在冲突与合作之间：作为元理论的建构主义
|
摘要
本文提出的基本理论问题是:偏好一般在什么条件下容易被改变以及如何被改变?进而,偏好的改变究竟能够在多大程度上加强或减弱权力政治与利益算计在国际关系中的影响?
在研究设计上,它首先探讨了两种不同身份形成(分离性认同VS聚合性认同)与两种不同偏好塑造(冲突性偏VS.合作性偏好)之间的关系。文章指出,以排斥外部他者为“敌人”身份的分离性认同易于导致冲突性偏好的形成,进而冲突性的战略互动过程会再造、加强并物化冲突性体系文化同时导致冲突性规范的扩散、传播与内化,从而驱动整个互动体系朝向冲突演进,这实质上是一种现实建构主义的进化冲突论;而以同化外部他者为“朋友”身份的聚合性认同则易塑造合作性偏好,进而高密度、高频度的社会互动会再造、加强并物化合作性体系文化同时促进合作性规范的扩散、传播与内化,最终驱动主体间关系朝向和平、合作演进,这可以看作是一种自由建构主义的进化合作论。
然后,文章提出了一种“复合建构主义”的进程分析框架,着重思考了“偏好是如何随着身份认同的转变而转变的”这一核心命题。复合建构主义认为,国际关系行为体所置身于其中并在其中运行的体系结构是一种物质与观念的复合结构。在不同的物质与观念复合结构下,行为体之间的互动不仅会建构不同的身份认同,而且也会导致行为体优先选择内化某些规范和观念同时拒斥另外一些规范和观念,从而对行为体偏好取向的形成和物化产生重大影响。
最后,在可操作层面,依据“结构与施动者之间的相互构成性”,文章提出了一种以“结构-结构施动者-施动者”三层次为特征的建构主义进程式层次分析方法。在案例研究部分,文章分别以1945-2009年的欧洲国际关系演变为例验证了自由建构主义的解释力、以当前的达尔富尔问题为例验证了现实建构主义的解释效用。结果发现,就体系和平进程而言,能否合法性的垄断暴力之使用与能否积极有效的社会化体系中的各类行为体,都是极为重要的进程决定因素。
The Ph.D. dissertation intends to answer two major theoretical questions - under what conditions an actor’s preference is prone to change and how it changes? To what extent the change affects the actor’s perception of power and interest in dealing with international relations?
In the beginning, the dissertation reviews two different processes of identity and preference formation, the convergent identity process, which leads to cooperative preference and the discrete identity process to conflicting preference. The convergent identity of self, which presumes external others as partners, constructs actor’s preference to cooperation. Then, the coming up self/other encounters guided by such a preference create, undergird and reify a Kantian culture in the system, which, in turn, encourage actors to learn and internalize the norms of cooperation. A system with such a culture is more likely to take a progressive evolution toward a state of peace, a process which the liberalist constructivism provides with a better understanding.
On the other hand, the discrete identity of self, which presumes external others hostile, constructs actors’preference to conflict. Then, the coming up self/other encounters guided by such a preference can only create, undergird and reify a systemic culture of power politics, which, in turn, drive actors to learn and internalize the norms advocating violence and competition. A system with such a culture would inevitably take a retrogressive evolution to a state of conflict, a process which the realist constructivism attempts to explain.
Despite of their contributions to the understanding of these two evolutionary processes of international politics, both liberal constructivism and realist constructivism ignore the theoretical questions of how identities change and how the changes affect actors’preference formation. To make up the deficiency, the dissertation seeks to establish a complex constructivism framework, which hypothesizes that the systemic structure, that agents interact within, is constituted by both material and ideational factors; different configurations of the factors propel agents to follow different modes of interactions, which lead to different identity and preference formation.
Maintaining that structure and agents are mutually constituted, the dissertation takes a structurationist approach to analyze the interactions between structure and agents. It studies carefully the history of European international relations from 1945 to 2009 and the recent crisis in Darfur, the former of which shows a configuration favoring progressive evolution to peace and the latter favoring retrogressive evolution to conflict, and found that to legitimately control the use of force and to effectively socialize agents in the system are two major factors determining a positive direction of the evolutionary process.
在研究设计上,它首先探讨了两种不同身份形成(分离性认同VS聚合性认同)与两种不同偏好塑造(冲突性偏VS.合作性偏好)之间的关系。文章指出,以排斥外部他者为“敌人”身份的分离性认同易于导致冲突性偏好的形成,进而冲突性的战略互动过程会再造、加强并物化冲突性体系文化同时导致冲突性规范的扩散、传播与内化,从而驱动整个互动体系朝向冲突演进,这实质上是一种现实建构主义的进化冲突论;而以同化外部他者为“朋友”身份的聚合性认同则易塑造合作性偏好,进而高密度、高频度的社会互动会再造、加强并物化合作性体系文化同时促进合作性规范的扩散、传播与内化,最终驱动主体间关系朝向和平、合作演进,这可以看作是一种自由建构主义的进化合作论。
然后,文章提出了一种“复合建构主义”的进程分析框架,着重思考了“偏好是如何随着身份认同的转变而转变的”这一核心命题。复合建构主义认为,国际关系行为体所置身于其中并在其中运行的体系结构是一种物质与观念的复合结构。在不同的物质与观念复合结构下,行为体之间的互动不仅会建构不同的身份认同,而且也会导致行为体优先选择内化某些规范和观念同时拒斥另外一些规范和观念,从而对行为体偏好取向的形成和物化产生重大影响。
最后,在可操作层面,依据“结构与施动者之间的相互构成性”,文章提出了一种以“结构-结构施动者-施动者”三层次为特征的建构主义进程式层次分析方法。在案例研究部分,文章分别以1945-2009年的欧洲国际关系演变为例验证了自由建构主义的解释力、以当前的达尔富尔问题为例验证了现实建构主义的解释效用。结果发现,就体系和平进程而言,能否合法性的垄断暴力之使用与能否积极有效的社会化体系中的各类行为体,都是极为重要的进程决定因素。
The Ph.D. dissertation intends to answer two major theoretical questions - under what conditions an actor’s preference is prone to change and how it changes? To what extent the change affects the actor’s perception of power and interest in dealing with international relations?
In the beginning, the dissertation reviews two different processes of identity and preference formation, the convergent identity process, which leads to cooperative preference and the discrete identity process to conflicting preference. The convergent identity of self, which presumes external others as partners, constructs actor’s preference to cooperation. Then, the coming up self/other encounters guided by such a preference create, undergird and reify a Kantian culture in the system, which, in turn, encourage actors to learn and internalize the norms of cooperation. A system with such a culture is more likely to take a progressive evolution toward a state of peace, a process which the liberalist constructivism provides with a better understanding.
On the other hand, the discrete identity of self, which presumes external others hostile, constructs actors’preference to conflict. Then, the coming up self/other encounters guided by such a preference can only create, undergird and reify a systemic culture of power politics, which, in turn, drive actors to learn and internalize the norms advocating violence and competition. A system with such a culture would inevitably take a retrogressive evolution to a state of conflict, a process which the realist constructivism attempts to explain.
Despite of their contributions to the understanding of these two evolutionary processes of international politics, both liberal constructivism and realist constructivism ignore the theoretical questions of how identities change and how the changes affect actors’preference formation. To make up the deficiency, the dissertation seeks to establish a complex constructivism framework, which hypothesizes that the systemic structure, that agents interact within, is constituted by both material and ideational factors; different configurations of the factors propel agents to follow different modes of interactions, which lead to different identity and preference formation.
Maintaining that structure and agents are mutually constituted, the dissertation takes a structurationist approach to analyze the interactions between structure and agents. It studies carefully the history of European international relations from 1945 to 2009 and the recent crisis in Darfur, the former of which shows a configuration favoring progressive evolution to peace and the latter favoring retrogressive evolution to conflict, and found that to legitimately control the use of force and to effectively socialize agents in the system are two major factors determining a positive direction of the evolutionary process.
引文
1 Jeffrey T. Checkel,“The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,”World Politics, Vol. 50, 1998, pp. 324-348.
2例如Stephen Walt,“International Relations: One World, Many Theories,”Foreign Policy, Vol.29, 1998, pp. 29-45; Barry Hughes, Continuity and Change in World Politics: The Clash of Perspectives, New Jersey:Prentice Hall, 1991; Anthony D. Lott, Creating insecurity: realism, constructivism, and U.S. security policy, Ashgate, 2004.
3关于这一点,很多国际关系学者已经注意到并予以强调。如:Nicholas G. Onuf,“A Constructivist Manifesto”, in eds., Kurt Burch and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp.7-17; Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.7; Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics," Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.4, 2001, pp. 391-416; Mikael Baaz, A Meta-Theoretical Foundation for the Study of International Relations in a Global Era: a Social Constructivist Approach, Goteborg University, 2002; J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003,pp.325-342.
4 [法]皮埃尔?雷纳:《科学》(刘成富译),上海文艺出版社2003版。
5 [英]卡尔.波普尔:《猜想与反驳:科学知识的增长》,上海译文出版社2005年版,第320页。
6 [英]霍布斯:《利维坦》(犁思复等译),商务印书馆,1985年版。
7黄泽全:《非洲发展亮点多》,载《人民日报》2006年01月16日第七版。
8黄泽全:《卢旺达大屠杀十年祭》,载《人民日报》2004年04月06日第三版。
9相关论述及批评可参见Bruce Russett, "A Neo-Kantian Perspective on Democracy, Interdependence and International Organizations in Building Security Communities", in Emmanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.368-394; Stephen M. Walt, "International Relations: One World, Many Theories." Foreign Policy, Spring 1998, pp. 29-46; Birgit Locher and Elisabeth Prügl, " Feminism and Constructivism: Worlds Apart or Sharing the Middle Ground? " International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 45, No. 1, 2001, pp. 111-129.
10 [美]亚历山大?温特著:《世界国家的出现是历史的必然——目的论与无政府逻辑》(秦亚青译),载《世.界经济与政治》,2003年第11期; Nicholas J. Kiersey, "World State or Global Governmentality? Constitutive Power and Resistance in a Post-Imperial World," Global Change, Peace & Security, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2008, pp. 357-374.
11 [德]伊曼纽尔·康德:《论永久和平》,《历史理性批判文集》(何兆武译),商务印书馆1990年版。
12 Michael W. Doyle,“Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs,”Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 12, No.3, 1983, pp. 205-235.
13 Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, Free Press,1992.
14 Stephen D. Krasner, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999.
15 Samuel. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003; Mohamed Elhachmi Hamdi, "Islam and Liberal Democracy: The Limits of the Western Model," Journal of Democracy, Apr. 1996, pp. 81-85; Larry Diamond and Marc F. Plattner, eds., Nationalism, Ethnic Conflict, and Democracy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994.
