Theory
Main article: International relations theory
Epistemology and IR theory
IR theories can be roughly divided into one of
two epistemological
camps: "positivist" and "post-positivist". Positivist theories
aim to replicate the methods of the natural sciences by analysing the impact of
material forces. They typically focus on features of international relations
such as state interactions, size of military forces, balance of powers etc.
Post-positivist epistemology rejects the idea that the social world can be
studied in an objective and value-free way. It rejects the central ideas of
neo-realism/liberalism, such as rational choice theory, on the grounds that
the scientific method cannot be applied to the social world and that a
'science' of IR is impossible.
A key difference between the two positions is
that while positivist theories, such as neo-realism, offer causal explanations
(such as why and how power is exercised), post-positivist theories focus
instead on constitutive questions, for instance what is meant by 'power'; what
makes it up, how it is experienced and how it is reproduced. Often,
post-positivist theories explicitly promote a normative approach to IR, by
considering ethics. This is something which has often been ignored under
'traditional' IR as positivist theories make a distinction between 'facts' and
normative judgments, or 'values'.
During the late 1980s/1990 debate between
positivists and post-positivists became the dominant debate and has been
described as constituting the Third "Great Debate" (Lapid 1989).
Positivist Theories
Realism
Realism focuses on state
security and power above all else. Early realists such as E.H. Carr
and Hans Morgenthau argued that states are
self-interested, power-seeking rational actors, who seek to maximize their
security and chances of survival. Cooperation between states is a way to
maximize each individual state's security (as opposed to more idealistic
reasons). Similarly, any act of war must be based on self-interest, rather than
on idealism. Many realists saw World War
II as the vindication of their theory.
It should be noted that classical writers such as
Thucydides,
Machiavelli, and Hobbes
are often cited as "founding fathers" of realism by contemporary
self-described realists.[citation needed] However, while
their work may support realist doctrine, it is not likely that they would have
classified themselves as realists (in this sense of the term). Realists are
often split up into two groups: Classical or Human Nature Realists (as
described here) and Structural or Neorealists (below).
Political realism believes that politics, like
society in general, is governed by objective laws that have their roots in
human nature. To improve society, it is first necessary to understand the laws
by which society lives. The operation of these laws being impervious to our
preferences, men will challenge them only at the risk of failure. Realism,
believing as it does in the objectivity of the laws of politics, must also
believe in the possibility of developing a rational theory that reflects,
however imperfectly and one-sidedly, these objective laws. It believes also,
then, in the possibility of distinguishing in politics between truth and
opinion-between what is true objectively and rationally, supported by evidence
and illuminated by reason, and what is only a subjective judgment, divorced
from the facts as they are and informed by prejudice and wishful thinking.
The placement of Realism under positivism is far
from unproblematic however. E.H. Carr's 'What is History' was a deliberate
critique of positivism, and Hans Morgenthau's aim in 'Scientific Man vs Power
Politics' - as the title implies - was to demolish any conception that
international politics/power politics can be studied scientifically.
Liberalism/idealism/Liberal Internationalism
Liberal international relations
theory arose after World War I in response to the inability of states
to control and limit war in their international relations. Early adherents
include Woodrow Wilson and Norman
Angell, who argued vigorously that states mutually gained from cooperation
and that war was so destructive to be essentially futile.
Liberalism was not recognized as a coherent
theory as such until it was collectively and derisively termed idealism by E. H. Carr. A new version of
"idealism" that focused on human rights
as the basis of the legitimacy of international law was advanced by Hans
Köchler.
Further information: liberal internationalism
Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism seeks to
update liberalism by accepting the neorealist presumption that states are the
key actors in international relations, but still maintains that non-state
actors (NSAs) and intergovernmental organizations
(IGOs) matter. Proponents such as Maria Chattha argue that states
will cooperate irrespective of relative gains, and are thus concerned with
absolute gains. This also means that nations are, in essence, free to make
their own choices as to how they will go about conducting policy without any
international organizations blocking a nation's right to sovereignty.
Neoliberalism also contains an economic theory
that is based on the use of open and free markets with little, if any,
government intervention to prevent monopolies and other conglomerates from
forming. The growing interdependence throughout and after the Cold War through
international institutions led to neo-liberalism being defined as institutionalism,
this new part of the theory being fronted by Robert
Keohane and also Joseph Nye.
Further information: complex interdependence
Regime Theory
Regime
theory is derived from the liberal tradition that argues that
international institutions or regimes affect the behavior of states (or other
international actors). It assumes that cooperation is possible in the anarchic
system of states, indeed, regimes are by definition, instances of international
cooperation.
While realism predicts that conflict
should be the norm in international relations, regime theorists say that there
is cooperation despite anarchy. Often they cite cooperation in trade, human
rights and collective security among other issues. These instances of
cooperation are regimes. The most commonly cited definition of regimes comes
from Stephen Krasner. Krasner defines regimes as
"institutions possessing norms, decision rules, and procedures which
facilitate a convergence of expectations."
