AS 20103

TEORI HUBUNGAN ANTARABANGSA

KULIAH 1 & KULIAH 2

Bahagian I- PERSOALAN ASAS TEORI
Bahagian II- FIRST MAJOR DEBATE
Soalan & Persoalan
 Apa yang dikatakan teori?
 Apa hubungan teori dengan hypothesis,
concept and case study?
 Apa dia Teori Hubungan Antarabangsa?
Soalan & Persoalan-2
 Bila bermulanya theoretical discussion
between IR scholars.
 Apakah Teori Hubungan Antarabangsa
mempunyai hubungan dengan
philosophy, history, economic, law etc.
Soalan & Persoalan-3
 Apakah first major debate in IR?
 Apa pula second major debate in IR?
 Apa perbezaannya dengan third major
debate in IR?
 Apa pula yang difokuskan dalam fourth
major debate?
Soalan & Persoalan-4
 Mana satukah teori yang terbaik dalam
memahami dan menganalisis hubungan
Antarabangsa?
 Kenapa kita perlu mempelajari banyak
teori?
RUJUKAN ASAS:
 Keylor, W., 1992, The Twentieth Century World: An
International History (second edition), New York:
Oxford University Press-especially chapter 3 & 4.
 Daddow, Olover, 2017, International Relations
Theory, (third edition), London: SAGE Publications
Ltd, part 1.
 Jackson, R. & Sorensen, G., 2010, Introduction to
International Relations: Theories and Approaches
(third edition), Oxford: OUP, chapter 1 & 2.
Rujukan
 Mearshiemer, John, J., 2014, The Tragedy of
Great Power Politics (updated edition), New
York & London; W.W. Norton Co.- chapter
one.
 Mohd. Noor Yazid, 2013,Hubungan
Antarabangsa: Analisis Sistemik dan
Domestik, bab 2 (Keruntuhan Soviet Union
1991, Perang Dingin dan Struktur Politik
Dunia).
Apa yang dikatakan teori?
 A theory is a proposition, or set of
proposition, that tries to analyze,
explain or predict something.
What is International Relations Theory?

 An International Relations theory is

defined as a set of principles and
guidelines used to analyze both world
events and relations between states.
Paradigm, model, image, or
perspective
 IR scholars often interchange various
terms with theory, such as paradigm,
model, image, or perspective.
 Whatever words, the important thing to
remember is that theories help to
assess past and present conditions and,
in turn, provide a reasonable basis for
predicting future trends.
What is the laboratory for
International Relations scholars?
 The laboratory for IR scholars is the
international system as a whole, and
International Relations scholars must
speculate about the behaviour of the
state and individual within it.
How International Relations
theory formed?
 Hypothesis
 Case study
 Concept
IR theory-2
 IR scholars begin with what is called
hypothesis.
 A hypothesis is essentially an educated guess
or proposition about how or why something-
an event or specific set of conditions
occurred.
 A hypothesis must, however, have a certain
degree of probablity (if one does not believe something
to be possible, there is no point in determining its likelihood)
Hypothesis, methodology and theory
 The hypothesis is then put to the test using
certain methods.
 The methodology commonly employed in the
development of IR theory consists of several
components, used either singly or in
combination: analysis of historical events,
conditions, or progressions; reasoned
deduction based on the facts or evidence;
and assessment of quantitative data.
Hypothesis, methodology and theory
 By using the above techniques, scholars
of IR come up with theories about the
behaviour and interaction of states.
Theories might be explained through
case studies.
Part 2

MAJOR THEORETICAL DEBATES IN

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Theoretical Discussion between International
Relations Scholars-Major Debates.

 There have been four major debates

since International Relations became an
academic subject at the end of the First
Word War.
4 major debates in IR theory
 The first major debates is between Utopian
Liberalism and Realism.
 The Second Debates between Traditional
Approaches and Behavioralism;
 The Third Debates between
Neorealism/Neoliberalism and Neo-Marxism;
 The Fourth Debates is between established
traditions and post-positivist (positivism vs.
post-positivism).
Major debates-2
 The discussion of these major debates
provide us with a map of the way the
academic subject of IR has developed
over the past century.
 The map is important to understand IR
as a dynamic academic discipline which
continue to evolve, and to see the
directions of evolution of IR thought.
First Major Debate: Utopian Liberalism &
Realism.

The decisive push to set up a separate

academic subject of International
Relations was occasioned by WWI
(1914-18), which produced million of
casualties;it was driven by a widely felt
determination never to allow human
suffering on such a scale to happen
again.
Why was it that the war began in the first
place?

