Notes
Isms and Anarchy
Milner, H. The assumption of anarchy in international relations theory a critique
- In the article Milner states that anarchy has been declared the fundamental
assumption about international politics. Neo-realist have positioned anarchy as the
single most important characteristic underlying international relations.
- Milner argues that a more fruitful way to understand the international system is one
that combines anarchy and interdependence.
Concepts of Anarchy
- Anarchy has been accorded a central role in international politics, especially in
recent theoretical writings.
- Anarchy is the fundamental fact of international relations
- For Kenneth Waltz anarchy is the first element of structure in the international
system. It is for him the structural feature from which all other consequences derive.
- He describes the initial international environment as one peopled by egoistic, anomic
states, pursuing their self-interests in a self-help system without any centralized
authority
- Anarchy has two meanings; the first meaning that anarchy carries is a lack of order.
International order, defined in a strong sense as a pattern of activity that sustains the
elementary or primary goals of a society of states or international society is not
lacking international relations.
- Regimes serve to constrain and guide states behavior according to common norms
and rules, thereby making possible patterned or orderly behavior.Here power is used
to create a structure that inhibits war and thus provides a means for organizing the
international system. The distribution of power as creating the means for producing
order, regularized predictable patterns of behavior- among states.Lack of order does
not seem to be the distinguishing feature associated with the system's anarchy.
- The second definition of anarchy is the lack of government.Waltz, for instance,
associates anarchy with lack of government, which deals with the means used to
organize how and when force can be employed.
- Anarchy means the absence of a central authority to enforce states' adherence to
promises or agree ments.27 The means for hierarchical rule enforcement are
missing.
- It seems not to be their existence that matters, but their capacity for commanding
obedience. This capacity depends much on their perceived legitimacy, as it does for
domestic institutions. These institutions will have little influence internationally or
domestically if they lack legitimacy
- s. Lack of legitimacy seems in the end to be what many IR scholars have in mind
when they talk about anarchy. Anarchy as a lack of government is for them
transformed into a discussion of lack of authority, or legitimacy
