Constructivism Theory in International Politics

Constructivist theory is one of the theories of the international relations emerged in the 1990s posing a challenge to the dominant liberal and realist theoretical paradigms. By taking different theoretical approaches to viewing the international systems, constructivist theory emphasizes on the material objects "rather than the mere existence of the objects themselves". (Cristol, 2011 p 1), for example, nuclear weapons in North Korea, and the United Kingdom may be identical materially, however, they possess different meaning to the US policy makers. Moreover, constructivists place a greater emphasizes on identity, norm development and idealist powers than other theoretical paradigms in international relations.

The objective of this paper is to discuss the theory of constructivism with reference to the international relations.

The international relations theory has been dominated by the theory of liberalism, realism, and pluralism for several decades. However, there has been a departure from the neo-classical theory of international relations with the emergence of a new theory of constructivism. Since the 1990s, constructivism has become a dominant force in understanding the international relations, while constructivism takes similar stands with the liberalist and realist assumptions with reference to anarchy, however, constructivism departs itself by focusing on norms, relationship between actors and how identity influences state behaviors. While constructivism has assisted in shaping the international order, there is still a limited scholarly article that explores the theory of constructivism in the international relations. This study attempts to fill the gap by exploring the concept constructivism in understanding the behaviors of states in the international relations.

Theory of constructivist provides a significant aspect of international relations showing that the international systems are socially and historically constructed rather focusing entirely on the features of the world politics. Onuf, (2012) contributes to the concept constructivism by revealing that power politics is typically socially constructed, which has been transformed into human practice. Since the 1990s, the theory of constructivism has become a major school of thought leading to a vibrant scholarly discussion among liberals, realists, constructivist and institutionalists. The primary argument of constructivism is its primary contrasts position with the assumption of neoliberalism and neorealism. According to Wendt, (1992), the basic argument of constructivism is its share ideas rather than the material forces, which determine the structures of human association by pointing out that share ideas determine the interests and identities of purposive actors. Thus, constructivist theorists believe that international systems are both affected by the power politics and ideas. However, social constructivists believe that the structures of international relations are socially constructed rather than being strictly materialistic. Thus, social constructivists believe that mutual social interaction between states is a critical tool in enhancing international peace and security. (Copeland, 2000).

Before the advent of constructivist theory, the neorealism was the dominant theory in the international relations and the advent of constructivism assists in challenging the neorealist assumptions. Neo-realists believe that the major aspects of international politics are based on the structural hierarchy of the international systems. The neo-realists also point out that international systems are primarily based on anarchy because they lack overarching authority. Moreover, the international system composes of the unit of state, formally equal, and enjoy sovereignty over their territories. Neo-realists believe that state can only rely on oneself for security, and defend their national and self-interests. However, a constructionist such as Wendt, (1992), challenges the assumption of realists on the ground that state can achieve security through a social interaction and cooperation.

Slaughter, (2011) takes a different approach to understanding the concept constructivism stating that constructivism is not a theory rather it is an ontology showing a set of assumption about the agency, human motivation and the world. The author believes that constructivism is not similar to liberalism, institutionalism, or realism rather the theory is rationalism. According to the constructivist perspectives, military power, international institutions, domestic preferences and trade relations are not important in the international politics since they have social meaning. Constructivists also believe that power relations among states should be a mixture of norms, ideas, and believe to understand the dynamic state behaviors. For example, nuclear arsenal between China and the United Kingdom may be comparatively destructive, however, the United States will translate different meaning to this nuclear armament. In the international relations, China acts on the realist assumption and do not act on the objective structure of international systems. Although, states may pursue self-interests, they will also pursue wealth, power, and survival. Thus, constructivism argues that social norms and international cooperation are the major tenets of the international politics. Contrary to other theories of international relations that focus mainly on states as the major actors of international relations, constructivism emphasizes the role of non-state actors such as transnational corporations, and NGO (Non-governmental organizations) because they can alter the state behaviors through persuasions, lobbying and shaming. Constructivism also identifies international bureaucracies as the critical entities that pursue their interests through human rights protection and free trade against wishes of the states, which created them.

