Introduction: International Relations Theory of War 7
the factors that lead to change in international systems, but the outcomes
inside them after the formation of those systems.
The theory contends with two of the arguments made against realism:
its inability to explain change and its inability to predict change.^12 The
theory attempts to explain why in those international system models the
two outcomes to be assessed will have similar values, whereas in different
international system models the two outcomes assessed will have different
values. These two phenomena, primarily stability of international systems,
have been expansively discussed in theoretical research of international
relations. However, to date, no comprehensive theory expansively dealing
with the effect of the three possible international system models on these
two international outcomes has been undertaken in the manner in which
the international relations theory of war does.
The international relations theory of war is based on the systemic analysis
level that examines international relations from the broadest viewpoint. It
attempts to conduct comprehensive reality analyses, maybe to too extreme
a degree, and provide a broad mapping of international phenomena and
outcomes, sometimes at the price of neglecting details. The theory acts at
the international system level, and according to it, the polarity of the sys-
tem is the factor that provides the best possible explanation for the various
models of global outcomes. The two principles of transhistorical order,
anarchy and homeostasis, have remained as two constant systemic prop-
erties over the years, because the international system always remains
without any supreme authority over the legitimate use of force. Countries
have also remained homogeneous over the years. Therefore, according to
the book’s conclusions, the changes in global outcomes throughout mod-
ern history, primarily since 1816, have resulted from the difference in the
polarity of the system. This means that two outcomes of the three possible
international system types assessed in the study may be identified.
INTERNATIONAL OUTCOMES: PRIMARY DISPUTES
AND COPING
The international relations theory of war contends with five key ques-
tions that have been expansively discussed in the theoretical research of
international relations in recent decades. The first question is does the
international system encourage expansion of territory and influence or
maintaining the status quo?^13 The two key approaches in the debate that
this question has generated are neorealism and offensive realism, theo-
ries that constitute contemporary realism.^14 The second question is what
level affects the manner of conduct of the international system—the levels
of the individual, the state, or the international system? The debate that
this question has generated takes place between neorealist theories and
the various realistic approaches that criticize them.^15 The third question