Not all approaches to regime theory, however are
liberal or neoliberal; some realist scholars like Joseph
Greico have developed hybrid theories which take a realist based approach to
this fundamentally liberal theory. (Realists don't say cooperation never
happens, just that it's not the norm; it's a difference of degree).
Post-positivist/reflectivist theories
[edit] International society theory (the English school)
International society
theory, also called the English School, focuses on the shared
norms and values of states and how they regulate international relations.
Examples of such norms include diplomacy, order, and international law. Unlike neo-realism, it
is not necessarily positivist. Theorists have focused particularly on
humanitarian intervention, and are subdivided between solidarists, who tend to
advocate it more, and pluralists, who place greater value in order and
sovereignty. Nicholas Wheeler is a prominent solidarist, while Hedley Bull
and Robert H. Jackson are perhaps the best known pluralists.
Social Constructivism
Social Constructivism encompasses a
broad range of theories that aim to address questions of ontology, such
as the Structure and agency debate, as well as
questions of epistemology, such as the
"material/ideational" debate that concerns the relative role of
material forces versus ideas. Constructivism is not a theory of IR in the
manner of neo-realism, but is instead a social
theory which is used to better explain the actions taken by states and
other major actors as well as the identities that guide these states and
actors.
Constructivism in IR can be
divided into what Hopf (1998) calls 'conventional' and 'critical'
constructivism. Common to all varieties of constructivism is an interest in the
role that ideational forces play. The most famous constructivist scholar, Alexander
Wendt noted in a 1992 article in International Organization (later
followed up by a book, Social Theory of International Politics (1999)),
that "anarchy is what states make of it". By this he means that the
anarchical structure that neo-realists claim governs state interaction is in
fact a phenomenon that is socially constructed and reproduced by states.
For example, if the system is dominated by states
that see anarchy as a life or death situation (what Wendt terms a
"Hobbesian" anarchy) then the system will be characterised by
warfare. If on the other hand anarchy is seen as restricted (a "Lockean"
anarchy) then a more peaceful system will exist. Anarchy in this view is
constituted by state interaction, rather than accepted as a natural and
immutable feature of international life as viewed by neo-realist IR scholars.
Critical Theory
Main article: Critical international
relations theory
Critical international
relations theory is the application of 'critical
theory' to international relations. Proponents such as Andrew
Linklater, Robert W. Cox and Ken Booth
focus on the need for human emancipation from States. Hence, it is
"critical" of mainstream IR theories that tend to be state-centric.
Marxism
Marxist and Neo-Marxist theories of IR reject the
realist/liberal view of state conflict or cooperation; instead focusing on the
economic and material aspects. It makes the assumption that the economy trumps
other concerns; allowing for the elevation of class as the focus of study.
Marxists view the international system as an integrated capitalist system in
pursuit of capital accumulation. Thus, the period of colonialism brought in
sources for raw materials and captive markets for exports, while
decolonialization brought new opportunities in the form of dependence.
Linked in with Marxist theories is dependency
theory which argues that developed countries, in their pursuit of power,
penetrate developing states through political advisors, missionaries, experts,
and MNCs to integrate them into the capitalist system in order to appropriate
natural resources and foster dependence.
Marxist theories receive scant attention in the
United States where no significant socialist party ever existed. It is more
common in parts of Europe and is one of the most important theoretic
contributions of Latin American academia, for example through Liberation theology.
Leadership Theories
Interest Group perspective
Interest Group theory posits that the driving
force behind state behavior is sub-state interest groups. Examples of interest
groups include political lobbyists, the military, and the corporate sector.
Group theory argues that although these interest groups are constitutive of the
state, they are also causal forces in the exercise of state power.
Strategic Perspective
Strategic Perspective is a theoretical approach
that views individuals as choosing their actions by taking into account the
anticipated actions and responses of others with the intention of maximizing
their own welfare.
Poststructuralist theories
Poststructuralist theories of IR developed in the
1980s from postmodernist studies in political science. Post-structuralism
explores the deconstruction of concepts traditionally not problematic in IR,
such as 'power' and 'agency' and examines how the construction of these
concepts shapes international relations. The examination of 'narratives' plays
an important part in poststructuralist analysis, for example feminist
poststructuralist work has examined the role that 'women' play in global
society and how they are constructed in war as 'innocent' and 'civilians'.
Examples of post-positivist research include:
- Feminisms ("gendering" war)
- Postcolonialism (challenges the euro-centrism of IR)
- Post-realism (focuses on IR theory as scientific and political rhetoric)
Concepts in international relations
Conjuncture
In decision making in international relations,
the concept of International Conjuncture, together with
freedom of action and equality are important elements. Decision makers must
take into account the set of international conditions in taking initiatives
that would create different types of responses.
