| ID | 090150 |
| Title Proper | Woman, the state, and war |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Elshtain, Jean Bethke |
| Publication | 2009. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Does `gender' as a category of analysis or as a central feature of a logic of explanation alter in significant ways Kenneth Waltz's famous `levels of analysis' as developed in his classic, Man, the State, and War? One overriding claim of feminist international relations has been that `gender' alters all levels of analysis; thus, changing `man' to `woman' in the formulation `man, the state, and war' significantly transforms our understanding of international relations. I evaluate this claim critically by assessing the adequacy of feminist formulations on each of Waltz's levels of analysis and, further, by unpacking Waltz's own understanding of these levels. I conclude that Waltz remains enormously helpful in deconstructing reductionist accounts, especially on the `first level' of analysis, but that his own account is problematic insofar as it insists on a `structural analysis' sundered from his levels 1 and 2, namely, wars flow from human nature or, alternatively, from the domestic ordering of states. I point out that Waltz himself leaves some `wiggle room' in his book that permits one to `plug in' features of the first two levels of analysis that are critical to understanding the structural level. In other words, all three levels must be in play if one is to craft a compelling explanatory framework. |
| `In' analytical Note | International Relations Vol. 23, No. 2; Jun 2009: p.289-303 |
| Journal Source | International Relations Vol. 23, No. 2; Jun 2009: p.289-303 |
| Key Words | Causes of War ; Feminist International Relations ; Gender ; Human Nature ; Levels of Analysis ; Man ; State ; War ; Reductionism ; K N Waltz ; Women and War |