau, Robert Gilpin ve Patrick Porter; Yapısal Realizmden de Kenneth Waltz ve John Mearsheimer seçilerek onların düzen kavramlaştırmaları tartışılacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yapısal Realizm
• Klasik Realizm
• Uluslararası Düzen

Kaynakça

1. Amstrup, N. (1978). The “Early” Morgenthau. A comment on the ıntellectual origins of realism. Cooperation and Conflict, 13(2), 163–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/001083677801300206
2. Anadolu Ajansı. (2022). Russian attacks on civilian infrastructure in Ukraine “war crimes,” says EU. Anadolu Ajansı. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/russia-ukraine-war/russian-attacks-on-civilian-infrastructure-in-ukraine-war-crimes-says-eu/2715197
3. Biden, J. (2020). Why America must lead again: Rescuing U.S. foreign policy after Trump. Foreign Affairs. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-01-23/why-america-must-lead-again Brooks, S. G., Ikenberry, G. J., & Wohlforth, W. C. (2012). Don’t come home, America: The case against retrenchment. International Security, 37(3), 7–51. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00107
4. Bull, H. (1976). Arms control and world order. International Security, 1(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.2307/2538573
5. Bull, H. (2002). The anarchical society : a study of order in world politics (3. baskı). Columbia University Press.
6. Carr, E. H. (2016). The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919-1939 (M. Cox (ed.)). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95076-8
7. Coen, A. (2018). International order, the rule of law, and US departures from refugee protection. The International Journal of Human Rights, 22(10), 1269–1284. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2018.1454910
8. Fukuyama, F. (1992). The end of history and the last man. Maxwell Macmillan International.