Systemic level concepts
International relations is often viewed in terms
of levels of analysis, the systemic level concepts are those
broad concepts that define and shape an international milieu, characterised by Anarchy.
Power
The concept of power in international relations
can be described as the degree of resources, capabilities, and influence in
international affairs. It is often divided up into the concepts of hard power
and soft
power, hard power relating primarily to coercive power, such as the use of
force, and soft power commonly covering economics, diplomacy and
cultural
influence. However, there is no clear dividing line between the two forms of
power.
Polarity
Polarity in International Relations refers to
the arrangement of power within the international system. The concept arose
from bipolarity during the Cold War,
with the international system dominated by the conflict between two superpowers,
and has been applied retrospectively by theorists. However, the term bipolar
was notably used by Stalin who said he saw the international system as a
bipolar one with two opposing powerbases and ideologies. Consequently, the
international system prior to 1945 can be described as multi-polar, with
power being shared among Great powers.
The collapse of the Soviet
Union in 1991 had led to what some would call unipolarity, with the United
States as a sole superpower. However, due to China's surge of economic success after
joining the World Trade Organization in 2001, combined
with the respectable international position they hold within political spheres
and the power that the Chinese Government exerts over their people (consisting
of the largest population in the world), there is debate over whether China is
now a superpower or a possible candidate in the future.
Several theories of international relations draw
upon the idea of polarity.
The balance of power was a concept prevalent in Europe prior to the First World War, the thought being that by balancing power blocs it would create stability and prevent war. Theories of the balance of power gained prominence again during the Cold War, being a central mechanism of Kenneth Waltz's Neorealism. Here, the concepts of balancing (rising in power to counter another) and bandwagonning (siding with another) are developed.
The balance of power was a concept prevalent in Europe prior to the First World War, the thought being that by balancing power blocs it would create stability and prevent war. Theories of the balance of power gained prominence again during the Cold War, being a central mechanism of Kenneth Waltz's Neorealism. Here, the concepts of balancing (rising in power to counter another) and bandwagonning (siding with another) are developed.
Hegemonic stability theory
(developed by Robert Gilpin) also draws upon the idea of Polarity, specifically
the state of unipolarity. Hegemony is the preponderance of power at one pole in the
international system, and the theory argues this is a stable configuration
because of mutual gains by both the dominant power and others in the
international system. This is contrary to many Neorealist arguments,
particularly made by Kenneth Waltz, stating that the end of the Cold War and
the state of unipolarity is an unstable configuration that will inevitably
change.
This can be expressed in Power transition theory, which states
that it is likely that a great power would challenge a hegemon after a certain
period, resulting in a major war. It suggests that while hegemony can control
the occurrence of wars, it also results in the creation of one. Its main
proponent, A.F.K. Organski, argued this based on the
occurrence of previous wars during British, Portuguese and Dutch hegemony.
Interdependence
Many advocate that the current international
system is characterized by growing interdependence; the mutual responsibility
and dependency on others. Advocates of this point to growing globalization,
particularly with international economic interaction. The role of international
institutions, and widespread acceptance of a number of operating principles in
the international system, reinforces ideas that relations are characterized by
interdependence.
Dependency
theory is a theory most commonly associated with Marxism, stating
that a set of Core states exploit a set of weaker Periphery
states for their prosperity. Various versions of the theory suggest that this
is either an inevitability (standard dependency theory), or use the theory to
highlight the necessity for change (Neo-Marxist).
Systemic tools of international relations
- Diplomacy is the practice of communication and negotiation between representatives of states. To some extent, all other tools of international relations can be considered the failure of diplomacy. Keeping in mind, the use of other tools are part of the communication and negotiation inherent within diplomacy. Sanctions, force, and adjusting trade regulations, while not typically considered part of diplomacy, are actually valuable tools in the interest of leverage and placement in negotiations.
- Sanctions are usually a first resort after the failure of diplomacy, and are one of the main tools used to enforce treaties. They can take the form of diplomatic or economic sanctions and involve the cutting of ties and imposition of barriers to communication or trade.
- War, the use of force, is often thought of as the ultimate tool of international relations. A widely accepted definition is that given by Clausewitz, with war being "the continuation of politics by other means". There is a growing study into 'new wars' involving actors other than states. The study of war in International Relations is covered by the disciplines of 'War Studies' and 'Strategic studies'.
- The mobilization of international shame can also be thought of as a tool of International Relations. This is attempting to alter states' actions through 'naming and shaming' at the international level. This is mostly done by the large human rights NGOs such as Amnesty International (for instance when it called Guantanamo Bay a "Gulag"),[3] or Human Rights Watch. A prominent use of was the UN Commission on Human Rights 1235 procedure, which publicly exposes state's human rights violations. The current Human Rights Council has yet to use this Mechanism
- The allotment of economic and/or diplomatic benefits. An example of this is the European Union's enlargement policy. Candidate countries are allowed entry into the EU only after the fulfillment of the Copenhagen criteria.