16 Roland Paris,“Peacebuilding and the Limits of Liberal Internationalism,”International Security, Vol. 22, No. 2, 1997, pp. 54-89
17 Emin Fuat Keyman, Globalization, State, Identity/Difference: Toward a Critical Social Theory of International Relations, New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1997; Samuel P. Huntington,“The Clash of Civilizations,”Foreign Affairs, Vol.72, No.3, 1993, pp.22-50.
18 Jonathan Mercer, "Anarchy and Identity," International Organization, Vol.49, No.2, 1995, pp. 229-252.
19“All politics are identities; all identities, political.”Quoted from Richard Thompson Ford, "Political Identity as Identity Politics," UNBOUND, Vol. 1, 2005, p. 53.
20 John Ikenberry, After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars, Princeton University Press, 2001.
21 Thanasis Pinakas, "The Notion of Solidarity in European Foreign Policy: A Realist-Constructivist Approach" Paper presented at the Research student conference on European foreign policy, LSE - 2-3 July 2004. http://www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/intrel/EFPC/Papers/Pinakas.doc
22 Nir Halevy, Gary Bornstein, and Lilach Sagiv,“‘In-Group Love’and‘Out-Group Hate’as Motives for Individual Participation in Inter-group Conflict: A New Game Paradigm,”Psychological Science, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2008, pp. 405– 411; Marilynn B. Brewer,“The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?”Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 55, No. 3, 1999, pp. 429-444.
23 Dale Copeland,“The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A Review Essay,”International Security, Vol.25, No.2, pp.187-212.
24 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.7.
25 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p. 325.
26 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”p. 338.
27 [美]尼古拉斯·奥努夫:《建构主义的哲学渊源》,载《世界经济与政治》,2006年第9期,第1-15页。
28例如Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics.
29例如Mikael Baaz, A Meta-Theoretical Foundation for the Study of International Relations in a Global Era: a Social Constructivist Approach, Goteborg University, 2002.
30 [美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版,第7页。
31温特指出,“第二层面理论”属于“社会研究的基本假设问题(the fundamental assumptions of social inquiry)”,是本体论、认识论与方法论问题;而“第一层面理论”研究的则是“特定领域”(domain-specific)问题,所涉及的是确定谁是具体的相关行为体、他们之间的关系是如何被结构化的以及这种关系将如何发展等实在问题。参见[美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),第一章。
32 Nicholas G. Onuf,“A Constructivist Manifesto”, in eds., Kurt Burch and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp.7-17.
33 John Gerard Ruggie, "What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge,”International Organization, Vol.52 , No.4, p. 856.
34关于建构主义核心信条的经典总结可参见[美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),第一章;也可参见Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics," Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.4, 2001, p. 393.
35 Andre Kukla, Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Science, London: Routledge, 2000; Dale C. Copeland,“The Constructivist Challenge to the Structural Realism”, International Security, Vol. 25, No. 2, 2000, pp.187-212.
36 Stefano Guzzini,“A Reconstruction of Constructivism in International Relations,”European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2000, p. 149.
37 Robert Jackson & Georg Sorensen, Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches, Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 164.
38建构主义通常被认为是关注构成性关系(constitutive relation)而不是因果性关系(casual relation )。但也有不少建构主义学者认为,建构主义突出强调构成性作用,并不妨碍它可以成为一种因果解释理论的可能性。有关讨论可参见David Dessler,“Constructivism Within a Positivist Social Science,”Review of International Studies, Vol. 25, 1999, pp.123–37; Alexander Wendt,“On Constitution and Causation in International Relations,”Review of International Studies, Vol. 24, 1998, pp.101-118; Craig Parsons, "Constructivism Can Be as Causal as Anything Else," Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Aug 31, 2006. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p152834_index.html
39有关常规建构主义(conventional constructivism)和批判建构主义(critical constructivism )的分歧,可参见Ted Hopf,“The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory,”International. Security, Vol.23, No.1, Summer 1998, pp.171-200; Karin M. Fierke,“Critical Methodology and Constructivism,”in Karin M. Fierke and Knud Erik Jorgensen, eds., Constructing International. Relations: The Next Generation, New York: M. E. Sharpe, 2001, pp. 115-135.
40 Heikki Patom?ki and Colin Wight,“After Postpositivism? The Promises of. Critical Realism,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol.44 , No. 1, pp.222.
41持有此类观点的建构主义学者诸如Alexander Wendt, Peter Katzenstein, Christian Reus-Smit, John Ruggie, Emmanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, Ted Hopf, and Martha Finnemore等。相关作品可参见Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999; Peter Katzenstein, Cultural Norms and National Security. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996; Martha Finnemore, National Interests in International Society. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996; John Ruggie, Constructing the World Polity:Essays on internationalization, London and New York: Routledge, 1998; Emanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, Security Community, Cambridge. University Press,1998; Christian Reus-Smit,“The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the. Nature of Fundamental Institutions,”International Organization, Vol.51, No.4, 1997, pp. 555-589; Ted Hopf, Social Construction of International Politics: Identities and Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002.
42参见Jim George, Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re) Introduction to International Relations, Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. , 1994
43持有此类观点的建构主义学者诸如David Campbell, Jim George, James Der Derian, R. B. J. Walker, Andrew Linklater and Ann Tickner等。相关文献可参见; David Campbell, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998; Jim George, Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re) Introduction to International Relations, Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc.., 1994; R.B.J. Walker,Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993; James Der Derian,eds., International Theory: Critical. Investigations, New York: New York University Press,1995; Andrew Linklater, The Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian Era, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998; J. Ann Tickner, Gender in International Relations: Feminist. Perspectives on Achieving Global Security, New York: Columbia University, 1992.
44如何在分析上恰当的处理好结构与施动者之间的关系?就当前的争论而言,存在三种影响较广的解决方案:(1)时间序列方案(temporal-sequential patterns);(2)涵括战略(bracketing strategy);(3)关系式解决(relational solutions)。相关讨论可参见Alexander Wendt,“The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory,”International. Organization, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1987, pp. 335-370; David Dessler, "What's at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate? " International Organization, Vol. 43, No. 3, 1989, pp.441-473; Walter Carsnaes, "The Agency-Structure Problem in Foreign Policy Analysis," International Studies Quarterly, Vol.36, No.3, 1992, pp. 245-270; Colin Wight, Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology. Cambridge University Press, 2006
45 Alexander Wendt,“The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory,”p. 337.
46 [美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版,第18页。
47 Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics," Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.4, 2001, p. 393.
48 [美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版,第19页。
49 Nicholas G. Onuf,“Constructivism: A User’s Manual,”in Nicholas G. Onuf, Paul Kowert, eds., International Relations in a Constructed World, New York: M.E. Sharp, 1998, p.68.
50温特认为,作为一种社会结构,无政府状态可以因“敌人”、“对手”和“朋友”三种不同身份关系而相应获得霍布斯、洛克和康德三种文化含义。Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, pp. 246-312.
51 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, p. 106.
52 Alexander Wendt, "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics,”International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2, 1992, p. 394.
53 Jeffrey Checkel,“The constructivist turn in international relations theory,”World Politics, Vol.50, No. 2, 1998, p. 326.
54 [美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版,第35-36页。也可参见Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics," Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.4, 2001, p. 393.
55就国际关系理论的构成逻辑而言,不少学者强调新现实主义和新自由制度主义实际上是作为分析方法的理性主义分别与政治现实主义世界观、政治自由主义世界观的复合。持此论较典型的学者如J. Samuel Barkin, "Realist Constructivism," International Studies Review, Vol. 5, No.3, 2003, pp.325 -342.
56有关“偏好”在国际关系解释中的作用,可参见Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Harvard University Press,1971; Andrew. Moravcsik, "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics." International Organization, Vol.51, No.4, 1997, pp.513-553; Jeffry A. Frieden, "Actors and Preferences in International Relations," in Strategic Choice and International Relations, edited by David A. Lake and Robert Powell, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999, pp.39-76.
57相关讨论和总结可参见:Aaron Wildavsky,“Choosing Preferences by Constructing Institutions: A Cultural Theory of Preference Formation,”The American Political Science Review, Vol. 81, No. 1, 1987, pp. 3-22; Dionyssis G. Dimitrakopoulos and Hussein Kassim,“Deciding the Future of the European Union: Preference Formation and Treaty Reform,”Comparative European Politics, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2004 , pp. 241-260; William Roberts Clark,“Agents and Structures: Two Views of Preferences, Two Views of Institutions,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol.42, 1998, pp.242-270; [美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版。
58例如,穆拉维斯克总结道:理念自由主义(ideational liberalism)重在传播自由民主观念;商业自由主义(commercial liberalism)侧重支持国际自由贸易;而共和自由主义(republican liberalism)偏好于维护自由国家的国内政治体制。Andrew. Moravcsik, "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics." International Organization, Vol.51, No.4, 1997, pp. 513-553.
59例如温特的理论指出,在频繁的社会互动中,国家通过复杂社会学习形成自身偏好,偏好的形成乃是“拉马克式”文化选择的结果;而费丽莫则强调,国家偏好形成于国际规范、国际组织等机构行为者的教化和传授。详细论述可参见[美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版;[美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版。
60 Andrew Moravcsik,“Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics,”International Organization, Vol. 51, No. 4 , Autumn 1997, p. 524.
61 [美]肯尼思·华尔兹:《国际政治理论》(苏长河,信强译),上海人民出版社2003年版,第20页。
62例如John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton, 2001; Richard Ned Lebow, The Tragic Vision of Politics. Ethics, Interests and Orders, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
63这一观点的表达见于结构现实主义各流派,典型阐述可参见[美]肯尼思·华尔兹:《国际政治理论》(苏长河,信强译),上海人民出版社2003年版。
64 John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton, 2001, p.22.
65例如Joseph M. Grieco,“Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism,”International Organization, Vol.42, No.3, 1988, pp.285-507.
66可参见Kenneth A. Oye, Cooperation under Anarchy, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986; Helen Milner, "International Theories of Cooperation among Nations: Strengths and Weakness," World Politics, Vol.44, No.3, 1992, pp.466-496.
67 Andrew. Moravcsik, "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics." International Organization, Vol.51, No.4, 1997, pp. 513-553.
68相关论述可参见Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence, New York: Harper Collins, 1989; John Ruggie,“International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Post-War Economic Order,”International Organization, Vol. 36, pp. 379-415.
