SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi / 2013 / Cilt: 68 - Sayı: 2

The peaceful ending of the Cold War and International Relations theories

Soğuk Savaş'ın barışçıl olarak sona ermesi ve Uluslararası ilişkiler teorileri

Klevis KOLASI
Pages
149–179
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Finally after discussing different views about the process of ending the Cold War, it will be shown that this end was caused by factors necglected by Neo-realism.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article focuses on the failure of International Relations theories to anticipate the end of the Cold War.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The end of the Cold War regarding International Relations theories was unexpected in two ways.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Finally after discussing different views about the process of ending the Cold War, it will be shown that this end was caused by factors necglected by Neo-realism.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This article focuses on the failure of International Relations theories to anticipate the end of the Cold War. The end of the Cold War regarding International Relations theories was unexpected in two ways. The bipolar structure was resolved and transformed while it was thought to endure and secondly this trasformation come out to be peaceful. It is argued that the failure to anticipate the end of the Cold War by theories of International Relations is primarily related to the dominance of Realism and especially neo- realism on this subject. Thus, this paper is focused especially on the central assumptions of neo-realism and its view of the Cold War. The peaceful end is argued to be inconsistent with assumptions of neo-realism about war as well as its general logic. Besides, it will be shown that the dominance of neo-realism is closely related to its commitment to positivism and especially the US position in world politics, thus the focus given to explain the endurance of the order or the “long peace” caused to overlook the possibilities for change. Finally after discussing different views about the process of ending the Cold War, it will be shown that this end was caused by factors necglected by Neo-realism.

Özet

Bu makale, Soğuk Savaş’ın sonunun Uluslararası İlişkiler teorileri tarafından neden öngörülmediğini incelemektedir. Soğuk Savaş’ın sonu Uluslararası İlişkiler teorileri açısından iki açıdan beklenmeyendi. Birincisi çift kutuplu yapının sürdürülmesi beklenirken bu yapının dönüşmesi ve ikincisi de bu dönüşümün barışçıl olmasıydı. Uluslararası İlişkiler teorilerinin Soğuk Savaş’ın sonunu öngörememesinin bu alanda Realizm ve özellikle Neo-realizmin hakimiyetiyle ilgili olduğu ileri sürülmektedir. Bu nedenle özellikle Neo-realizmin temel varsayımları ve Soğuk Savaş’a bakışı değerlendirilmiştir. Dönüşümün barışçıl olmasının ise Neo-realizmin savaş ile ilgili varsayımlarıyla ve genel mantığıyla bağdaşmadığı fikri savunulacaktır. Bunun yanında Neo-realizmin hakimiyetinin benimsediği pozitivist bilim felsefesiyle ve özellikle ABD’nin dünya politikasındaki konumuyla yakından ilişkili olduğu ve bu nedenle düzenin devamlılığını, yani “uzun barış”ı açıklamaya odaklanırken değişim olanaklarının görmezlikten gelinmesine neden olduğu da ayrıca gösterilmeye çalışılacaktır. Son olarak Soğuk Savaş’ı sona erdiren süreçle ilgili ortaya atılan farklı görüşler tartışılarak, bu sonun Neo-realizmin bakmayı reddettiği etkenlerden kaynaklandığı gösterilecektir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KOLASI, K. (2022). The peaceful ending of the Cold War and International Relations theories. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, Cilt: 68 - Sayı: 2, 149–179. https://ajindex.com/articles/443005

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Ashley, Richard (1984), “The Poverty of Neorealism”, International Organization, 38 (2): 225-286.
  2. Aydın, Mustafa (2004), “Uluslararası İlişkilerin “Gerçekçi” Teorisi: Kökeni, Kapsamı, Kritiği”, Uluslararası İlişkiler, 1 (1): 33-60.
  3. Brooks, Stephen G. ve William C. Wohlforth (2000/01), “Power, Globalization, and the End of the Cold War”, International Security, 25 (3): 5-53.
  4. Brown, Chris (2000), “Turtles All The Way Down”: Anti-foundationalism, Critical Theory and International Relations”, Andrew Linklater (der.), Critical Concepts in International Relations Vol. IV (New York: Routledge): 1655-1678.
  5. Booth, Ken (2005), “Two Terrors One Problem”, Ersel Aydinli ve James N. Rosenau (der.), Globalisation, Security, and the Nation-State: Paradigms in Transition (Albany: State University of New York Press): 27-48.
  6. Burchill, S. (1995) “Realism and Neo-realism,” S.Burchill ve A.Linklater (der.) Theories of International Relations (New York: St. Martin’s Press). Buzan, Barry, Charles Jones ve Richard Little (1993), The Logic of Anarchy: Neorealism to Structural Realism, (New York: Columbia University Press). Buzan, Barry ve Lene Hansen (2009), The Evolution of International Security (New York: Cambridge University Press). Carr, E. H. (1981), The Twenty Years’ Crisis 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations (London: Macmillan Press). Cox, Robert (1981), “Social Forces, States and World Order: Beyond International Relations Theory”, Millennium, 10 (2): 126-155.
  7. Cox, Robert W. (1986), “Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory”, Robert O. Keohane (der.), Neorealism and its Critics (New York: Columbia University Press): 204-254.
  8. Creswell, Michael ve Marc Trachtenberg (2003), “France and the German Question, 1945–1955”, Journal of Cold War Studies, 5 (3): 5-28.
  9. Crockatt, Richard (2001), “The End of the Cold War”, John Baylis ve Steve Smith (der.), The Globalization Of World Politics, An Introduction to International Relations (New York: Oxford University Press): 92-110.
  10. Donnelly, Jack (2004), Realism and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Donnelly, Jack (2005), “Realism”, Scott Burchill, Andrew Linklater, Richard Devetak, Jack Donnelly, Matthew Paterson, Christian Reus-Smit ve Jacqui True, Theories of International Relations (New York: Palgrave): 29-54.
  11. Dunne, Tim ve Brian C. Schmidt (2001), “Realism”, John Baylis ve Steve Smith (der.), The Globalization of World Politics: An Intro