9. Gilpin, R. (1975). Three models of the future. International Organization, 29(1), 37–60. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2706285
10. Gilpin, R. (1981). War and change in world politics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511664267
11. Gilpin, R. (1988). The theory of Hegemonic war. Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 18(4), 591. https://doi.org/10.2307/204816
12. Gilpin, R., & Gilpin, J. M. (1987). The political economy of international relations. Princeton University Press. Gilpin, R., & Gilpin, J. M. (2001). Global political economy. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvcm4j53
13. Goddard, S. E. (2018). When right makes might : Rising powers and world order. Cornell University Press.
14. Goh, E. (2013). The struggle for order: Hegemony, hierarchy, and transition in post-cold war east Asia. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199599363.001.0001
15. Ikenberry, G. J. (2001). After Victory: Institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars. Princeton University Press.
16. Ikenberry, G. J. (2014). The logic of order: Westphalia, liberalism, and the evolution of international order in the modern era. Içinde G. J. Ikenberry (Ed.), Power, Order, and Change in World Politics (ss. 83–107). Cambridge University Press.
17. Ikenberry, G. J. (2020). A world safe for democracy liberal ınternationalism and the crises of global order. Yale University Press.
18. Ikenberry, G. J., Mastanduno, M., & Wohlforth, W. C. (2009). Introduction: Unipolarity, state behavior, and systemic consequences. World Politics, 61(1), 1–27. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40060219
19. Jervis, R. (2009). Unipolarity: A structural perspective. World Politics, 61(1), 188–213. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40060225
20. Krauthammer, C. (1990). The unipolar moment. Foreign Affairs, 70(1), 23–33. https://doi.org/10.2307/20044692 Layne, C. (1993). The unipolar illusion: Why new great powers will rise. International Security, 17(4), 5–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539020
21. Mastanduno, M. (1997). Preserving the unipolar moment: Realist theories and U.S. grand strategy after the cold war. International Security, 21(4), 49–88. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539283
22. Mearsheimer, J. J. (1990). Back to the future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War. International Security, 15(1), 5–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/2538981
23. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). Tragedy of great power politics. W.W. Norton & Company.
24. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2018). The great delusion: Liberal dreams and ınternational realities. Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv5cgb1w
25. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2019). Bound to fail: The Rise and fall of the liberal ınternational order. International Security, 43(4), 7–50. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00342
26. Milner, H. (1991). The assumption of anarchy in ınternational relations theory: A critique. Review of International Studies, 17(1), 67–85. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20097244
27. Morgenthau, H. J. (1939). International Affairs: The Resurrection of Neutrality in Europe. The American Political Science Review, 33(3), 473–486. https://doi.org/10.2307/1948801
28. Morgenthau, H. J. (1945). The Machiavellian Utopia. Ethics, 55(2), 145–147. https://doi.org/10.1086/290440
29. Morgenthau, H. J. (1947). Scientific man vs. power politics. LATIMER HOUSE LIMITED.
30. Morgenthau, H. J. (1948). Politics among nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. A.A. Knopf.
31. Morgenthau, H. J. (2011). Enduring realities and foreign policy. American Foreign Policy Interests, 33(3), 143–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803920.2011.593989
32. Navari, C. (2000). Internationalism and the state in the twentieth century. Routledge.
33. Norrlof, C. (2010). America’s global advantage US Hegemony and ınternational cooperation. Cambridge University Press.
34. Politico. (2023). EU condemns Hamas attack on Israel as ‘terrorism in its most despicable form’. https://www.politico.eu/article/israel-ursulva-von-der-leyen-hamas-palestina-condemns-terrorism/
35. Porter, P. (2020). The false promise of liberal order: Nostalgia, Delusion and the Rise of Trump. Polity.
36. Rathbun, B. (2008). A Rose by any other name: Neoclassical realism as the logical and necessary extension of structural realism. Security Studies, 17(2), 294–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636410802098917
37. Ripsman, N. M., Taliaferro, J. W., & Lobell, S. E. (2016). Neoclassical realist theory of ınternational politics. Içinde Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Politics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199899234.001.0001
38. Sheetz, M. S., & Mastanduno, M. (1997). Debating the unipolar moment. International Security, 22(3), 168–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539361
39. Slaughter, A.-M. (2004). A new world order. Princeton University Press.
40. Walt, S. M. (1987). The origins of alliance. Cornell University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt32b5fc
41. Waltz, K. N. (1967). The politics of peace. International Studies Quarterly, 11(3), 199–211. https://doi.org/10.2307/3013947
42. Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Addison-Wesley Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781912282388
43. Waltz, K. N. (1982a). The myth of national interdependence. Içinde R. Maghroori & B. Ramberg (Ed.), Globalism versus Realism: International Relations’ Third Debate (ss. 81–96). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429049033-6
44. Waltz, K. N. (1982b). The central balance and security in Northeast Asia. Asian Perspective, 6(1), 88–107. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43737981
45. Waltz, K. N. (1990). Realist thought and neorealist theory. Journal of International Affairs, 44(1), 21–37. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24357222
46. Waltz, K. N. (1993). The new world order. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 22(2), 187–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298930220020801
47. Waltz, K. N. (2000). NATO expansion: A realist’s view. Contemporary Security Policy, 21(2), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260008404253
48. Waltz, K. N. (2004). Neorealism: Confusions and criticisms. Journal of Politics and Society, 15(1), 2–6. Wendt, A. (2003). Why a World State is Inevitable. European Journal of International Relations, 9(4), 491–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/135406610394001
49. Wendt, A., & Duvall, R. (2008). Sovereignty and the UFO. Political Theory, 36(4), 607–633. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591708317902
50. Wohlforth, W. C. (1999). The stability of a unipolar world. International Security, 24(1), 5–41.
51. Wolfers, A. (1962). Discord and collaboration; essays on international politics. Johns Hopkins Press.
52. Zarakol, A. (2011). After Defeat: How the East learned to live with the West. Cambridge University Press.
53. Zhang, B. (2017). Hans Morgenthau, realist theory of ınternational leadership, and the future of global order. Chinese Political Science Review, 2(4), 512–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-017-0080-0