Democratic Peace Theory and the Realist-Liberal Dichotomy: the Promise of Neoclassical Realism?

Abstract

The idea of a separate (dyadic) peace among (liberal) democracies remains an alluring proposition for Western intellectuals and policy makers, despite criticism from non-Western circles. We contend that explanations of the democratic peace have degenerated into theoretical stalemate, with the structuralist bias depicted in (neo)realist theories and, conversely, the individualist nature of liberal theories of the democratic peace, providing little room for alternative conceptions. As a distinct theory of foreign policy in which the relationship between agents and structures, and their intersection across differing levels of analysis, is more fully explored, neoclassical realism could hold potential for transcending the explanatory dichotomies plaguing the theorisation of the democratic peace. Moreover, it could open up room for an alternative theoretical framework for theorising the dyadic peace and its implications for how peace-building initiatives are approached.

Notes

Not all liberal theories of the democratic peace have excluded systemic features from their frameworks. Huntley (1996) provides a notable exception. In the main, however, liberal scholars have explained the absence of war between (liberal) democracies as the product of the intentional actions and/or properties of liberal states or liberal decision makers.

The distinction between IR theory and theories of foreign policy is noted. Given the fact however that democratic peace scholars have themselves failed in upholding this distinction, the neoclassical realist focus on theories of foreign policy is not problematic.

The dyadic thesis refers to the absence of war between pairs of liberal democracies; conversely, the monadic thesis holds that liberal democracies are peaceful in general.

Oren (1996) reached a similar conclusion in his analysis of the changing nature of US perceptions of Germany before and during the First World War.

For a linkage between structural realist theories of international politics and theories of foreign policy, see Rose (1998). Waltz, however, rejects both the idea of a theory of foreign policy and attempts at constructing such theories predicated on his work (cf. Waltz, 1996).

As Zakaria (1992, p. 198) comments, ‘[o]ver the last decade, scholars of international relations have either ignored the international system or never moved beyond it’.

The Kruger telegram alludes to the outright Germany hostility towards Britain subsequent to the failed Jameson raid against the government of the Transvaal (in South Africa), in which the German Emperor, Wilhelm II, sent a congratulatory telegram to the Boer leader, upon capturing the Jameson raiders.

Obviously, the historical account given here is very brief. Given spatial limitations, we will merely provide some general comments and refer to a possible neoclassical realist construction of the historical episode.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Eben Coetzee

Department of Political Studies and Governance, University of the Free State, South Africa (Email: [email protected])

Heidi Hudson

Centre for Africa Studies, University of the Free State