CLASSICAL LIBERALISM/IDEALISM

1) Introduction:

“Liberalism has much to its credit. But as John Stuart Mill said about Christianity, “all truths need fundamental re-examination from time to time” and if that was true of Christianity in the 18th century, I think that it is just as true of liberalism in the 21st.”

One of the most respected contemporary theorists in the field, Stanley Hoffman, once famously wrote, “International relations have been the nemesis of liberalism. The essence of liberalism is self-restraint, moderation compromise and peace whereas the essence of international politics is exactly the opposite: troubled peace, at best, or the state of war.”

Liberalism is an ideology whose central concern is the liberty of the individual; liberals see the establishment of the state as a necessary part of preserving liberty either from harm by other individuals or by states; the state must always be the servant of the collective will, not the master, and democratic institutions are the means of guaranteeing this. Liberalism is, in fact, a theory of government, one that seeks to reconcile order and justice within a particular community.

Liberalism is primarily a theory of government; one that seeks to reconcile order and justice within a particular community.

It is the most dominant approaches and named Idealism as it has a vision of how a new and peaceful world order might be constructed. It emerged after WWI when there was a dire need for universal peace. This approach is also known as Utopian Approach as its ideas can be true only in imagination not in reality.

Interwar period 1919-39 is taken as idealist era. Idealists were advocates of League of Nations, World Federalism and of peace through international law. Its writers and scholars regard power politics as passing phase of history and the present. They desired the international system in future free from power politics in morality and violence. The basic concept of this approach is quite old and can be found in Declaration of American War of Independence (1776) and in French Revolution (1789).

Another image of this approach is world government “that would be above all national governments”.


2) Important writers:

Condorcet, Rousseau, Kant, Russell and Wilson.
Rousseau says in Fragment on War, “Let’s dismiss evil which makes men slave and miserable.”

Kant made strong plea for the prevention of war among states and creation of conditions for perpetual peace. But probably greatest advocate was Woodrow Wilson, who gave concrete shape to his idealism through treaty of Versailles. The whole theory proceeds with assumption of optimism that interest of various groups or nations are likely to be adjusted in larger interest of mankind as a whole.


3) Assumptions: Kegley’s

I. Human nature:

II. Bad human behaviour: evilness of institutions and structural arrangements which make human selfish.

III. Worst feature of international politics ‘The War’:

IV. War can be eliminated:

V. Role of international society:


4) Criticism:

I. Adaptation of moral principles: reality is material.

II. Behaviour of states: diplomatic tricks and systematic relations, not moral.

III. Utopian approach:

IV. Formation of world government:

V. Disarmament:

VI. Ignorance of past:

VII. One sided theory:

VIII. Situation of power politics:


NEO-LIBERALISM (SCHOOL OF THOUGHT)


1) Introduction:

Neo-liberalism generally refers neo-liberal institutionalism or now what is called Institutional Theory. However, in the policy world, neo-liberalism means something different. Neo-liberal policy promotes free trade and open market and western democratic values and institutions. Most of the leading western states have joined US led chorus, calling for the enlargement of community and of democratic and capitalist nation-states. In reality, neo-liberal foreign policies tend not to be as wedded to the ideals of democratic peace, free trade and open borders. National interest takes precedence over morality and universal ideas, and much to the dismay of traditional realists, economic interests are given priority over geo-political ones.

Neo-liberals study political economy and focus on cooperation and institutions.


2) David Baldwin’s varieties of liberalism:

These four varieties of liberalism influence contemporary international relations.

I. Commercial Liberalism: it advocates free trade and a market or capitalist economy towards peace and prosperity. Today it’s view is promoted by global financial institutions, major trading states and MNCs.

II. Republican liberalism: it states that democratic states are more inclined to respect the rights of their citizens and are less likely to go to war with their democratic neighbours. This view is presented as democratic peace theory.

Commercial and republican liberalism combine to form core foreign policy goals of many of the world major powers. The new liberal internationalism is promoted by the US and its G-8 partners in trade, aid and security policies.

III. Sociological Liberalism: the notion of community and the process of interdependence are important elements. As transnational activities increased, people in distant lands linked and the governments become more interdependent. Resultantly, it becomes more difficult and more costly for states to act unilaterally and to avoid cooperation. Many of the assumptions of the sociological liberalism are presented in current globalization literature dealing with popular culture and civil society.

IV. Institutional liberalism: neo-liberal institutionalism is the most convincing challenge to realist and neo-realist thinking. Its study suggests that the way towards peace and prosperity is to have independent states pool their resources and even some of their sovereignty to create integrated communities to promote economic growth. EU is one such institution that began as regional community for encouraging multilateral cooperation. Neo-liberal institutionalists see institutions as mediator and the means to achieve cooperation among actors in the system. They are focusing their research on the issues of the global governance and creation and maintenance of institutions associated with managing the processors of globalization.


THE MAIN FEATURES OF THE NEO-REALIST/NEO-LIBERAL DEBATE

According to Baldwin:

1) Both agree that the international system is anarchic. Neo-realists say that the anarchiy puts more constraints on foreign policy and that neo-liberals minimize the importance of survival as the goal of each state. Neo-liberals claim that neo-realists minimize the importance of international interdependence, globalization and the regimes created to manage these interactions.

2) Neo-realists believe that international cooperation will not happen unless states make it happen. They feel that it is hard to achieve, difficult to maintain, and dependent on state power. Neo-liberals believe that cooperation is easy to achieve in areas where states have mutual interests.

3) Neo-liberals think that actors with common interests try to maximize absolute gains. Neo-realists claim that neo-liberals overlook the importance of relative gains. They believe that the fundamental goal of states is cooperative relationships is to prevent others from gaining more.

4) Neo-realists state that anarchy requires states to be preoccupied with relative power. Security and survival in a competitive international system. Neo-liberals are more concerned with economic welfare or international political economy issues and other nonmilitary issue areas such as international environmental concerns.

5) Neo-liberals see institutions and regimes as significant forces in international relations. Neo-realists state that neo-liberals exaggerate the impact of regimes and institutions on state behaviour.