69“建构主义”在本文中有两种使用情形:其一、作为社会分析方法(approach)或元理论(meta-theory)的建构主义;其二、作为国际关系实在理论(substantive theory of IR)的建构主义。相关阐述导论部分已有涉及,在此加以强调。
70相关论述可参见Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, Cabridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999; Dale C. Copeland,“The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A Review Essay,”International Security, Vol.25, No.2, 2000, pp.187-212; Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading”, International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, pp.73-97.
71 [美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版,第13页。
72 Nicholas G. Onuf,“A Constructivist Manifesto”, in eds., Kurt Burch and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp.7-17.
73 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p. 331.
74有关后果性逻辑和适当性逻辑讨论,可参见James G. March and Johan P. Olson,“The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Order,”International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998, pp. 943-969; Ian Hurd,“Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics,”International Organization VoL.53, No.2, 1999, 380-381; Thomas Risse,“Let's Argue: Communicative Action in World Politics,”International Organization, Vol.
54, No. 1, 2000, pp. 1-39; Ole Jacob Sending,“Constitution, Choice, and Change: Problems with the‘Logic of Appropriateness’and its Use in Constructivist Theory,”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.8, No.4, 2002, pp.443-470;
75 James G. March and Johan P. Olson,“The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Order,”International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998, pp. 943-969.
76有关这一观点的阐述,可参见Jonathan Mercer, "Anarchy and Identity," International Organization, Vol.49, No.2, 1995, pp. 229-252; Charles W. Perdue, John F. Dovidio, Michael B. Gurtman and Richard B. Tyler, Us and Them: Social Categorization and the Process of Inter-group Bias," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.59, No.3, pp.475-486; N. R. Branscombe, D. L Wann, J. G Noel & J. Coleman,“In-group or Out-group Extremity: Importance of the Threatened Social Identity,”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol.19, 1993, pp. 381–388; C. Kelly & S. Breinlinger, The Social Psychology of Collective Action: Identity, Injustice, and Gender, London: Taylor and Francis, 1996.
77 Daniel Levy, Max Pensky and, John Torpey, Old Europe, New Europe and Core Europe: Transatlantic Relations after the Iraq War, London: Verso, 2005.
78 Arie M. Kacowicz, Zones of Peace in the Third World: South America and West Africa in Comparative Perspective, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1998.
79参见James D. Fearon and David D. Laitin,“Violence and the Social Construction of Ethnic Identity,”International Organization, Vol.54, No.4, 2000, pp. 845–87; Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso, 1991.
80 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2002, pp.73-9; Jonathan Mercer, "Anarchy and Identity," International Organization, Vol.49, No.2, 1995, pp. 229-252.
81 Iver B. Neumann,“Self and Other in International Relations,”European Journal of International Relations Vol.2, No.2 , 1996, p.140; James D. Fearon,“Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy, and Theories of International Relations,”Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.1, 1998, p. 297.
82许多建构主义文献指出,身份的建构关键取决于行为体彼此在互动中如何看待和对待对方。“如果你将他者看作是‘朋友’,在反复的交往实践中,他者就有可能以同样的方式对待你,最终他者可能成为会真正的朋友;反之亦然。”就此而言,身份概念总是体现一定的社会关系特征。
83 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, pp. 92-138.
84参见Colin Hay, "Constructivist Institutionalism: Or, Why Interests into Ideas Don't Go" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott, Loews Philadelphia, and the Pennsylvania Convention Center, Philadelphia, PA, Aug 31, 2006.
85例如Stephen M. Walt, "International Relations: One World, Many Theories," Foreign Policy, No. 110, Spring 1998, pp. 29-32.
86 Peter J. Katzenstein, Robert O. Keohane, and Stephen D. Krasner,“International Organization and the Study of World Politics,”in Peter J. Katzenstein, Robert O. Keohane, and Stephen D. Krasner, eds., Exploration and Contestation in the Study of World Politics, Cambridge: The MIT Press,1999, pp.5-45.
87 Ole Waever,“The Rise and Fall of the Inter-Paradigm Debate,”in Steve Smith, Ken Booth and Marysia Zalewski, eds., International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, pp.149-185.
88这里主要是指以“经济理性人”假定为基础的理性选择理论(rational choice theory)。
89例如J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003,pp.325-342; Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Competing Paradigms or Birds of a Feather? Constructivism and Neoliberal Institutionalism Compared,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol.44, No.1, 2000, p. 97; John Mearsheimer,“The False Promise of International Institutions,”International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994/95, pp. 37-47.
90 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.338.
91 John Mearsheimer,“The False Promise of International Institutions,”International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994/95, pp. 37-47.
92 Stefano Guzzini and Anna Leander, eds., Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and His Critics, London & New York: Routledge, 2006.
93 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.339.
94 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2002, p.76.
95例如Bruce Russett, "A Neo-Kantian Perspective on Democracy, Interdependence and International Organizations in Building Security Communities", in Emmanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.368-394; Birgit Locher and Elisabeth Prügl, " Feminism and Constructivism: Worlds Apart or Sharing the Middle Ground? " International Studies Quarterly, Vol.
45, No. 1, 2001, pp. 111-129.
96 Friedrich Kratochwil, Rules, Norms, and Decisions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
97 Thomas Risse,“' Let's Argue!' Communicative Action in International Relations,”International Organization, Vol. 54, No.1, 2000, pp.1-39.
98巴尔金指出,哈贝马斯一般被认为是批判性理论家,但在某些方面他却是自由理想主义者。之所以是理想主义的,是因为他有着关于什么构成了政治进步和良好政治生活的清晰概念;之所以是自由主义的,是因为他关于良好政治生活的概念建立在个人表达和一种理性形式的基础之上。参见J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.339.
99 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.340.
100有关现实主义与建构主义对立的批判总结,可参见J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, pp.325-342; Jeffrey T Checkel,“The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,”World Politics, Vol. 50, No.2, pp. 324-348; James Fearon and Alexander Wendt Rationalism vs. Constructivism: A Skeptical View, in Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth A. Simmons, eds., Handbook of International Relations, New York: Sage Publications, 2002, pp.52-72.
101相关文献可参考Michael Winnerstig,“Shared Values or Power Politics?: Transatlantic Security Relations 1981-94,”Stockholm, Swedish Institute for International Affairs, 1996; Andreas Gofas,“Structure, Agency and Inter-subjectivity: Re-capturing the EMU Policy Process in a Constructivist Realist Framework”, Paper prepared for the 2nd workshop of the European Political-economy Infrastructure Consortium, May 2002;Henry Nau, At Home Abroad: Identity and Power in American Foreign Policy, Ithaca Cornell University Press , 2002; Patrick T. Jackson & Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”, Jennifer Serling-Folker, “Realist-Constructivism and Morality”, Janice B. Mattern,“Power in Realist-Constructivism Research”, Richard N. Lebow,“Constructive Realism”, J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism and Realist-constructivisms?”in “Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue”, International Studies Review, No.6, 2004,pp.337-352; Jeffrey Checkel,“Social Constructivisms in Global and European Politics:A Review Essay.”Review of International Studies,Vol. 30,No.1 ,2004, pp.229-244; Ilan Peleg ,“The Zionist Right and Constructivist Realism: Ideological Persistence and Tactical Readjustment,”Israel Studies– Vol.10, No.3, 2005, pp. 127-153.
102 Peter J. Katzenstein (ed.), The Culture of National Security, Norms and Identity in World Politics, Columbia University Press,1996;Emanuel Alder and Michael Barnett, Security Communities , Cambridge University Press, 1998.
103 Daniel Nexon and Patrick Jackson, Paradigmatic Faults: Why The Divisions Between 'Schools' of IR Theory Aren't All They're Cracked Up To Be. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel,, Mar 17, 2004.
104 John J. Mearscheimer:“The False Promise of International Institutions,”International Security, Vol. 19, No. 3, Winter 1994/95, pp. 5-49.
105关于这一方面的总结可以参见美国国际研究协会(ISA)的会议论文:“Realism Reconsidered,”which convened at the 2006 annual meeting of the International Studies Association in San Diego, California, USA,22 March, 2006.
106这一术语借自于Stefano Guzzini。参见Stefano Guzzini,“The Enduring Dilemmas of Realism in International Relations”, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.10, No.4, 2004, pp. 533-68.
107奥利?韦弗尔(Ole W?ver)指出,“现实主义仍是当前国际关系研究的主导范式,但绝大多数国关学者尤其是年轻学者都不是现实主义者。现实主义主要是作为一个批判标靶而存在的。”Ole W?ver,“Figures of International Thought: Introducing Persons Instead of Paradigms,”In I. B. Neumann and Ole W?ver (eds.), The Future of International Relations: Masters in the Making? London: Routlege, 1997, p.26.
108“最小现实主义”是指放松或偏离现实主义基本命题的理论,只保留某些现实主义的基本命题,比如理性主义和无政府命题。相关论述参见Jeffrey W. Legro and Andrew Moravcsik,“Is Anybody Still a Realist?”International Security, Vol. 24, No. 2, 1999, p.19.
109比如Peter J. Katzenstein, Robert O. Keohane & Stephen D. Krasner, "International Organization and the Study of World Politics ", International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998, pp. 645-685; James Fearon and Alexander Wendt,“Rationalism vs. Constructivism: a Skeptical View,”in Walter Carlnaes, Thomas Risse and Beth Simmons (eds.), Handbook of International Relations, London: Sage, 2002.
110 Lapid, Yosef and Friedrich Kratochwil (eds.) The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory, Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1996.
111例如Michael Winnerstig,“Shared Values or Power Politics?: Transatlantic Security Relations 1981-94,”Stockholm, Swedish Institute for International Affairs, 1996; Magnus Ericson,“A Realist Stable Peace: Power, Threat and the Development of a Shared Norwegian-Swedish Democratic Security Identity 1905-1940”, Lund, Department of Political Science, 2000;Andreas Gofas,“Structure, Agency and Inter-subjectivity: Re-capturing the EMU Policy Process in a Constructivist Realist Framework ,”Paper prepared for the 2nd workshop of the European Political-economy Infrastructure Consortium, May 2002.
112 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.338.
113 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.7.
114 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.338.
115 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, pp. 329-334.
117巴尔金关于“现实建构主义”的详细阐述可参见J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”,pp.325-342.另外,有关巴尔金“现实建构主义”的回应文章可参考:“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue,”International Studies Review, No.6, 2004, pp.337-341;秦亚青、[美]亚历山大·温特:《建构主义的发展空间》,《世界经济与政治》杂志2005年第1期;以及最新的评论文章Brent Steele,“Liberal-Idealism: A Constructivist Critique.”International Studies Review,No.9, 2007, pp. 23-52.
