Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics
Abstract
The debate between realists and liberals has reemerged as an axis of contention in international relations theory. Revolving in the past around competing theories of human nature, the debate is more concerned today with the extent to which state action is influenced by “structure” (anarchy and the distribution of power) versus “process” (interaction and learning) and institutions. Does the absence of centralized political authority force states to play competitive power politics? Can international regimes overcome this logic, and under what conditions? What in anarchy is given and immutable, and what is amenable to change?
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Wendt's concept of power politics fits best as a fundament because his positivist approach to social constructivism acknowledges the high relevance of the realist key idea of anarchy.
“As a fundament, Wendt's (1992) concept of power politics fits best, as his positivist approach to social constructivism acknowledges the high relevance of the realist key idea of anarchy.”
From The Aggravated Struggle for Regional Power in the Middle East: American Allies Saudi Arabia and Israel versus Iran (2020) · cites this paper as Wendt, 1992
Anarchy has the potential to produce different kinds of relations between states depending on the history of interactions: Hobbesian, Lockean, and Kantian.
“Wendt (1992, p. 408) argues that in dependency on the history of interactions between states, anarchy has the potential to produce a different kind of relations between states: a Hobbesian world of enemies, a Lockean world of egoists, and a Kantian world of friends (Wendt, 1992, p. 408;1994, p. 389).”
From The Aggravated Struggle for Regional Power in the Middle East: American Allies Saudi Arabia and Israel versus Iran (2020) · cites this paper as Wendt, 1992
Positivist constructivism differs from rationalism in that identities are prior to interests.
“What sets apart positivist constructivism from rationalism is the idea that identities are prior to interests (Wendt, 1992, p. 398).”
From The Aggravated Struggle for Regional Power in the Middle East: American Allies Saudi Arabia and Israel versus Iran (2020) · cites this paper as Wendt, 1992
Cites
Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.41.9.954 · Cited by 5,806 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Buzan, B. (2004) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511616617 · Cited by 905 · see citing works
Diasporas and International Relations Theory
Shain, Y., & Barth, A. (2003) · International Organization · doi:10.1017/s0020818303573015 · Cited by 574 · see citing works
China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia
Christensen, T. J. (1999) · International Security · doi:10.1162/isec.23.4.49 · Cited by 358 · see citing works
The rise and fall of the inter-paradigm debate
Wæver, O. (1996) · International Theory · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511660054.009 · Cited by 335 · see citing works
Constructivism and Identity: A Dangerous Liaison
ZEHFUSS, M. (2001) · European Journal of International Relations · doi:10.1177/1354066101007003002 · Cited by 175 · see citing works
Political priority in the global fight against non-communicable diseases
Maher, A., & Sridhar, D. (2012) · Journal of Global Health · doi:10.7189/jogh.02.020403 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Beck, M. (2020) · Global Policy · doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12778 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Del Sarto, R. A., & Soler i Lecha, E. (2024) · Geopolitics · doi:10.1080/14650045.2023.2268542 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
“…at least tacitly implies that the definition of threats and their prioritisation are not fixed or given, but rather (inter) subjective and partly arbitrary, as constructivist approaches and critical security studies have postulated (e.g., Bilgin 2010; Krause and Williams 1997; Wendt 1992).”
BackgroundThreats and Alliances in the Middle East: Saudi and Syrian Policies in a Turbulent Region
Darwich, M. (2019) · doi:10.1017/9781108656689 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
- Authors
- Wendt, A.
- Corresponding author
- Wendt, Alexander
- ORCID
- Wendt, Alexander
- Venue
- International Organization
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1992
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 391-425
- ISSN
- 0020-8183 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-5088
- OpenAlex
- W2150518915
- Cited by
- 5,885
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 246 · 2025: 307 · 2024: 249 · 2023: 292 · 2022: 233 · 2021: 309 · 2020: 395 · 2019: 292 · 2018: 263 · 2017: 205 · 2016: 201 · 2015: 218 · 2014: 231 · 2013: 216 · 2012: 243
- FWCI
- 223.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Organization (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DergiPark (Istanbul University) (submittedVersion)
- Hispana (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Science Research and Education
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Global Peace and Security Dynamics
- Keywords
- anarchy, power politics, social construction of international relations, realism versus liberalism, international regimes, state action, distribution of power, institutions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
