Item Details
Skip Navigation Links
   ActiveUsers:394Hits:19928148Skip Navigation Links
Show My Basket
Contact Us
IDSA Web Site
Ask Us
Today's News
HelpExpand Help
Advanced search

In Basket
  Journal Article   Journal Article
 

ID083657
Title ProperFear in International Politics
Other Title Informationtwo positions
LanguageENG
AuthorTang, Shiping
Publication2008.
Summary / Abstract (Note)There are two-and only two-fundamental positions on how to cope with the fear that is derived from the uncertainty over others' intentions in international relations (IR) literature. Because these two positions cannot be deduced from other bedrock assumptions within the different IR approaches, the two positions should be taken as an additional bedrock assumption. The first position, held by offensive realism, insists that states should assume the worst over others' intentions, thus essentially eliminating the uncertainty about others' intentions. The second position, held by a more diverse bunch of non-offensive realism theories, insists that states should not always assume the worst over others' intentions and that states can and should take measures to reduce uncertainty about each others intentions and thus fear. These two different assumptions are quintessential for the logic of the different theoretical approaches and underpin some of the fundamental differences between offensive realism on the one side and non-offensive realism theories on the other side. Making the two positions explicit helps us understand IR theories and makes dialogues among non-offensive realism theories possible.
`In' analytical NoteInternational Studies Review Vol. 10, No.3; Sep 2008: p451-471
Journal SourceInternational Studies Review Vol. 10, No.3; Sep 2008: p451-471
Key WordsInternational Relations ;  Realism ;  World Politics