1
Core Module: International Relations
Reading Summaries + Key Points
FIRST EXAM (MID-TERM)
LECTURE ONE READINGS.
Waltz, K. N. (1959). Man, the State and War: A Theoretical Analysis. New York:
Columbia University Press. Foreword and chapter 1.
In the foreword, Waltz explains that the book attempts to provide a theoretical framework for
understanding the causes of war. He argues that previous attempts to explain war have been
inadequate, as they have focused on specific historical events rather than the broader patterns
that underlie them. Waltz believes a theoretical approach is necessary to understand war
better.
In chapter 1, Waltz discusses the different levels of analysis that can be used to understand
international politics. He argues that there are three levels of analysis: the individual level, the
state level, and the international system level. Each level focuses on different factors that
influence international politics, and Waltz believes it is important to understand how these
factors interact.
Waltz also introduces the concept of the "third image," which refers to the international
system as a whole. He argues that the structure of the international system plays a key role in
determining whether or not war occurs. According to Waltz, a stable international system is
one in which there is a balance of power between different states, as this helps to prevent any
one state from becoming too powerful and dominating the others.
Overall, Waltz's book provides a theoretical framework for understanding the causes of war,
emphasising the importance of analyzing international politics at different levels of analysis.
KEY POINTS:
● Waltz's book "Man, the State and War: A Theoretical Analysis" explores the causes of
war from a structural perspective.
, 2
● The author argues that while individual leaders or states may contribute to the
outbreak of war, the ultimate cause lies in the anarchic nature of the international
system.
● In this system, there is no central authority to regulate the behavior of states, which
creates a constant state of competition and insecurity.
● Waltz identifies three levels of analysis for understanding the causes of war: the
individual level (focusing on the personal characteristics of leaders), the state level
(focusing on the internal characteristics of states), and the systemic level (focusing on
the structure of the international system).
● The author argues that while the first two levels can contribute to the causes of war,
the systemic level is the most important and the ultimate cause.
● Waltz suggests that the best way to prevent war is to create a system of international
governance that can regulate the behavior of states and reduce the potential for
conflict.
● Overall, the book lays the theoretical foundation for understanding the structural
causes of war and provides a framework for thinking about how to create a more
peaceful global system.
Pepinsky, T. (2022). Here’s Why Mearsheimer’s Realist Take is So Exasperating. March
3
https://tompepinsky.com/2022/03/03/heres-why-mearsheimers-realist-take-is-so-exasper
ating/
The article by Tom Pepinsky is a critique of the realist perspective on international relations
put forth by John Mearsheimer. Pepinsky argues that Mearsheimer's emphasis on great power
competition and the balance of power overlooks important aspects of international relations,
such as economic interdependence and the role of non-state actors. Pepinsky asserts that
Mearsheimer's framework is overly deterministic and fails to account for the agency of
individual actors and the potential for cooperation and diplomacy in international politics. He
also critiques Mearsheimer's dismissal of human rights and democratic values in international
relations, arguing that these should be important considerations in shaping foreign policy.
Overall, Pepinsky argues that Mearsheimer's realist perspective is limiting and inadequate for
understanding the complex dynamics of international politics.
, 3
KEY POINTS:
● The article discusses John Mearsheimer's book "The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams
and International Realities" and argues that his realist perspective is flawed in several
ways.
● The author points out that Mearsheimer's theory is based on assumptions that are
often contested by other scholars, such as the idea that states are the primary actors in
international politics and that their behavior is driven solely by the pursuit of power.
● The article also argues that Mearsheimer's view of international relations as a
zero-sum game overlooks the potential for cooperation and mutual benefit among
states.
● Additionally, the author criticizes Mearsheimer for ignoring the role of ideology,
culture, and identity in shaping international relations, and for underestimating the
importance of norms and institutions in moderating state behavior.
● The article suggests that Mearsheimer's realist perspective is appealing to some
because it offers a simple, clear-cut explanation of international relations, but argues
that this perspective ultimately fails to capture the complexity and nuance of
real-world politics.
Acharya, A. (2014). Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds. A New
Agenda for International Studies, International studies quarterly, 58(4), 647-659.
The article by Acharya proposes a new agenda for international studies that take into account
the importance of regional dynamics in global international relations. Acharya argues that the
dominant Western-centric approach to international studies has neglected the perspectives
and experiences of non-Western regions, leading to an incomplete understanding of global
politics. He advocates for a more inclusive approach that recognizes the diversity of regional
worlds and their unique contributions to global politics. Acharya also emphasizes the need for
scholars to engage with local actors and incorporate their perspectives into their research.
Overall, Acharya's article seeks to broaden the scope of international studies by incorporating
a more nuanced understanding of regional dynamics and challenging the dominant
Western-centric approach.
KEY POINTS:
, 4
● The traditional approach to International Relations (IR) focuses on the global level of
analysis, ignoring the significance of regional and local factors that shape the world's
political and economic order.
● The emergence of new regional powers such as China and India, the increasing
importance of regional organizations like the European Union, and the rise of regional
conflicts have highlighted the need for a more nuanced understanding of regional
dynamics in IR.
● The author proposes a new approach to studying IR that focuses on "regional worlds"
rather than just the global level of analysis. This approach recognizes the importance
of regional contexts, institutions, and cultures in shaping political and economic
outcomes.
● By examining regional worlds, scholars can better understand how global processes
are mediated and transformed by local and regional factors. This approach can also
help identify the challenges and opportunities for regional cooperation and
integration.
● The author argues that this new agenda for IR research can be pursued through
interdisciplinary and comparative studies that draw on insights from fields such as
history, sociology, and anthropology.
● Finally, the author calls for more attention to be given to non-Western perspectives in
IR research, to ensure that the field reflects the diversity of global experiences and
challenges.
LECTURE TWO READINGS.
O’Brien, R. and Williams, M. (2016). Global Political Economy. Evolution and Dynamics
(5th edition; New York: Palgrave. Chapter 1; 6-21.
The article by O'Brien and Williams provides an overview of the evolution and dynamics of
the global political economy in the first chapter of their book. They argue that global political
economy is a multidisciplinary field that seeks to understand the interplay between politics
and economics in shaping the global system. The authors trace the historical development of
global political economy, from its origins in the writings of Adam Smith and Karl Marx to its
contemporary manifestations in neoliberalism and globalization. They also discuss the
various theoretical approaches used to analyze the global political economy, including