Additionally, the post-cold war discourse in international relations offers various approaches to understanding the international system. The constructivist theory has been identified as one of the examples of international relations theories revealing the dynamic of world politics. The constructivist's theory focuses on the materialists and neorealism that reveals on the distribution of power that includes economic capabilities, and military forces. (Hurd, 2008). Constructivists theory also explains the state behavior and balance of power between states. (Nugroho, 2008).

After the collapse of Soviet Union and fall on Berlin in Wall, there was a change in the world order leading to the emergence of constructivist theory that assisted in enhancing a greater understanding economics and politics, and Onuf, (2012) introduced the constructivism in the international relations in 1989 based on the rejection of neo-realist position. The core of the constructivists argument is that the interaction of states is to survive. While both constructivists and neo-racialists agree that states can only survive based on their security procedures, however, both theories depart on the strategy to adopt in enhancing the security policy.

Ungroom, (2008) reveals that the end of cold war assists in enhancing a greater understanding of the constructionist theory revealing that material structure can have a generic effect. After the end of the cold war, the United States and former Soviet Union did not perceive one another as enemy subsequently leading to a new world order. The major argument of constructivism is that intersubjective knowledge, material world and interaction of states are not independent having relative autonomy. According to the constructionist theory, while people have the ability to interpret issues, it is not possible to interpret the social structure and material world. (Sayer, 2008),

Reus-Smith, (2005) contribute to the argument of the previous authors by pointing out a concept anarchy is where constructivists depart from liberalists and realists. However, all these theories agree that the concept anarchy governs the international systems, and there is the absence of overarching authority that governs the world affairs. Nevertheless, constructionist disagrees with other theories based on the behavior of states under the anarchical system. While realists believe that state competes for power, resources and security under the anarchical system, however pluralists and liberalists view cooperation through international institutions under an anarchical system because these institutions can assist in bringing positive gains for both state and non-state actors. Although, constructivists believe in an anarchical system in the international relations, however, they disagree that the anarchy leads to war ad competition.

"Based on the Wendt (1992) argument power politics and self-help do not necessarily follow either causally or logically from anarchy and that if today we find ourselves in a self-help world, this is due to process, not structure". (p 394). There is no "logic" of anarchy apart from the practices that create and instantiate one structure of identities and interests rather than another; structure has no existence or causal powers apart from the process." (Wendt 1992 p 394). "Self-help and power politics are institutions, not essential features of anarchy" Wendt 1992 p 394). Wendt goes on stating that "Anarchy is what states make of it" (Wendt 1992, p 394).

Thus, constructivists believe the anarchical system occur based on what actors want it to be. Constructivists further argue states have no basis to think other states as cooperative partners or threats. According to constructivists, states often act differently in term of culture, identity and relationships and interests among one another. Despite the contribution of the theory of constructivists in the international relations, Hopf (1998) argue that some scholars are still skeptical about the rationality of constructivist theory in the international relations. Typically, power is central to theoretical approach in international relations, and military and economic powers are the essential components of international politics. (Waltz, 2010). The United States is able to influence the world politics because of their economic and military superiorities. Although, both neo-liberalism and neorealism assume that the military and economic power are critical elements in international politics, however, constructivism believe that both military and economic powers are the elements to understand the world affairs. This study does not support the theory of constructivists on the basis that it dismisses the power of ideology, culture, knowledge and language.

Despite the shortcomings identified in the theory of constructivism, the theory is still perfect in testing the peace in the democratic society because it assists in understanding how the social international cooperation and practice among states bring world order. Moreover, the theory offers an effective way of understanding how ethnicity, religion, race, and sexuality account of the understanding of global politics. The constructivism provides a new dimension in understanding how ideas and social norms affect the international politics while rejecting power politics and materialistic approach to understanding global politics and security.