119这里的“理性社会人”是与“理性经济人”相对的,前一“理性”时更宽泛意义上的理性,即涵括工具理性,也涵括价值理性,既指预测理性,同时也指规范理性。而后一“理性”着重指工具理性、预测理性。
120 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing,”International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No.1, 2002, p.73.
121比如,斯特林-福克尔指出,自然选择机制下,同样是为了争夺和开发更多的资源以维持和延续生命,人类和鸟类都在进化,但为什么人类会进化出双手而鸟类会进化出翅膀?Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the constructivist challenge: rejecting, reconstructing, or rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, p.80.
122相关文献可参考Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the constructivist challenge: rejecting, reconstructing, or rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, pp. 73-97; "Realist-Constructivism and Morality," International Studies Review, vol. 6, No. 2, 2004;“Evolutionary Tendencies in Realist and Liberal Theory,”In Evolutionary Interpretations of World Politics,ed. William R. Thompson. New York: Routledge, 2001; "Realist Global Governance: Revisiting Cave! hic dragones and Beyond." In Contending Perspectives on Global Governance: Coherence, Contestation, and World Order. Matthew Hoffmann and Alice Ba, eds. London: Routledge, 2005;“Realism and Constructivism: From Debate to Dialogue,”Presenter at conference organized by Patrick Thaddeus Jackson and Daniel Nexon, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, April 29-30, 2005; Theories of International Cooperation and the Primacy of Anarchy: Explaining U.S. International Monetary Policy-Making After Bretton Woods. Albany, NY: SUNY Series in Global Politics, 2002.
124 Brent Steele,“Eavesdropping on Honored Ghosts': from Classical to Reflexive Realism”, Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.10, No. 3, 2007, pp. 272-300.根据Brent Steele的概括总结,“反思性现实主义”的典型作品还包括:Richard Ned Lebow, The Tragic Vision of Politics; Anthony Lang, Agency and Ethics: The Politics of Military Intervention, Albany: SUNY Press, 2002; Michael C. Williams, The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations, Cambridge University Press, 2005.
125 Brent Steele,“Eavesdropping on Honored ghosts': from classical to reflexive realism”, Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.10, No. 3, 2007, pp. 272-300.
126 Bill McSweeney, Security, Identity and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999, p. 213.
127例如,温特建构主义带有浓厚的目的论哲学色彩。这种“目的论哲学”往往忽视施动者的施动性所造成的历史偶然性(contingency),因而预言国际关系会朝向某个预先设定的历史目标演进。参见Alexander Wendt, "Why a World State is Inevitable: Teleology and the Logic of Anarchy," European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2003, pp. 491-542.
128 Daniel Nexon and Patrick Jackson,“Paradigmatic Faults: Why the Divisions in International Relations aren’t all they’re Cracked up to be.”Paper resented at the Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, 2004.
129也有人将这一形态的自由主义称之为“观念自由主义(ideational liberalism)”。例如Andrew Moravcsik, " Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics," International Organization, Vol. 51, No.4, 1997, p.515.
130 Patrick T. Jackson and Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”International Studies Review, No.6, 2004, pp. 337-341.
131 Alexander Wendt,“Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics,”International Organization, Vol.41, No.3, pp. 392-425.
132 Stefano Guzzini, Realism in International Relations in and International Political Economy: the Continuing Story of a Death Foretold, NY: Routledge, 1998, pp.190-210.
133 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing,”International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No.1, 2002, p.73.
134 [美]尼古拉斯·奥努夫:《建构主义的哲学渊源》,载《世界经济与政治》,2006年第9期,第1-15页。
135 Nicholas G. Onuf,“A Constructivist Manifesto,”in eds., Kurt Burch and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp.7-17.
136 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.336.
137 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the constructivist challenge: rejecting, reconstructing, or rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, p.85.
138有关这些建构主义的分类总结,可参见秦亚青:《建构主义的发展空间》,《世界经济与政治》2005年第1期,第8-12页。
139 "Realist Constructivism, Constructivist Realism" Panel at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, August 1998.
140 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, pp. 325-342.
141相关论述可参见Michael Winnerstig,“Shared Values or Power Politics?: Transatlantic Security Relations 1981-94,”Stockholm, Swedish Institute for International Affairs, 1996; Andreas Gofas,“Structure, Agency and Inter-subjectivity: Re-capturing the EMU Policy Process in a Constructivist Realist Framework”, Paper prepared for the 2nd workshop of the European Political-economy Infrastructure Consortium, May 2002;Henry Nau, At Home Abroad: Identity and Power in American Foreign Policy. Ithaca Cornell University Press , 2002; Jennifer Sterling-Folker, Theories of International Cooperation and the Primacy of Anarchy: Explaining U.S. InternationalMonetary Policy-Making After Bretton Woods. Albany, NY: SUNY Series in Global Politics, 2002.
142详细论述可参见:Joseph Jupille et al., "Integrating Institutions: Rationalism, Constructivism, and the Study of the European Union," Comparative Political Studies, Vol.36, 2003, No.1-2, pp.7-40.
143“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue”, International Studies Review, No.6, 2004,pp.337-352;
144 Patrick Thaddeus Jackson and Daniel Nexon,“Paradigmatic Faults: Why the Divisions in International Relations aren’t all they’re Cracked up to be.”Paper resented at the Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, 2004 and at the Pan-European Conference on International Relations, 2004
145“Realism and Constructivism: From Debate to Dialogue,”Conference organized by Patrick Thaddeus Jackson and Daniel Nexon, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, April 29-30,2005.
146秦亚青、[美]亚历山大·温特:《建构主义的发展空间》,《世界经济与政治》2005年第1期,第8-12页。
147 Brent J. Steele ,“Liberal-Idealism: A Constructivist Critique.”International Studies Review,Vol.9, 2007, pp.23-52.
148 Kari Mottola,“The European Union as a Critic of the International Order: the Power of a Normative Power,”paper submitted on International Studies Association (ISA) Annual Convention, 2007.
149 Janice B. Mattern,“Power in Realist-Constructivism Research”, in“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue,”pp.343-346.
150 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism and Realist-Constructivisms.”in“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue,”International Studies Review, No.6, 2004, p.351.
151详细论述参见:Patrick T. Jackson & Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”in“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue”, International Studies Review, No.6, 2004, pp.337-341; Daniel Nexon and Patrick Jackson,“Paradigmatic Faults: Why The Divisions Between 'Schools' of IR Theory Aren't All They're Cracked Up To Be.”Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Mar 17, 2004; Richard Ned Lebow,“Thucydides the Constructivist”; Ashley Thomas,“The Peloponnesian War: A Constructivist Account of International Politics.”Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, September 2004.
152 Daniel Nexon and Patrick Jackson,“Paradigmatic Faults: Why The Divisions Between 'Schools' of IR Theory Aren't All They're Cracked Up To Be.”
153 Patrick T. Jackson & Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”.
154相关论述参见: Linus Hagstr?m, "Relational Power for Foreign Policy Analysis: Issues in Japan’s China Policy," European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 11, No. 3, 2005, pp.395-430; Stefano Guzzini, "Structural Power: The Limits of Neorealist Power Analysis," International Organization, Vol. 47, No. 3 , Summer 1993, pp. 443-478; Patrick Thaddeus Jackson, "Relational Constructivism: A War of Words," in Making Sense of International Relations Theory, ed. Jennifer Sterling-Folker, Lynne Rienner, 2005, pp. 139-155; Michael C. Williams, The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations, Cambridge University Press, 2005.
155 Michael C.Williams,“Why Ideas Matter in International Relations: Hans Morgenthau Classical Realism and the Moral Construction of Power.”International Organization, Vol. 58, 2004, pp. 633-665.
156拥护这一主张的学者认为,现实建构主义应当恪守建构主义的基本信条,并往往引用如下经典文献,以佐证建构主义旨在强调国际政治的社会建构性。例如:Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge University Press, 1999 &“Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics," International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2, 1992; Ted Hopf, Social Construction of International Politics: Identities and Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002; Beate Jahn, The Cultural Construction of International Relations: The Invention of the State of Nature ,New York: Palgrave, 2000; Nicholas J. Onuf, World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations, Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1989; Peter J Katzenstein, The Culture of National Security, Norms and Identity in World Politics, Columbia University Press, 1996.
157 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism and Realist-Constructivisms.”& Janice B. Mattern,“Power in Realist-Constructivism Research”.
158系统总结可见:Brent Steele, "The Reflexive Realists," Paper presented at the British International Studies Association annual meeting Cork, Ireland, December 2006; Brent Steele,“Eavesdropping on honored ghosts': from classical to reflexive realism”, in Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.10, No. 3, September 2007 , pp. 272-300; Rodney Bruce Hall, "Moral Authority as a Power Resource," International Organization, Vol.51, 1997, pp. 591-622.; Willian Bain, "Deconfusing Morgenthau: Moral Inquiry and Classical Realism Reconsidered," Review of International Studies, Vol. 26,2000, pp. 445-464.
159 Jennifer Serling-Folker,“Realist-Constructivism and Morality,”in“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue,”International Studies Review, No.6, 2004, pp. 341-343.
160参见[日]野家启一:《库恩——范式》(毕小辉译),石家庄:河北教育出版社,2002年版,第141-150页。
161有关“自由建构主义”的相关论述可参见: Thomas Risse-Kappen, Collective Identity in a Democratic Community: The Case of NATO, In Peter J. Katzenstein, ed., The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York: Columbia University Press 1996, pp.357-399; Jeffrey T. Checkel, The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory, World Politics, Vol.50, No.2: 1998, pp.324-348; Latha Varadarajan,“Constructivism, identity and neoliberal (in)security,”Review of International Studies,Vol.30, 2004, pp.319-341; Pooja Rishi, "(Re)Constructing Constructivism: Bringing Governmentality In". Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association 48th Annual Convention, Hilton Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA, Feb 28, 2007.
162 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”p 332.
163参见秦亚青:“译者前言”,第29页。载[美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版社,2000年。
164 Andrew T. F. Lang,“Reconstructing Embedded Liberalism: John Gerard Ruggie and Constructivist Approaches to the Study of the International Trade Regime,”Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 9, No. 1, March 2006 pp. 81-116.
165 Tim Dunne, Inventing International Society:A History of the English School, London:Macmillan Press Ltd.,1998.; Alexander Wendt, "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics ,"International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2 (Spring, 1992), pp. 391-425.
166“All politics are identities; all identities, political.”Quoted from Richard Thompson Ford, "Political Identity as Identity Politics," UNBOUND, Vol. 1, 2005, p53.
167“All truth of the political derives from the distinction between friend and enemy.”See Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, trans., George Schwab. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996, p27.
