‘No theory of intl. relations predicted global economic crisis’
Tehran Times Political Desk

TEHRAN - Cornell University professor Peter J. Katzenstein says that none of the major theories of international relations accurately predicted the current global economic crisis.

He made the remarks during an e-mail interview with the Mehr News Agency conducted by Javad Herannia and Hossein Kaji last week.

Following is the text of the interview:

Q: There are four major intellectual discussions in international relations theories: realism versus liberalism; behaviorism versus traditionalism; neo-realism versus neo-liberalism; and rationalism versus constructivism. What is the main debate?

A: If there is one these days, which is not so clear, it is the last one.

Q: As we know, we are in the middle of a global economic crisis. Why were most of the major international relations theories not able to predict it?

A: Nobody predicted it well. Rational expectation theory and rationalism have suffered most since they cannot deal with Knightian uncertainty very well. I doubt that this will have much effect on the character of research.

Q: Professor Christian Reus-Smit argues that there is no longer a great debate over international relations theories. Do you accept this view? If that is the case, which international relations theories can explain the current issues in the area of international relations?

A: I tend to agree and think that eclecticism is now becoming more and more acceptable and accepted. I am writing a book on that subject right now.

Q: Constructivism is one of the renowned theories in the field of international relations. What are the main advantages of this theory in comparison to other world-class international relations theories?

A: It is not a theory but a language just like rationalism. It provides space for conceptual innovation not for theory building as such.

Q: Some scholars assert that international relations is an Anglo–American discipline, but others claim that international relations has some roots in continental countries. What is your viewpoint about this division? To what extent do developing countries contribute to the discipline of international relations?

A: There are many different non Anglo-American disciplines of international relations but they are drowned out by the number of scholars in the U.S. and the advantages they have writing in English. Think of the Chinese and the Danish and the French school for starters.

Peter J. Katzenstein is the Walter S. Carpenter, Jr. Professor of International Studies at Cornell University. His research and teaching lie at the intersection of the fields of international relations and comparative politics. Katzenstein’s work addresses issues of political economy, security, and culture in world politics

   Print Version     |        Back    |     Send To Friend