 Why did Great Britain, France, Russia,

Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey and
other powers persist in waging war in
the face of such slaughter and with
diminishing chances of gaining anything
of real value from the conflict?
Liberal thinkers-
 For Liberal Thinkers, the WWI was in no small
measure attributable to the egoistic and short-
sighted calculations and miscalculations of
autocratic leaders in the heavily militarized
countries involved, especially Germany &
Austria-Hungary.
 And the leaders of GB and France, in turn,
allowed themselves to be drawn into the conflict
by an interlocking system of military alliances.
2
 The alliances were intended to keep the
peace, but they propelled all the
European powers into war once any
major power or alliance embarked on
war.
How to avoid such great war in the
future?

 Liberal Thinkers had some clear ideas

and strong beliefs about how to avoid
major war in the future-by reforming
the international system, and also
by reforming the domestic
structures of autocratic countries.
Woodrow Wilson
 Wilson vision was formulated in a fourteen-
point program delivered in the Congress in
January 1918-his vision influenced the Paris
Peace Conference 1919.
 Wilson’s program concerned the creation of
an international organization that would
put relations between state on a firmer
institutional foundation than the realist
notions of the concert of Europe & the
Balance of Power had provided in the past.
International institution-promote peaceful
cooperation.

 The idea that international

institutions can promote peaceful
cooperation among states is a basic
element of liberal thinking.
 Liberal ideas dominated in the first phase
of academic IR-in the international
relations of the 1920s the liberal ideas
could claim some success.
Development in the 1930s
 Liberal idealism was not a good intellectual
guide to international relations in the 1930s.
 Interdependence did not produce peaceful
cooperation-The LoN was helpless in the
face of the expansionist power politics
conducted by the regime in Germany & Italy.
 IR scholars began to speak the classical
realist of Thucydides, Machiavelli and Hobbes
in which the power politics was central.
Edward.H. Carr, The Twenty Years
Crisis, 1919-1939.

 The most comprehensive & penetrating

critique of Liberalism was that of E.H.
Carr in the TYC 1919-1939.
 Carr argued that Liberal profoundly
misread the facts of history and
misunderstood the nature of
international relations.
Carr-2
 According to Carr, the correct starting-point is
the opposite one-we should assume that
there are profound conflicts of interest both
between countries and between people.
 Some people & some countries are better off
than others. They will attempt to preserve &
defend their privileged position. The
underdogs, the ‘have-nots’, will struggle to
change that situation.
Carr-3
 International relations is in a basic sense
about the struggle between such conflicting
interests and desires -that is why IR is far
more about conflict than about cooperation.
 Carr labeled the liberal position “utopian” as a
contrast to his own position, which he labeled
“realist” was the more correct analysis of
international relations.
Hans Morgenthau -Politics Among
Nations: The Struggle for Power and
Peace, 1948.
 For Morgenthau, human nature was at the
base of international relations no less than
any other human relations- and humans
were self-interested and power-seeking
and that could easily result in aggression.
 In the late 1930s it was not difficult to find
evidence to support such view-Hitler’s
Germany & Mussolini’s Italy pursued
aggressive foreign policies aim at conflict, not
cooperation.
The nature of international relations
 For realist, international politics, like all
politics, is a struggle for power. Whatever
the ultimate aims of international politics,
power is always the immediate aim.
 There is no world government-on the
contrary, there is a system of sovereign and
armed state facing each other. World
politics is an international anarchy.
The nature of IP-2

 The 1930s and 1940s appeared to

confirm this proposition-IRs was a
struggle for power & for survival.
 The quest for power certainly
characterised the foreign policies of
Germany, Italy & Japan=the same
struggle, in response, applied to the
Allied side during the WWII (1939-45).
“Have”,”have-not”/”underdog”
 GB,France & the US were the “haves” in
Carr’s terms, the satisfied powers who
wanted to hold on to what they already
had- and Germany, Italy & Japan were
the “have-not” – so it was only natural,
according to realist thinking, that the
“have-not” would try and redress the
international balance through the use of
force.
Realist analysis
 Following realist analysis, the sole appropriate
response to such attempt is the creation of
countervailing power & the intelligent
utilization of that power to provide for
national defense & to deter potential
aggressor.
 That is impossible to reorganize the ‘jungle’
into a ’zoo’-The strongest animals will never
allow themselves to be captured & put in
cages.
Realist analysis-2
 The strongest animals will never allow
themselves to be captured & put in
cages -Germany following the WWI was
seen as proof of that truth.
 The League of Nations failed to put the
Germany in a cage- and the outbreak of
WWII in 1939.
Realist analysis-3
 WWII might have been avoided if a realistic
foreign policy based on the principle of
countervailing power had been followed by
Great Britain, France & the US right from the
start of Germany’s, Italy’s and Japan’s saber-
rattling- Negotiations & diplomacy by
themselves can never bring
security & survival in world
politics.
Tutorial 1 & Tutorial 2
 Tutorial 1-Jelaskan prinsip-prinsip asas
pendekatan Realism dan Liberalism.
 Tutorial 2-Apakah asas utama
perdebatan dalam first major debate in
International Relations?