38 International Relations Theory of War
is the existence of institutions and laws to maintain order rather than
the use of force. In his view, the absence of a regime means an absence
of laws, of the permission to write them, of the judicial right to enforce
them, and of the executive ability to administer them.^15 Others emphasize
the institutions and power more than the force as a key component of a
regime.^16
The Way Constructivism, Neoliberalism, and
Realism Relate to AnarchyThe constructivist discussion of anarchy offers a different interesting
view of the term and its implications. In the opinion of neorealism, the
anarchic structure leads to the self-help principle irrespective of process.
In contrast, according to constructivism, the structure has no existence or
causality separate from the process, and the reason we find ourselves in a
world of self-help today stems from a process rather than a structure. From
this, the constructivist theory concludes that self-help and power politics
are institutions rather than inherent properties of anarchy and there is no
concept of anarchy that is separate from the habits that form and demon-
strate one structure of identities and principles more than others.^17 Thus,
Wendt argues that countries can think of anarchy in multiple ways, and
that “anarchy is what states make of it.”^18
Like neorealist researchers, neoliberal researchers have also assumed
that the international system operates under anarchy. However, in contrast
to neorealism, they have concluded that cooperation may occur under
anarchy.^19 The argument concerning the possibility of cooperation under
anarchy appears in many neoliberal sources. Robert Keohane describes
the international environment as devoid of central authority and argues
that even in that environment countries may cooperate through acting in a
manner that corresponds with their own narrow interest.^20
The comparison of hierarchy to anarchy poses the question of whether
an anarchic system is better than a global empire. Formal international
theory has usually objected to the existence of a global state, arguing that
it would be too large to be efficient. According to that theory, through
the balance of powers, it allows for the division of humankind into free
countries, not only into countries but also into individuals acting inside
them.^21
Although consensus exists between the two key contemporary realist
theories, neorealism and offensive realism, concerning the existence of
anarchy, they are divided with regard to its effects. According to neoreal-
ism, anarchy leads the powers to tend to a status quo, whereas according
to offensive realism, anarchy pushes the powers to revisionism.
After a review of the current theories concerning the effects of anarchy
on the players acting in the international system, I shall turn to reviewing