168 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, pp. 92-138.
169有关这一观点的表达可参见温特的作品:Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge University Press, 1999.
170有关这一观点的表达可参见施密特的作品: Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, trans., George Schwab. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
171在这里,本文区别自由主义者所使用的包容性“集体认同”(inclusion-based collective identity)和现实建构主义所使用的排他性“群体认同”(exclusion-based group identity)。
172在此意义上,一些建构主义学者的作品被学界称之为“规则建构主义”(Onuf)或“规范建构主义”(Kratochwil)。诸如:Nicholas J. Onuf, World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations, Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1989; Friedrich Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions, On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
173 Brent Steele, "Utopian Dreams: Some Much-Needed Constructivist Distinctions with Liberal-Utopianism"
174 Zaki La?di,“Are European Preferences Shared by Others ?”speech given at the Conference sponsored by CERI, Centre d’Etudes Européennes de Sciences Po and held in Paris on 23-24th of June 2006.
175 Reus-Smit认为,建构主义内部的各种争论主要是围绕规范性问题、分析层次和方法论三个轴心维度展开,其中在规范性维度上可大致区分为社会学制度主义者、哈贝马斯式沟通行动理论家和福柯式系谱学家等三个派别。(Christian Reus-Smit, "Imagining society: constructivism and the English School," British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 4, No. 3, October 2002 , pp. 487-509. ) Jackson和Nexon则更为明确的指出,现实建构主义和自由建构主义之区分乃是持两种不同政治立场的建构主义之区分。自由建构主秉持哈贝马斯的政治哲学观点,相信在“理想话语条件”下,权力政治最终能为行为体之间的沟通行动所取代;而现实建构主义则坚持一种福柯立场,认为即使是在“理想话语条件”下,某些权力仍然是不可超越的。( Patrick T. Jackson & Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”pp.340-341.)受惠于上述理论观点,本文提出如果以不同导向的社会化理论为基准,作为划分现实建构主义与自由建构主义之标准,应该更能彰显二者之差别。
176相关经典论述可参见:Jonathan Mercer, "Anarchy and Identity," International Organization, Vol.49, Spring 1995, pp.229-252; Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing or Rereading”; Dale C. Copeland,"The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A Review Essay," International Security, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Autumn, 2000), pp. 187-212; Johan M.G. van der Dennen,“Ethnocentrism and In-group/Out-group Differentiation: A Review and Interpretation of the Literature,”in Reynolds, ed., The Sociobiology of Ethnocentrism, Athens: University of Georgia, 1987, pp. 1-47; Trine Flockhart, "A Mission Bound to Fail?: The United States as Socializer of Democratic Norms in Post-War Iraq," The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, Winter/Spring 2005, pp.53-68.
177总结于Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political. & Chantal Mouffe, The Return of the Political. London–New York: Verso, 1993.
178例如温特的“世界国家”理论。Alexander Wendt, "Why a World State is Inevitable: Teleology and the Logicof Anarchy." European Journal of International Relations, Vol,9, No,4, pp.491-542.
179 John J. Mearsheimer, "A Realist Reply," International Security, Vol. 20, No. 1, Summer, 1995, pp. 82-93.
180 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing or Rereading,”p76.
181有关结构现实主义是静态理论和结构理论的批评和指责,见于:John Gerard Ruggie, "Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis," World Politics, Vol. 35, No. 2, January 1983, pp.261-285; R. B. J. Walker, "Realism, Change, and International Political Theory," International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 31, No. 1, March 1987, pp. 65-86; Robert Jervis, "Realism in the Study of World Politics," International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, Autumn 1998, pp. 971-991; Dale Copeland, "The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A Review Essay," International Security, Vol. 25, No.2, 2000, pp.187-212.
182总结于Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing or Rereading,”; Rodney Hall,“Human Nature as Behavior and Action in Economics and International Relations Theory,”Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.9, No.3,2006, pp.269-287.
183 Rousseau pointed out in his second Discours:“The characteristics we attribute to human nature may be the effect, not the cause of sociopolitical phenomena.”Quoted from Asash Abizadeh, "Does Collective Identity Presuppose an Other? On the Alleged Incoherence of Global Solidarity," American Political Science Review, Vol. 99, No. 1 February 2005, p54.
184例如以新现实主义和新自由主义为代表的美国国际关系理论。参见:Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics. McGraw-Hill. New York: 1979; Robert Keohane, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton University Press , 1984.
185例如英国学派和欧洲一体化理论者。参见:Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London, Macmillan, 1977; Hedley Bull and Adam Watson, (eds.) The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press.1984; Barry Buzan, From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
186 Alexander Wendt, "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics”.
187 Tim Dunne, Inventing International Society: A History of the English School, London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1998.
188 Christian Reus-Smit, "Imagining society: constructivism and the English School".
189 Alexander Wendt, "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics”, p 394.
190温特指出,无政府状态可以因“敌人”、“对手”和“朋友”三种不同身份关系而相应获得霍布斯、洛克和康德三种文化含义。Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, pp. 246-312.
191 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, p 106.
192 Alexander Wendt, "Why a World State is Inevitable: Teleology and the Logic of Anarchy".
193关于这一立场的经典讨论及其在国际关系理论中的应用总结,可参见:Asash Abizadeh, "Does Collective Identity Presuppose an Other? On the Alleged Incoherence of Global Solidarity" .
194 Michael Walzer,“The New Tribalism: Notes on a Difficult Problem.”Dissent Vol. 39, Spring 1992, p171.
195 Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, pp. 23- 58.
196 Samuel P. Huntington,“The Clash of Civilizations?”Foreign Affairs, vol. 72, no. 3, Summer 1993, pp. 22-49.
197 Asash Abizadeh, "Does Collective Identity Presuppose an Other? On the Alleged Incoherence of Global Solidarity,"pp.50-58.
198 Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, p 49.
199 Jonathan Mercer指出,国际关系体系之所以呈现为自助状态,主要不是因为结构或人类的权力欲望所致,而是因为人类天生就有划分群体并渴望得到承认和尊重的社会心理需求所致。Jonathan Mercer, "Anarchy and Identity," pp. 241-242.
200总结自Mika Ojakangas, "A Terrifying World without and Exterior: Carl Schmitt and the Metaphysics of International (Dis)Order," in The international political thought of Carl Schmitt : terror, liberal war and the crisis of global order, edited by Louiza Odysseos and Fabio Petito, London: Routledge, 2007, pp.205-221.
201 [美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版,第7章。.
202例如在此目的论哲学推论下,温特指出,世界国家是历史的必然。
203 Michael Walzer,“The New Tribalism: Notes on a Difficult Problem.”Dissent, Vol.39, 1992, p.171.
204 Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 1996.
205卡尔·施密特:《政治的概念》(刘宗坤等译),载刘小枫主编:《施密特文集第一卷:政治的概念》,上海:上海人民出版社2004版,第113页。
206卡尔·施密特:《政治的概念》(刘宗坤等译),载刘小枫主编:《施密特文集第一卷:政治的概念》,上海:上海人民出版社2004版,第113页。
207 Chantal Mouffe, The Return of the Political, London: Verso, 1993, p.115.
208相关文献参见Richard Price and Christian Reus-Smit,“Dangerous Liaisons? Critical International Theory and Constructivism.”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.4, pp. 259– 294; Michael C. Williams,“Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 511– 531.
209 Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man. Free Press, 1992.
210 Samuel P. Huntington,“The Clash of Civilizations?”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3, 1993, pp. 22-49.
211 [美]汉斯·摩根索著:《国家间政治——权力斗争与和平》(第七版),北京:北京大学出版社2006版。
212 Leonard Liggio, "Christianity, Classical Liberalism are Liberty's Foundations", Religion & Liberty (Acton Institute), 2003; Mark Evans, ed., Edinburgh Companion to Contemporary Liberalism: Evidence and Experience, London: Routledge, 2001.
213 [美]罗伯特·基欧汉:《霸权之后:世界政治经济中的合作与纷争》,苏长和等译,上海:上海人民出版社,2001年版。
214 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, pp. 325-342.
216 J. David Singer,“The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations,”American Foreign Policy: Theoretical Essays, ed. G. John Ikenberry. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1989, p. 67.
217 Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics. Addison-Wesley, 1979, p. 175.
218 Colin Elman,“Horses for Courses: Why Not a Neorealist Theory of Foreign Policy,”Security Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1996, p.8.
219 Colin Elman,“Horses for Courses: Why Not a Neorealist Theory of Foreign Policy,”Security Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1996, p.59.
220 [美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版,第一章。
221 Jeffrey Checkel,“The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,”World Politics,Vol.50, No.1, p.341. .
222 Jeffrey Checkel,“The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,”World Politics,Vol.50, No.1, p.341.
223 Steve Smith.“Foreign Policy Is What States Make of It: Social Construction and International Relations Theory.”In V. Kubalkova, ed., Foreign Policy in a Constructed World. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, p.39.
224 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.11.
225 [美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版,第四章。
226 [美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版,第四章。
227这种进程式层次分析方法借鉴了当前欧盟决策研究和对外政策分析中的双层博弈理论,在具体经验研究中已多有文献涉及(例如Michael Alan Brittingham, " The“Role”of Nationalism in Chinese Foreign Policy: A Reactive Model of Nationalism & Conflict ," Journal of Chinese Political Science,Vol.12, No. 2, 2007. )。在这里,它可以被看作是“施动者与结构相互构成”这一经典主张与传统层次分析方法的复合。
228 [美]威廉·内斯特编著《:国际关系: 21世纪的政治与经济》(姚远、汪恒译),北京:北京大学出版社2005年版。
229 Charles S.Gochman & Zeev Maoz.“Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816-1976.”in J. David Singer & Paul F. Diehl ed., Measuring the Correlates of War, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press1990, p.199.