Unit-level concepts in international relations
As a level of analysis the unit level is
often referred to as the state level, as it locates its explanation at the
level of the state, rather than the international system.
Regime type
It is often considered that a state's form of government
can dictate the way that a state interacts with others in the international
system.
Democratic Peace Theory is a theory
that suggests that the nature of democracy
means that democratic countries will not go to war with each other. The
justifications for this are that democracies externalise their norms and only
go to war for just causes, and that democracy encourages mutual trust and
respect.
Communism
justifies a world revolution, which similarly would lead to peaceful
coexistence, based on a proletarian global society.
Revisionism/Status quo
States can be classified by whether they accept
the international status quo, or are revisionist, i.e. want change. Revisionist
states seek to fundamentally change the rules and practices of international
relations, feeling disadvantaged by the status quo. They see the international
system as a largely western creation which serves to reinforce current
realities. Japan
is an example of a state that has gone from being a revisionist state to one
that is satisfied with the status quo, because the status quo is now beneficial
to it.
Religion
It is often considered that religion can
have an effect on the way a state acts within the international system.
Religion is visible as an organising principle particularly for Islamic states,
whereas secularism sits at the other end of the spectrum, with the separation
of state and religion being responsible for the Liberal international relations
theory.
[edit] Individual or sub-unit level concepts
The level beneath the unit (state) level can be
useful both for explaining factors in International Relations that other
theories fail to explain, and for moving away from a state-centric view of
international relations.
- Psychological factors in International Relations - Evaluating psychological factors in international relations comes from the understanding that a state is not a 'black box' as proposed by Realism, and that there may be other influences on foreign policy decisions. Examining the role of personalities in the decision making process can have some explanatory power, as can the role of misperception between various actors. A prominent application of sub-unit level psychological factors in international relations is the concept of Groupthink, another is the propensity of policymakers to think in terms of analogies.
- Bureaucratic politics - Looks at the role of the bureaucracy in decision making, and sees decisions as a result of bureaucratic in-fighting, and as having been shaped by various constraints.
- Religious, Ethnic, and secessionist groups - Viewing these aspects of the sub-unit level has explanatory power with regards to ethnic conflicts, religious wars, transnational diaspora (diaspora politics) and other actors which do not consider themselves to fit with the defined state boundaries. This is particularly useful in the context of the pre-modern world of weak states.
- Science, Technology and International Relations- How science and technology impact the global health, business, environment, technology, and development.
- International political economy, and economic factors in international relations.[4]
- International political culturology – Looks at how culture and cultural variables impact in international relations[5] · [6] · .[7]
reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_relations
versi Indonesia
Teori hubungan internasional
Artikel utama: Teori hubungan internasional
Apa yang secara eksplisit diakui sebagai teori hubungan internasional tidak dikembangkan sampai setelah Perang Dunia I, dan dibahas secara lebih rinci di bawah ini. Namun, teori HI memiliki tradisi panjang menggunakan karya ilmu-ilmu sosial lainnya. Penggunaan huruf besar “H” dan “I” dalam hubungan internasional bertujuan untuk membedakan disiplin Hubungan Internasional dari fenomena hubungan internasional. Banyak orang yang mengutip Sejarah Perang Peloponnesia karya Thucydides sebagai inspirasi bagi teori realis, dengan Leviathan karya Hobbes dan The Prince karya Machiavelli memberikan pengembangan lebih lanjut. Demikian juga, liberalisme menggunakan karya Kant dan Rousseau, dengan karya Kant sering dikutip sebagai pengembangan pertama dari Teori Perdamaian Demokratis. Meskipun hak-hak asasi manusia kontemporer secara signifikan berbeda dengan jenis hak-hak yang didambakan dalam hukum alam, Francisco de Vitoria, Hugo Grotius, dan John Locke memberikan pernyataan-pernyataan pertama tentang hak untuk mendapatkan hak-hak tertentu berdasarkan kemanusiaan secara umum. Pada abad ke-20, selain teori-teori kontemporer intenasionalisme liberal, Marxisme merupakan landasan hubungan internasional.
Perkembangan fenomena hubungan internasional telah memasuki aspek-aspek baru, dimana Hubungan Internasional tidak hanya mengkaji tentang negara, tetapi juga mengkaji tentang peran aktor non-negara di dalam ruang lingkup politik global. Peran non-state actor yang semakin dominan mengindikasikan bahwa non-state actor memegang peran yang penting.
Dewasa ini, fenomena hubungan internasional telah memasuki ranah budaya (seperti klaim tari pendet Malaysia terhadap indonesia), sehingga Hubungan Internasional memerlukan kajian teoritis dari dispilin ilmu lainnya.
