Chapter 2 Theoretical Overview
2.4. The International Relations Theory and Security Concept
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
2.4. The International Relations Theory and Security Concept
Peace and security have been the core issues in the international relation studies.
From the West point of view, three perspectives shall be discussed in order to understand international security theory, they are as the follows: (1) there is analysis of security theory in the study of International Relations; (2) the issue of security will not disappear; on the contrary, it becomes more and more important in the future; and (3) security policy should be established on the basis of theoretical analysis in the long run.
In other words, the issue about peace and security has been a critical issue in the international relation theory. The international relation theory has been evolved from classical realism to many types which also intrigue the evolvement of “security concepts.” Therefore, by looking into the variations of the security concepts within the frame of the development of international relation theory, it is helpful to know the causes of the evolvement of security concept and the thesis of different security concept, which provides a wider view for us to further discuss security theory after the end of Cold War.38
Realism and Traditional Security Concept
“Security” is the primary condition of survival and development in human society, and is one of the main issues in the international relation theory. Further, it
38 倪世雄，「冷戰後國際關係理論的新發展」，當代國際觀係理論 (台北：五南出版社，2003
年 ) ， 頁 564 。 [Ni Shixiong, Lengzhanhou Guojiguanxi De Xinfazhan (The Post Cold War International Relation Theory and Development), DangDai Guojiguanxi Lilun (International Relation Theory) (Taipei: Wunan Publisher, 2003), p. 564.]
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
also represents national security in the international relation studies. On the other hand, classical realism argues that all nations pursue power, and the national interests are defined by power which is the guarantee of acquiring national interest. However, realism presumes that anarchy is the feature in the international system, the international system is a self-help system because anarchy, and self-help will necessarily lead to power politics resulting in military competition, balance of power, and global wars. In other words, the military power is the main element that affects national security. The traditional national security is military security, a zero-sum game, which means one country's security is the insecurity of the others. As a result, the other country's security is another country's insecurity.39
Neo-Realism and Its Security Concept
Kenneth Waltz developed theory of neo-realism (defined as structural realism) on the basis of realism theory, shifting human nature from self-interest to the international structure formed by state to state interactions. The biggest difference between neo-realism and classical realism is that classical realism defines power as a goal followed by nations; however, neo-realism uses power as a tool in international relations. For example, all states possess some level of military power, and each state has the option of threatening or using the power. To some extent, each state must be concerned with the power capabilities of other states. Therefore, what concerns the states is security instead of power. To neo-realists, the characteristic of the international politics is not necessary be endless conflicts and wars, rather, there exists
39倪世雄，「冷戰後國際關係理論的新發展」，當代國際觀係理論 (台北：五南出版社，2003
年 ) ， 頁 564 。 [Ni Shixiong, Lengzhanhou Guojiguanxi De Xinfazhan (The Post Cold War International Relation Theory and Development), DangDai Guojiguanxi Lilun (International Relation Theory) (Taipei: Wunan Publisher, 2003), p. 564.]
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
limited cooperation among all nations.
What really concerns the neo-realist is the issue of relative gain. From the perspective of neo-realist, what worries neo-realists is the distrust among nations during the process of cooperation. As a result, both realism and neo-realism hold the speculation that it is not only lack of trust, but also full of misunderstandings in the international system.
Neo-Liberalism and Independence with Neo-Realism
Both neo-realism and neo-liberalism share some assumptions, particularly on the perspective of the security concept. Neo-liberalism pointed out the function of Institution among nation behaviors in the anarchy international system, and the absolute gain of security cooperation within the system. Not only does neo-liberalism assure the existence of mutual interest, but also the share of group interest in the long term. Robert O. Keohane and Joseph Nye are neo-liberalism scholars who argue that realism ignores the fact of international cooperation in the international system, explaining that realism not only ignores the function of institution but also the development of institutionalized society in the international system. Specifically, the extent of interdependence among politics and economics, mutual conflicts, mutual competitions, and regional cooperation are constantly increasing, contributing huge efforts to the international system.40 In addition, the domestic affairs are internationalized, making it harder for classical realism to meet the requirement of international cooperation.
40 Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence (New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing, 2000), p. 12.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
To sum up, the biggest difference between neo-realism and neo-liberalism is that the former precludes the possibilities of cooperation between states based on the distrustful relations of states, resulting the norm of zero-sum game; however the latter ensures the existence of cooperation based on the marginal costs and benefits, and under this circumstances, non-zero-sum game is normalized, therefore the international security can be gained by nations in the international system.