230 [美]汉斯·摩根索:《国家间政治》,北京大学出版社2006版,第七章。
231例如“王朝观念”会建构“君主荣誉”成为国家利益的一部分,而“主权观念”则会导致领土边界成为不可侵犯的国家利益。
232 [美]戴维·卡莱欧:《欧洲的未来》(冯绍雷、袁胜育、王蕴秀译),上海世纪出版集团2003年版,第17页。
233转摘自李世安、刘丽云等著:《欧洲一体化史》,河北人民出版社2003年版,第19-20页。
234有关欧洲联合思想的详细历史叙述,可参见李世安、刘丽云等著:《欧洲一体化史》,河北人民出版社2003年版,第20-21页。
235 Stephen Walt,“International Relations: One World, Many Theories,”Foreign Policy, Vol.29, 1998, pp. 29-45.
236李世安、刘丽云等著:《欧洲一体化史》,河北人民出版社2003年版,第30页。
237 [美]戴维·卡莱欧:《欧洲的未来》(冯绍雷、袁胜育、王蕴秀译),上海世纪出版集团2003年版,第20页。
238 [美]戴维·卡莱欧:《欧洲的未来》(冯绍雷、袁胜育、王蕴秀译),上海世纪出版集团2003年版,第38页。
239 [美]戴维·卡莱欧:《欧洲的未来》(冯绍雷、袁胜育、王蕴秀译),上海世纪出版集团2003年版,第25页。
240李世安、刘丽云等著:《欧洲一体化史》,河北人民出版社2003年版,第30页。
241邱芝:《论欧洲一体化进程中集体认同的建构》,《世界经济与政治论坛》2007年第4期,第45页。
242 [德]尤尔根·哈贝马斯:“欧洲是否需要一部宪法”,哈贝马斯主编,曹卫东译:《后民族结构》,上海人民出版社,2002年版,第151—161页。
243高华:《北约欧盟双东扩:机遇、挑战和前景》,载李慎明、王逸舟主编:《2005年全球政治与安全报告》,社会科学文献出版社2005年版。
244邱芝:《论欧洲一体化进程中集体认同的建构》,《世界经济与政治论坛》2007年第4期,第45页。
245资中筠主编:《冷眼向洋》,生活·读书·新知——三联出版社2000年版,第336页。
246张生祥:《欧洲的新认同政治与欧洲认同的形成》,《当代世界社会主义问题》2006年底4期,第39页。
247张生祥:《欧洲的新认同政治与欧洲认同的形成》,《当代世界社会主义问题》2006年底4期,滴9页。
248 Kenneth N. Waltz, "Structural Realism after the Cold War," International Security, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2000, pp. 5-41.
249 Joseph M. Grieco,“Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism.”International Organization, Vol.42, No.3, 1988, pp. 485-507.
250 Ernst B. Haas, Beyond Nation State: Functionalism and International Organization, Stanford: Stanford University Press , 1964 , p . 34.
251崔宏伟:《欧盟国际“集体身份”的建构及其政策影响》http://www.escsass.org.cn/adm/UploadFiles/2006122919753443.doc
252吴志成、王霞:《欧洲化及其对成员国政治的影响》,《欧洲研究》2007年第4期,第45页。
253 Patrick M.Regan, Civil Wars and Foreign Powers: Outside Intervention in Intrastate Conflict. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2000.
254 K.J. Holsti,“War, Peace, and the State of the State,”International Political Science Review, Vol. 16, No. 4, 1995, p. 332.
255 James D. Fearon and David D. Laitin,“Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War,”American Political Science Review, Vol. 97, No.1, 2003, p. 277.
256涂龙德:《达尔危机之透视》,《阿拉伯世界研究》2005年第4期,第2页。
257 Nelson Alusla,“The Arming of Rwanda and the Genocide,”African Security Review, Vol. 13, No.2, 2001, p.137.
258 David A. Lake and Donald Rothchild (eds.). The International Spread of Ethnic Conflict: Fear, Diffusion and Escalation, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998, pp.392-398.
259 Paul R. Kimmel, "Culture and Conflict," in The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice, eds.Morton Deutsch an Peter T. Coleman. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2000, p.456.
260 Edward A. Tiryakian, "Comparative Perspectives on Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflicts," International Journal of Comparative Sociology, Vol. 45, 2004, pp. 35-49.
261《达尔富尔:发展是关键》,《北京周报》2007年第33期8月16日版。
262 Renner, Michael, Fighting for Survival: Environmental Decline, Social Conflict, and the New Age of Insecurity. New York: W.W. Norton, 1997.
263《墨子·尚同中》。
264 K. J. Holsti, International Politics: A Framework for Analysis, Prentice Hall, 1988, p.67
265 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.340.
阿查亚,阿米塔著:《建构安全共同体:东盟与地区秩序》(王正毅、冯怀信译),上海人民出版社,2004年版。
奥努夫,尼古拉斯:《建构主义的哲学渊源》,《世界经济与政治》2006年第9期。
波普尔,卡尔著:《猜想与反驳:科学知识的增长》,上海译文出版社,2005年版。
方长平:《国家利益的建构主义分析》,当代世界出版社,2002年版。
费里莫,玛莎著:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社,2001年版。
哈贝马斯,于尔根主编:《后民族结构》(曹卫东译),上海人民出版社,2002年版。
华尔兹,肯尼思著:《国际政治理论》(苏长河、信强译),上海人民出版社,2003年版。
黄泽全:《非洲发展亮点多》,载《人民日报》2006年01月16日第七版。
黄泽全:《卢旺达大屠杀十年祭》,载《人民日报》2004年04月06日第三版。
霍布斯,托马斯:《利维坦》(犁思复等译),商务印书馆,1985年版。
基欧汉,罗伯特著:《霸权之后:世界政治经济中的合作与纷争》(苏长和等译),上海人民出版社,2001年版。
吉登斯,安东尼:《社会理论与现代社会学》(文军、赵勇译),北京·社会科学文献出版社,2003年版。
卡莱欧,戴维著:《欧洲的未来》(冯绍雷、袁胜育、王蕴秀译),上海世纪出版集团,2003年版。
卡赞斯坦,彼得著:《文化规范与国家安全》(李小华译)北京·新华出版社,2002年版。
康德,伊曼纽尔:《论永久和平》,《历史理性批判文集》(何兆武译),商务印书馆,1990年版。
库芭科娃,温都尔卡等主编:《建构世界中的国际关系》(肖锋译),北京大学出版社,2006年版。
雷纳,皮埃尔著:《科学》(刘成富译),上海文艺出版社,2003版。
李慎明、王逸舟主编:《2005年全球政治与安全报告》,社会科学文献出版社,2005年版。
李世安、刘丽云等著:《欧洲一体化史》,河北人民出版社,2003年版。
刘放桐等编著:《新编现代西方哲学》,人民出版社,2000年。
刘小枫主编:《施密特文集第一卷:政治的概念》,上海人民出版,2004版。
罗天虹:《哥本哈根学派的安全理论评析》,《教学与研究》1999年第8期。
摩根索,汉斯著:《国家间政治——权力斗争与和平》(第七版),北京大学出版社,2006版。
内斯特,威廉编著:《国际关系:21世纪的政治与经济》(姚远、汪恒译),北京大学出版社,2005年版。
秦亚青、温特,亚历山大:《建构主义的发展空间》,《世界经济与政治》2005年第1期。
秦亚青:《权力?制度?文化:国际关系理论与方法研究文集》,北京大学出版社,2005年版。
秦亚青主编:《文化与国际社会:建构主义国际关系理论研究》,世界知识出版社,2006年版。
邱芝:《论欧洲一体化进程中集体认同的建构》,《世界经济与政治论坛》2007年第4期。
苏长和:《理性主义、建构主义与世界政治研究——兼评世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,《国际政治研究》2006年第2期。
孙吉胜:《国际关系中的言语与规则建构——奥努弗建构主义研究》,《世界经济与政治》2006年第6期。
王逸舟:《西方国际政治学:理论与历史》,上海人民出版社,2006年版。
韦弗尔,伊曼?奥勒主编:《未来国际思想大师》(肖锋、石泉译),北京大学出版社,2003年版。
温特,亚历山大:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版,2000年版。
温特,亚历山大:《世界国家的出现是历史的必然——目的论与无政府逻辑》(秦亚青译),《世界经济与政治》,2003年第11期。
吴志成、王霞:《欧洲化及其对成员国政治的影响》,《欧洲研究》2007年第4期。
野家启一:《库恩——范式》(毕小辉译),河北教育出版社,2002年版。
袁正清:《从安全困境到安全共同体:建构主义的解析》,《欧洲研究》2003年第4期。
袁正清:《国际政治理论的社会学转向:建构主义研究》,上海人民出版社,2005年版。
袁正清:《国际政治理论的社会学转向:建构主义研究》,上海人民出版社,2005年版。
袁正清:《建构主义与外交政策分析》,《世界经济与政治》2004年第9期。
袁正清:《交往行为理论与国际政治研究——以德国国际关系研究视角为中心的一项考察》,《世界经济与政治》2006年9期。
朱立群:《加速演进的规范化进程》,《世界经济与政治》,2006年第11期。
朱宁:《安全与非安全化——哥本哈根学派安全研究》,《世界经济与政治》2003年第10期。
资中筠主编:《冷眼向洋》,生活?读书?新知—三联出版社,2000年版。
Abizadeh, Asash, "Does Collective Identity Presuppose an Other? On the Alleged Incoherence of Global Solidarity," American Political Science Review, Vol. 99, No. 1 February 2005, pp.50-58.
Adler, Emmanuel and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Anderson, Benedict, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso, 1991.
Baaz, Mikael, A Meta-Theoretical Foundation for the Study of International Relations in a Global Era: a Social Constructivist Approach, Goteborg University, 2002.
Bain,Willian, "Deconfusing Morgenthau: Moral Inquiry and Classical Realism Reconsidered," Review of International Studies, Vol. 26, 2000, pp. 445-464.
Barkin, J. Samuel,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, pp.325-342.
Branscombe, N. R., D. L. Wann, J. G Noel and J. Coleman,“In-group or Out-group Extremity: Importance of the Threatened Social Identity,”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol.19, 1993, pp. 381–388.
Brewer, Marilynn B.,“The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?”Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 55, No. 3, 1999, pp. 429-444.
Bull, Hedley and Adam Watson, (eds.) The Expansion of International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.1984.
Bull, Hedley, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London, Macmillan, 1977.
Burch, Kurt and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997.
Buzan, Barry, From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Campbell, David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998.
Carl Schmitt, Tterror, Lliberal War and the Crisis of Global Order, edited by Louiza Odysseos and Fabio Petito, London: Routledge, 2007.
Carsnaes, Walter, "The Agency-Structure Problem in Foreign Policy Analysis," International Studies Quarterly, Vol.36, No.3, 1992, pp. 245-270.
Checkel, Jeffrey T.,“Social Constructivisms in Global and European Politics:A Review Essay.”Review of International Studies,Vol. 30, No.1 ,2004, pp.229-244.
Checkel, Jeffrey T.,“The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,”World Politics, Vol. 50, 1998, pp. 324-348.
Clark,William Roberts,“Agents and Structures: Two Views of Preferences, Two Views of Institutions,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol.42, 1998, pp.242-270.
Copeland, Dale C.,“The Constructivist Challenge to the Structural Realism,”International Security, Vol.25, No.2, 2000, pp.187-212.