Teori Epistemologi dan teori HI
Teori-teori Utama Hubungan Internasional Realisme [[Neorealisme], Dipelopori oleh Kenneth Waltz, istilah kunci : struktur, agen, sistem internasional Idealisme, Dipelopoeri oleh Imanuel Kant, istilah kunci : Pacific UnION Liberalisme. Dipelopori oleh Robert Keohane, istilah kunci : complex interdepency Neoliberalisme, Marxisme dan Neo Marxis Teori dependensi
Teori kritis dipelopori oleh Jurgen Habermas, istilah kunci : Paradigma Komunikasi, Paradigma Kesadaran, Alienisasi, Emansipatoris. Konstruksivisme, Fungsionalisme, Neofungsiionalisme Negativitas Total dari TW Adorno, untuk memahami isu-isu lingkungan Masyarakat Konsumtif dari Herbert Marcuse, untuk memahami hubungan antara masyarakat dengan budaya global.
Secara garis besar teori-teori HI dapat dibagi menjadi dua pandangan epistemologis “positivis” dan “pasca-positivis”. Teori-teori positivis bertujuan mereplikasi metode-metode ilmu-ilmu sosial dengan menganalisis dampak kekuatan-kekuatan material. Teori-teori ini biasanya berfokus berbagai aspek seperti interaksi negara-negara, ukuran kekuatan-kekuatan militer, keseimbangan kekuasaaan dan lain-lain. Epistemologi pasca-positivis menolak ide bahwa dunia sosial dapat dipelajari dengan cara yang objektif dan bebas-nilai. Epistemologi ini menolak ide-ide sentral tentang neo-realisme/liberalisme, seperti teori pilihan rasional, dengan alasan bahwa metode ilmiah tidak dapat diterapkan ke dalam dunia sosial dan bahwa suatu “ilmu” HI adalah tidak mungkin. Perbedaan kunci antara kedua pandangan tersebut adalah bahwa sementara teori-teori positivis, seperti neo-realisme, menawarkan berbagai penjelasan yang bersifat sebab-akibat (seperti mengapa dan bagaimana kekuasaan diterapkan), teori pasca-positivis pasca-positivis berfokus pada pertanyaan-pertanyaan konstitutif, sebagai contoh apa yang dimaksudkan dengan “kekuasaan”; hal-hal apa sajakah yang membentuknya, bagaimana kekuasaan dialami dan bagaimana kekuasaan direproduksi. Teori-teori pasca-positivs secara eksplisit sering mempromosikan pendekatan normatif terhadap HI, dengan mempertimbangkan etika. Hal ini merupakan sesuatu yang sering diabaikan dalam HI “tradisional” karena teori-teori positivis membuat perbedaan antara “fakta-fakta” dan penilaian-penilaian normatif, atau “nilai-nilai”. Selama periode akhir 1980-an/1990 perdebatan antara para pendukung teori-teori positivis dan para pendukung teori-teori pasca-positivis menjadi perdebatan yang dominan dan disebut sebagai “Perdebatan Terbesar” Ketiga (Lapid 1989.)
Islam, yang hanya dipandang orang dan para akademisi hanya sebagai agama, ternyata menyimpan pemikiran hubungan internasional. Sejarah mencatat kekuasaan Islam atau khalifah pada sekitar abad 7M. Pada masa ini, khalifah Islam merupakan suatu global polis atau tatanan hubungan internasional, karena menata hubungan wilayah-wilayah yang disatukan ke dalam bentuk polis. Apabila dikaji lebih dalam, khalifah Islam merupakan suatu order atau tatanan yang mengatur seluruh aspek-aspek kehidupan manusia. Misalnya hukum ekonomi global berlandaskan pada hukum ekonomi Islam, dimana hukum ekonomi Islam tidak mengutamakan riba ( keuntungan atau jiwa-jiwa kapitalis seperti yang diungkapkan oleh Pemikiran Marxis, tetapi suatu sistem ekonomi yang win-win solution serta mengutamakan kesejahteraan bersama, bukan keuntungan pihak tertentu saja. Bandingkan dengan pemikiran-pemikiran ekonomi sekarang ini, seperti Neolib dll, dimana pemikiran telah menciptakan keterbelakangan dan ketergantungan ( depedensi ) yang berakibat pada kesenjangan global.
Teori politik adalah salah satu kajian di dalam bidang hubungan internasional. Teori politik pada dasarnya adalah tentang tata negara. Pemikiran sistem politik demokrasi yang diadopsi oleh negara-negara berkembang merupakan kajian teori politik. Islam adalah sumber teori politik, karena memuat seluruh aspek-aspek kehidupan manusia. Sebagai contoh, sistem ekonomi Islam merupakan teori politik yang bertujuan menjamin kesejahteraan bersama sehingga manusia menjadi "mansalahat" atau tentram. Teori politik yang bersumber dari pemikiran barat adalah suatu mal-praktik bagi manusia itu sendiri, karena manusia tidak menerima esensinya sendiri, tetapi mencari esensi lain yang berakibat pada jatuhnya manusia kepada jurang alienisasi.