Copeland, Dale,“The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A ReviewEssay,”International Security, Vol.25, No.2, pp.187-212.
Dennen, Johan M.G. van der,“Ethnocentrism and In-group/Out-group Differentiation: A Review and Interpretation of the Literature,”in Reynolds, ed., The Sociobiology of Ethnocentrism, Athens: University of Georgia, 1987, pp.1-47.
Derian, James Der, eds., International Theory: Critical. Investigations, New York: New York University Press, 1995.
Dessler, David, "What's at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate? " International Organization, Vol. 43, No. 3, 1989, pp. 441-473.
Dessler, David,“Constructivism Within a Positivist Social Science,”Review of International Studies, Vol.25, 1999, pp.123-137.
Diamond, Larry and Marc F. Plattner,eds., Nationalism, Ethnic Conflict, and Democracy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994
Dimitrakopoulos, Dionyssis G. and Hussein Kassim,“Deciding the Future of the European Union: Preference Formation and Treaty Reform,”Comparative European Politics, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2004, pp. 241-260.
Doyle, Michael W.,“Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs,”Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 12, No.3, 1983, pp. 205-235.
Dunne, Tim, Inventing International Society: A History of the English School, London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1998.
Elman, Colin,“Horses for Courses: Why Not a Neorealist Theory of Foreign Policy,”Security Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1996, p.8-59.
Evans, Mark, eds., Edinburgh Companion to Contemporary Liberalism: Evidence and Experience, London: Routledge, 2001.
Fearon, James D. and David D. Laitin,“Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War,”American Political Science Review, Vol. 97, No.1, 2003, pp.75-90.
Fearon, James D. and David D. Laitin,“Violence and the Social Construction of Ethnic Identity,”International Organization, Vol.54, No.4, 2000, pp. 845–87.
Fearon, James D.,“Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy, and Theories of International Relations,”Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.1, 1998, pp. 289-313.
Fearon, James, and Alexander Wendt,“Rationalism vs. Constructivism: A SkepticalView,”in Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth A. Simmons, eds., Handbook of International Relations, New York: Sage Publications, 2002, pp.52-72.
Fierke, Karin M.,“Critical Methodology and Constructivism,”in Karin M. Fierke and Knud Erik Jorgensen, eds., Constructing International. Relations: The Next Generation, New York: M. E. Sharpe, 2001, pp. 115-135.
Finnemore, Martha and Kathryn Sikkink, "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics," Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.4, 2001, pp. 391-416;
Finnemore, Martha, National Interests in International Society. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996.
Flockhart, Trine, "A Mission Bound to Fail?: The United States as Socializer of Democratic Norms in Post-War Iraq," The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, Winter/Spring 2005, pp.53-68.
Frieden, Jeffry A., "Actors and Preferences in International Relations," in Strategic Choice and International Relations, edited by David A. Lake and Robert Powell, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999, pp.39-76.
Fukuyama, Francis, The End of History and the Last Man. Free Press, 1992.
George, Jim, Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re) Introduction to International Relations, Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc., 1994.
Gofas, Andreas,“Structure, Agency and Inter-subjectivity: Re-capturing the EMU Policy Process in a Constructivist Realist Framework,”Paper prepared for the 2nd workshop of the European Political-economy Infrastructure Consortium, May 2002. http://aei.pitt.edu/725/01/C2W3_Gofas.pdf
Grieco, Joseph M.,“Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism,”International Organization, Vol.42, No.3, 1988, pp.285-507.
Guzzini, Stefano and Anna Leander, eds., Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and His Critics, London & New York: Routledge, 2006.
Guzzini, Stefano, "Structural Power: The Limits of Neorealist Power Analysis,"International Organization, Vol. 47, No. 3, 1993, pp. 443-478.
Guzzini, Stefano,“A Reconstruction of Constructivism in International Relations,”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.6, No.2, 2000, pp.147-183.
Guzzini, Stefano, Realism in International Relations in and International Political Economy: the Continuing Story of a Death Foretold, NY: Routledge, 1998.
Guzzini, Stefano,“The Enduring Dilemmas of Realism in International Relations,”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.10, No.4, 2004, pp. 533-568.
Hagstr?m, Linus, "Relational Power for Foreign Policy Analysis: Issues in Japan’s China Policy," European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 11, No.3, 2005, pp.395-430.
Halevy, Nir, Gary Bornstein and Lilach Sagiv,“‘In-Group Love’and‘Out-Group Hate’as Motives for Individual Participation in Inter-group Conflict: A New Game Paradigm,”Psychological Science, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2008, pp. 405– 411.
Hall, Rodney Bruce, "Moral Authority as a Power Resource," International Organization, Vol.51, 1997, pp. 591-622.
Hall, Rodney,“Human Nature as Behavior and Action in Economics and International Relations Theory,”Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.9, No.3, 2006, pp. 269-287.
Hamdi, Mohamed E., "Islam and Liberal Democracy: The Limits of the Western Model," Journal of Democracy, Apr. 1996, pp. 81-85.
Hay, Colin, "Constructivist Institutionalism: Or, Why Interests into Ideas Don't Go" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Aug 31, 2006.
http://www.asu.edu/clas/polisci/cqrm/APSA2006/Hay_Constructivism.pdf Hoffmann, Matthew and Alice Ba, eds., Contending Perspectives on Global Governance: Coherence, Contestation, and World Order. London: Routledge, 2005.
Hoffmann, Matthew and Alice Ba, eds., Contending Perspectives on Global Governance: Coherence, Contestation, and World Order. London: Routledge, 2005.
Holsti, K. J.,“War, Peace, and the State of the State,”International Political Science Review, Vol. 16, No. 4, 1995, pp. 319-339.
Hopf, Ted,“The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory,”International. Security, Vol. 23, No.1, 1998, pp.171-200.
Hopf, Ted, Social Construction of International Politics: Identities and Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002.
Hughes, Barry. Continuity and Change in World Politics: The Clash of Perspectives, New Jersey:Prentice Hall, 1991.
Huntington, Samuel P.,“The Clash of Civilizations,”Foreign Affairs, Vol.72, No.3, 1993, pp. 22-50.
Huntington, Samuel, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003.
Hurd, Ian,“Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics,”International Organization, Vol.53, No.2, 1999, pp. 380-381.
Ikenberry, John, After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars, Princeton University Press, 2001.
Jackson, Patrick T. and Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”International Studies Review, No. 6, 2004, pp.337-352.
Jackson, Patrick T., "Relational Constructivism: A War of Words," in Making Sense of International Relations Theory, ed. Jennifer Sterling-Folker, Lynne Rienner, 2005, pp. 139-155.
Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus and Daniel Nexon, Theories of International Cooperation and the Primacy of Anarchy: Explaining U.S. International Monetary Policy-Making After Bretton Woods. Albany, NY: SUNY Series in Global Politics, 2002.
Jackson, Robert and Georg Sorensen, Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches, Oxford University Press, 2007.
Jahn, Beate, The Cultural Construction of International Relations: The Invention of the State of Nature, New York: Palgrave, 2000.
Jervis, Robert, "Realism in the Study of World Politics," International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, Autumn 1998, pp. 971-991.
Jupille, Joseph, et al., "Integrating Institutions: Rationalism, Constructivism, and the Study of the European Union," Comparative Political Studies, Vol.36, 2003, No.1-2, pp.7-40.
Kacowicz, Arie M., Zones of Peace in the Third World: South America and West Africa in Comparative Perspective, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1998.
Katzenstein, Peter J., Robert O. Keohane and Stephen D. Krasner, "International Organization and the Study of World Politics ", International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998, pp. 645-685.
Katzenstein, Peter, Cultural Norms and National Security. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996.
Kelly, C. and S. Breinlinger, The Social Psychology of Collective Action: Identity, Injustice, and Gender, London: Taylor and Francis, 1996.
Keohane Robert O. and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence, New York: Harper Collins, 1989.
Keohane, Robert O., After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton University Press, 1984.
Keyman, Emin Fuat, Globalization, State, Identity/Difference: Toward a Critical Social Theory of International Relations, New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1997.
Kiersey, Nicholas J., "World State or Global Governmentality? Constitutive Power and Resistance in a Post-Imperial World," Global Change, Peace & Security, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2008, pp. 357-374.
Krasner, Stephen D., Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999.
Kratochwil, Friedrich, Rules, Norms, and Decisions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Kukla, Andre, Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Science, London: Routledge, 2000.
La?di, Zaki,“Are European Preferences Shared by Others ?”speech given at the Conference sponsored by CERI, Centre d’Etudes Européennes de Sciences Po and held in Paris on 23-24th of June 2006.
http://www.garnet-eu.org/fileadmin/documents/events/5.1.1%20Conference%20Programme.pdf
Lang, Andrew T. F.,“Reconstructing Embedded Liberalism: John Gerard Ruggie and Constructivist Approaches to the Study of the International Trade Regime,”Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 9, No. 1, March 2006 pp. 81-116.
Lapid, Yosef and Friedrich Kratochwil (eds.) The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory, Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1996.
Lebow, Richard Ned, The Tragic Vision of Politics. Ethics, Interests and Orders, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Legro, Jeffrey W. and Andrew Moravcsik,“Is Anybody Still a Realist?”International Security, Vol. 24, No. 2, 1999, pp.5-55.
Levy, Daniel, Max Pensky and John Torpey, Old Europe, New Europe and Core Europe: Transatlantic Relations after the Iraq War, London: Verso, 2005.
Linklater, Andrew, The Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian Era, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998.
Locher, Birgit and Elisabeth Prügl, " Feminism and Constructivism: Worlds Apart or Sharing the Middle Ground? " International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 45, No. 1, 2001, pp. 111-129.
Lott, Anthony D., Creating Insecurity: Realism, Constructivism, and U.S. Security Policy, Ashgate, 2004.
Magnus Ericson,“A Realist Stable Peace: Power, Threat and the Development of a Shared Norwegian-Swedish Democratic Security Identity 1905-1940.”Lund: Department of Political Science, 2000. http://de.scientificcommons.org/magnus_ericson
March, James G., and Johan P. Olson,“The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Order,”International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998, pp. 943-969.
Mattern, Janice B.,“Power in Realist-Constructivism Research,”International StudiesReview, No.6, 2004, pp. 343-346.
McSweeney, Bill, Security, Identity and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Mearsheimer, John J., "A Realist Reply," International Security, Vol. 20, No. 1, 1995, pp. 82-93.
Mearsheimer, John J., The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton, 2001.
Mearsheimer, John,“The False Promise of International Institutions,”International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994/95, pp. 37-47.