Menurut Imanuel Kant, perdamaian akan tercipta apabila negara-negara menganut sistem demokrasi. Perpertual peace adalah perdamaian yang timbul karena negara-negara menganut sistem demokrasi. Ini adalah kesalahan besar. Perdamaian hanya akan timbul apabila manusia menerima esensinya sebagai manusia, dengan cara menerapkan teori politik Islam yang merupakan sumber dari order manusia itu sendiri.
Teori-teori Positivis
Realisme
Realisme, sebagai tanggapan terhadap liberalisme, pada intinya menyangkal bahwa negara-negara berusaha untuk bekerja sama. Para realis awal seperti E.H. Carr, Daniel Bernhard, dan Hans Morgenthau berargumen bahwa, untuk maksud meningkatkan keamanan mereka, negara-negara adalah aktor-aktor rasional yang berusaha mencari kekuasaan dan tertarik kepada kepentingan diri sendiri (self-interested). Setiap kerja sama antara negara-negara dijelaskan sebagai benar-benar insidental. Para realis melihat Perang Dunia II sebagai pembuktian terhadap teori mereka. Perlu diperhatikan bahwa para penulis klasik seperti Thucydides, Machiavelli, dan Hobbes sering disebut-sebut sebagai “bapak-bapak pendiri” realisme oleh orang-orang yang menyebut diri mereka sendiri sebagai realis kontemporer.] Namun, meskipun karya mereka dapat mendukung doktrin realis, ketiga orang tersebut tampaknya tidak mungkin menggolongkan diri mereka sendiri sebagai realis (dalam pengertian yang dipakai di sini untuk istilah tersebut).
Liberalisme/idealisme/Internasionalisme Liberal
Teori hubungan internasional liberal muncul setelah Perang Dunia I untuk menanggapi ketidakmampuan negara-negara untuk mengontrol dan membatasi perang dalam hubungan internasional mereka. Pendukung-pendukung awal teori ini termasuk Woodrow Wilson dan Normal Angell, yang berargumen dengan berbagai cara bahwa negara-negara mendapatkan keuntungan dari satu sama lain lewat kerjasama dan bahwa perang terlalu destruktif untuk bisa dikatakan sebagai pada dasarnya sia-sia. Liberalisme tidak diakui sebagai teori yang terpadu sampai paham tersebut secara kolektif dan mengejek disebut sebagai idealisme oleh E.H. Carr. Sebuah versi baru “idealisme”, yang berpusat pada hak-hak asasi manusia sebagai dasar legitimasi hukum internasional, dikemukakan oleh Hans Kóchler.
Neorealisme
Neorealisme terutama merupakan karya Kenneh Waltz (yang sebenarnya menyebut teorinya “realisme struktural” di dalam buku karangannya yang berjudul Man, the State, and War).] Sambil tetap mempertahankan pengamatan-pengamatan empiris realisme, bahwa hubungan internasional dikarakterka oleh hubungan-hubungan antarnegara yang antagonistik, para pendukung neorealisme menunjuk struktur anarkis dalam sistem internasional sebagai penyebabnya. Mereka menolak berbagai penjelasan yang mempertimbangkan pengaruh karakteristik-karakteristik dalam negeri negara-negara.. Negara-negara dipaksa oleh pencapaian yang relatif (relative gains) dan keseimbangan yang menghambat konsentrasi kekuasaan. Tidak seperti realisme, neo-realisme berusaha ilmiah dan lebih positivis. Hal lain yang juga membedakan neo-realisme dari realisme adalah bahwa neo-realisme tidak menyetujui penekanan realisme pada penjelasan yang bersifat perilaku dalam hubungan internasional.
Neoliberalisme
Neoliberalisme berusaha memperbarui liberalisme dengan menyetujui asumsi neorealis bahwa negara-negara adalah aktor-aktor kunci dalam hubungan internasional, tetapi tetap mempertahankan pendapat bahwa aktor-aktor bukan negara dan organisasi-organisasi antarpemerintah adalah juga penting. Para pendukung seperti Maria Chatta berargumen bahwa negara-negara akan bekerja sama terlepas dari pencapaian-pencapaian relatif, dan dengan demikian menaruh perhatian pada pencapaian-pencapaian mutlak. Meningkatnya interdependensi selama Perang Dingin lewat institusi-institusi internasional berarti bahwa neo-liberalisme juga disebut institusionalisme liberal. Hal ini juga berarti bahwa pada dasarnya bangsa-bangsa bebas membuat pilihan-pilihan mereka sendiri tentang bagaimana mereka akan menerapkan kebijakan tanpa organisasi-organisasi internasional yang merintangi hak suatu bangsa atas kedaulatan. Neoliberalimse juga mengandung suatu teori ekonomi yang didasarkan pada penggunaan pasar-pasar yang terbuka dan bebas dengan hanya sedikit, jika memang ada, intervensi pemerintah untuk mencegah terbentuknya monopoli dan bentuk-bentuk konglomerasi yang lain. Keadaan saling tergantung satu sama lain yang terus meningkat selama dan sesudah Perang Dingin menyebabkan neoliberalisme didefinisikan sebagai institusionalisme, bagian baru teori ini dikemukakan oleh Robert Keohane dan juga Joseph Nye.
Teori Rejim
Teori rejim berasal dari tradisi liberal yang berargumen bahwa berbagai institusi atau rejim internasional mempengaruhi perilaku negara-negara (maupun aktor internasional yang lain). Teori ini mengasumsikan kerjasama bisa terjadi di dalam sistem negara-negara anarki. Bila dilihat dari definisinya sendiri, rejim adalah contoh dari kerjasama internasional. Sementara realisme memprediksikan konflik akan menjadi norma dalam hubungan internasional, para teoritisi rejim menyatakan kerjasama tetap ada dalam situasi anarki sekalipun. Seringkali mereka menyebutkan kerjasama di bidang perdagangan, hak asasi manusia, dan keamanan bersama di antara isu-isu lainnya. Contoh-contoh kerjasama tadilah yang dimaksud dengan rejim. Definisi rejim yang paling lazim dipakai datang dari Stephen Krasner. Krasner mendefinisikan rejim sebagai “institusi yang memiliki sejumlah norma, aturan yang tegas, dan prosedur yang memfasilitasi sebuah pemusatan berbagai harapan. Tapi tidak semua pendekatan teori rejim berbasis pada liberal atau neoliberal; beberapa pendukung realis seperi Joseph Greico telah mengembangkan sejumlah teori cangkokan yang membawa sebuah pendekatan berbasis realis ke teori yang berdasarkan pada liberal ini. (Kerjasama menurut kelompok realis bukannya tidak pernah terjadi, hanya saja kerjasama bukanlah norma; kerjasama merupakan sebuah perbedaan derajat.
Teori-teori pasca-positivis/reflektivis
Teori masyarakat internasional (Aliran pemikiran Inggris)
Teori masyarakat internasional, juga disebut Aliran Pemikiran Inggris, berfokus pada berbagai norma dan nilai yang sama-sama dimiliki oleh negara-negara dan bagaimana norma-norma dan nilai-nlai tersebut mengatur hubungan internasional. Contoh norma-norma seperti itu mencakup diplomasi, tatanan, hukum internasional. Tidak seperti neo-realisme, teori ini tidak selalu positivis. Para teoritisi teori ini telah berfokus terutama pada intervensi kemanusiaan, dan dibagi kembali antara para solidaris, yang cenderung lebih menyokong intervensi kemanusiaan, dan para pluralis, yang lebih menekankan tatanan dan kedaulatan, Nicholas Wheeler adalah seorang solidaris terkemuka, sementara Hedley Bull mungkin merupakan pluraris yang paling dikenal.
Konstruktivisme Sosial
Kontrukstivisme Sosial mencakup rentang luas teori yang bertujuan menangani berbagai pertanyaan tentang ontologi, seperti perdebatan tentang lembaga (agency) dan Struktur, serta pertanyaan-pertanyaan tentang epistemologi, seperti perdebatan tentang “materi/ide” yang menaruh perhatian terhadap peranan relatif kekuatan-kekuatan materi versus ide-ide. Konstruktivisme bukan merupakan teori HI, sebagai contoh dalam hal neo-realisme, tetapi sebaliknya merupakan teori sosial. Konstruktivisme dalam HI dapat dibagi menjadi apa yang disebut oleh Hopf (1998) sebagai konstruktivisme “konvensional” dan “kritis”. Hal yang terdapat dalam semua variasi konstruktivisme adalah minat terhadap peran yang dimiliki oleh kekuatan-kekuatan ide. Pakar konstruktivisme yang paling terkenal, Alexander Wendt menulis pada 1992 tentang Organisasi Internasional (kemudian diikuti oleh suatu buku, Social Theory of International Politics 1999), “anarki adalah hal yang diciptakan oleh negara-negara dari hal tersebut”. Yang dimaksudkannya adalah bahwa struktur anarkis yang diklaim oleh para pendukung neo-realis sebagai mengatur interaksi negara pada kenyataannya merupakan fenomena yang secara sosial dikonstruksi dan direproduksi oleh negara-negara. Sebagai contoh, jika sistem internasional didominasi oleh negara-negara yang melihat anarki sebagai situasi hidup dan mati (diistilahkan oleh Wendt sebagai anarki “Hobbesian”) maka sistem tersebut akan dikarakterkan dengan peperangan. Jika pada pihak lain anarki dilihat sebagai dibatasi (anarki “Lockean”) maka sistem yang lebih damai akan eksis. Anarki menurut pandangan ini dibentuk oleh interaksi negara, bukan diterima sebagai aspek yang alami dan tidak mudah berubah dalam kehidupan internasional seperti menurut pendapat para pakar HI non-realis. Namun, banyak kritikus yang muncul dari kedua sisi pembagian epistemologis tersebut. Para pendukung pasca-positivis mengatakan bahwa fokus terhadap negara dengan mengorbankan etnisitas/ras/jender menjadikan konstrukstivisme sosial sebagai teori positivis yang lain. Penggunaan teori pilihan rasional secara implisit oleh Wendt juga telah menimbulkan pelbagai kritik dari para pakar seperti Steven Smith. Para pakar positivis (neo-liberalisme/realisme) berpendapat bahwa teori tersebut mengenyampingkan terlalu banyak asumsi positivis untuk dapat dianggap sebagai teori positivis.
Teori Kritis
(Artikel utama: Teori hubungan internasional kritis) Teori hubungan internasional kritis adalah penerapan “teori kritis” dalam hubungan internasional. Pada pendukung seperti Andrew Linklater, Robert W. Cox, dan Ken Booth berfokus pada kebutuhan terhadap emansipansi (kebebasan) manusia dari Negara-negara. Dengan demikian, adalah teori ini bersifat “kritis” terhadap teori-teori HI “mainstream” yang cenderung berpusat pada negara (state-centric). Catatan: Daftar teori ini sama sekali tidak menyebutkan seluruh teori HI yang ada. Masih ada teori-teori lain misalnya fungsionalisme, neofungsionalisme, feminisme, dan teori dependen.
Marxisme
Teori Marxis dan teori Neo-Marxis dalam HI menolak pandangan realis/liberal tentang konflik atau kerja sama negara, tetapi sebaliknya berfokus pada aspek ekonomi dan materi. Marxisme membuat asumsi bahwa ekonomi lebih penting daripada persoalan-persoalan yang lain; sehingga memungkinkan bagi peningkatan kelas sebagai fokus studi. Para pendukung Marxis memandang sistem internasional sebagai sistem kapitalis terintegrasi yang mengejar akumulasi modal (kapital). Dengan demikian, periode kolonialisme membawa masuk pelbagai sumber daya untuk bahan-bahan mentah dan pasar-pasar yang pasti (captive markets) dancuk...dancukk..dancukkkuntuk ekspor, sementara dekolonisasi membawa masuk pelbagai kesempatan baru dalam bentuk dependensi (ketergantungan). Berkaitan dengan teori-teori Marx adalah teori dependensi yang berargumen bahwa negara-negara maju, dalam usaha mereka untuk mencapai kekuasaan, menembus negara-negara berkembang lewat penasihat politik, misionaris, pakar, dan perusahaan multinasional untuk mengintegrasikan negara-negara berkembang tersebut ke dalam sistem kapitalis terintegrasi untuk mendapatkan sumber-sumber daya alam dan meningkatkan dependensi negara-negara berkembang terhadap negara-negara maju. Teori-teori Marxis kurang mendapatkan perhatian di Amerika Serikat di mana tidak ada partai sosialis yang signifikan. Teori-teori ini lebih lazim di pelbagai bagian Eropa dan merupakan salah satu kontribusi teoritis yang paling penting bagi dunia akademis Amerika Latin, sebagai contoh lewat teologi.
Teori-teori pascastrukturalis
Teori-teori pascastrukturalis dalam HI berkembang pada 1980-an dari studi-studi pascamodernis dalam ilmu politik. Pasca-strukturalisme mengeksplorasi dekonstruksi konsep-konsep yang secara tradisional tidak problematis dalam HI, seperti kekuasaan dan agensi dan meneliti bagaimana pengkonstruksian konsep-konsep ini membentuk hubungan-hubungan internasional. Penelitian terhadap “narasi” memainkan peran yang penting dalam analisis pascastrukturalis, sebagai contoh studi pascastrukturalis feminis telah meneliti peran yang dimainkan oleh “kaum wanita” dalam masyarakat global dan bagaimana kaum wanita dikonstruksi dalam perang sebagai “tanpa dosa” (innocent) dan “warga sipil”. Contoh-contoh riset pasca-positivis mencakup: Pelbagai bentuk feminisme (perang "gender" war—“gendering” war)Pascakolonialisme (tantangan-tantangan dari sentrisme Eropa dalam HI)
referensi: http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubungan_internasional
Read More..