Mercer, Jonathan, "Anarchy and Identity," International Organization, Vol.49, No.2, 1995, pp. 229-252;
Milner, Helen, "International Theories of Cooperation among Nations: Strengths and Weakness," World Politics, Vol.44, No.3, 1992, pp.466-496.
Moravcsik, Andrew, "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics." International Organization, Vol. 51, No.4, 1997, pp.513-553.
Moravcsik, Andrew, "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics." International Organization, Vol. 51, No.4, 1997, pp. 513-553.
Mottola, Kari,“The European Union as a Critic of the International Order: the Power of a Normative Power,”paper submitted on International Studies Association (ISA) Annual Convention, 2007. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/8/0/5/3/p180536_index.html
Mouffe, Chantal, The Return of the Political. London-New York: Verso, 1993. Nau, Henry, At Home Abroad: Identity and Power in American Foreign Policy. Ithaca Cornell University Press, 2002.
Neumann, Iver B.,“Self and Other in International Relations,”European Journal of International Relations,Vol. 2, No.2, 1996, pp.139-174..
Nexon, Daniel, and Patrick Jackson,“Paradigmatic Faults: Why The Divisions Between 'Schools' of IR Theory Aren't All They're Cracked Up To Be.”Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Mar 17, 2004.http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/7/3/5/7/p73575_index.html
Olson, Mancur, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Harvard University Press, 1971.
Onuf, Nicholas G.,“A Constructivist Manifesto”, in eds., Kurt Burch and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp.7-17.
Onuf, Nicholas J., World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations, Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1989.
Oye, Kenneth A., Cooperation under Anarchy, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986.
Paris, Roland,“Peacebuilding and the Limits of Liberal Internationalism,”International Security, Vol. 22, No. 2, 1997, pp. 54-89.
Parsons, Craig, "Constructivism Can Be as Causal as Anything Else," Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Aug 31, 2006. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p152834_index.html
Patom?ki, Heikki and Colin Wight,“After Postpositivism? The Promises of. Critical Realism,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 44 , No. 1, pp.222.
Peleg, Ilan,“The Zionist Right and Constructivist Realism: Ideological Persistence and Tactical Readjustment,”Israel Studies,Vol.10, No.3, 2005, pp. 127-153.
Perdue, Charles W., John F. Dovidio, Michael B. Gurtman and Richard B. Tyler,“Us and Them: Social Categorization and the Process of Inter-group Bias," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.59, No.3, pp.475-486.
Pinakas, Thanasis, "The Notion of Solidarity in European Foreign Policy: A Realist-Constructivist Approach" Paper presented at the Research student conference on European foreign policy, LSE - 2-3 July 2004. http://www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/intrel/EFPC/Papers/Pinakas.doc
Price, Richard and Christian Reus-Smit,“Dangerous Liaisons? Critical International Theory and Constructivism.”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.4,pp. 259-294.
Regan Patrick M., Civil Wars and Foreign Powers: Outside Intervention in Intrastate Conflict. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2000.
Reus-Smit, Christian, "Imagining Society: Constructivism and the English School," British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 4, No. 3, 2002 , pp. 487-509.
Reus-Smit, Christian,“The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the. Nature of Fundamental Institutions,”International Organization, Vol.51, No.4, 1997, pp. 555-589.
Rishi, Pooja, "(Re)Constructing Constructivism: Bringing Governmentality In". Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association 48th Annual Convention, Hilton Chicago, Feb 28, 2007. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p179929_index.html
Risse, Thomas,“'Let's Argue!' Communicative Action in International Relations,”International Organization, Vol. 54, No.1, 2000, pp.1-39.
Risse, Thomas,“Let's Argue: Communicative Action in World Politics,”International Organization, Vol. 54, No. 1, 2000, pp. 1-39.
Risse-Kappen, Thomas,“Collective Identity in a Democratic Community: The Case of NATO,”In Peter J. Katzenstein, ed., The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York: Columbia University Press 1996, pp.357-399.
Ruggie, John G., "What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge,”International Organization, Vol.52, No.4, p.856.
Ruggie, John,“International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Post-War Economic Order,”International Organization, Vol. 36, pp. 379-415.
Ruggie, John, Constructing the World Polity:Essays on internationalization, London and New York: Routledge, 1998.
Ruggie,John G., "Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward aNeorealist Synthesis," World Politics, Vol. 35, No. 2, January 1983, pp.261-285.
Russett, Bruce, "A Neo-Kantian Perspective on Democracy, Interdependence and International Organizations in Building Security Communities", in Emmanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.368-394.
Russett, Bruce, "A Neo-Kantian Perspective on Democracy, Interdependence and International Organizations in Building Security Communities", in Emmanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.368-394.
Schmitt, Carl, The Concept of the Political, trans., George Schwab. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
Sending, Ole Jacob,“Constitution, Choice, and Change: Problems with the‘Logic of Appropriateness’and its Use in Constructivist Theory,”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.8, No.4, 2002, pp.443-470.
Singer, J. David,“The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations,”American Foreign Policy: Theoretical Essays, ed. G. John Ikenberry. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1989, pp.77-92.
Smith, Steve,“Foreign Policy Is What States Make of It: Social Construction and International Relations Theory.”In V. Kubalkova,ed., Foreign Policy in a Constructed World. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp.38-55.
Steele, Brent, "The Reflexive Realists," Paper presented at the British International Studies Association annual meeting Cork, Ireland, December 2006. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/7/8/4/9/p178496_index.html
Steele, Brent,“Eavesdropping on Honored Ghosts': from Classical to Reflexive Realism,”Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.10, No. 3, 2007, pp. 272-300.
Steele, Brent,“Liberal-Idealism: A Constructivist Critique.”International Studies Review, No.9, 2007, pp. 23-52.
Sterling-Folker, Jennifer,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting,Reconstructing, or Rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2002, pp.73-79.
Sterling-Folker, Jennifer,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading”, International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, pp.73-97.
Sterling-Folker, Jennifer,“Realism and the constructivist challenge: rejecting, reconstructing, or rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, pp. 73-97.
Sterling-Folker, Jennifer, Theories of International Cooperation and the Primacy of Anarchy: Explaining U.S. International Monetary Policy-Making After Bretton Woods. Albany, NY: SUNY Series in Global Politics, 2002.
Thomas, Ashley,“The Peloponnesian War: A Constructivist Account of International Politics.”Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, 2004. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/6/0/0/2/p60025_index.html
Thompson, William R., Evolutionary Interpretations of World Politics,. New York: Routledge, 2001.
Tickner, J. Ann, Gender in International Relations: Feminist. Perspectives on Achieving Global Security, New York: Columbia University, 1992.
Varadarajan, Latha,“Constructivism, identity and neoliberal (in)security,”Review of International Studies,Vol.30, 2004, pp.319-341.
Waever, Ole,“The Rise and Fall of the Inter-Paradigm Debate,”in Steve Smith, Ken Booth and Marysia Zalewski, eds., International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, pp.149-185.
Walker, R. B. J., "Realism, Change, and International Political Theory," International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 31, No. 1, March 1987, pp. 65-86.
Walker, R.B.J., Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Walt, Stephen,“International Relations: One World, Many Theories,”Foreign Policy,Vol.29, 1998, pp. 29-45.
Wendt, Alexander, "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics,”International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2, 1992, p. 394.
Wendt, Alexander, "Why a World State is Inevitable: Teleology and the Logic of Anarchy," European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2003, pp. 491-542.
Wendt, Alexander,“On Constitution and Causation in International Relations,”Review of International Studies, Vol. 24, 1998, pp.101-118.
Wendt, Alexander, Social Theory of International Politics, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Wendt, Alexander,“The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory,”International. Organization, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1987, pp. 335-370;
Wight, Colin, Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology. Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Wildavsky, Aaron,“Choosing Preferences by Constructing Institutions: A Cultural Theory of Preference Formation,”The American Political Science Review, Vol. 81, No. 1, 1987, pp. 3-22.
Williams, Michael C.,“Why Ideas Matter in International Relations: Hans Morgenthau Classical Realism and the Moral Construction of Power.”International Organization, Vol. 58, 2004, pp. 633-665.
Williams, Michael C.,“Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 511– 531.
Williams, Michael C., The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations, Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Winnerstig, Michael,“Shared Values or Power Politics? Transatlantic Security Relations 1981-94,”Stockholm, Swedish Institute for International Affairs, 1996. http://www.nato.int/structur/library/bibref/transatlantic.pdf
2例如Stephen Walt,“International Relations: One World, Many Theories,”Foreign Policy, Vol.29, 1998, pp. 29-45; Barry Hughes, Continuity and Change in World Politics: The Clash of Perspectives, New Jersey:Prentice Hall, 1991; Anthony D. Lott, Creating insecurity: realism, constructivism, and U.S. security policy, Ashgate, 2004.
3关于这一点,很多国际关系学者已经注意到并予以强调。如:Nicholas G. Onuf,“A Constructivist Manifesto”, in eds., Kurt Burch and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp.7-17; Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.7; Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics," Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.4, 2001, pp. 391-416; Mikael Baaz, A Meta-Theoretical Foundation for the Study of International Relations in a Global Era: a Social Constructivist Approach, Goteborg University, 2002; J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003,pp.325-342.
4 [法]皮埃尔?雷纳:《科学》(刘成富译),上海文艺出版社2003版。
5 [英]卡尔.波普尔:《猜想与反驳:科学知识的增长》,上海译文出版社2005年版,第320页。
6 [英]霍布斯:《利维坦》(犁思复等译),商务印书馆,1985年版。
7黄泽全:《非洲发展亮点多》,载《人民日报》2006年01月16日第七版。
8黄泽全:《卢旺达大屠杀十年祭》,载《人民日报》2004年04月06日第三版。
9相关论述及批评可参见Bruce Russett, "A Neo-Kantian Perspective on Democracy, Interdependence and International Organizations in Building Security Communities", in Emmanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.368-394; Stephen M. Walt, "International Relations: One World, Many Theories." Foreign Policy, Spring 1998, pp. 29-46; Birgit Locher and Elisabeth Prügl, " Feminism and Constructivism: Worlds Apart or Sharing the Middle Ground? " International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 45, No. 1, 2001, pp. 111-129.
10 [美]亚历山大?温特著:《世界国家的出现是历史的必然——目的论与无政府逻辑》(秦亚青译),载《世.界经济与政治》,2003年第11期; Nicholas J. Kiersey, "World State or Global Governmentality? Constitutive Power and Resistance in a Post-Imperial World," Global Change, Peace & Security, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2008, pp. 357-374.
11 [德]伊曼纽尔·康德:《论永久和平》,《历史理性批判文集》(何兆武译),商务印书馆1990年版。
12 Michael W. Doyle,“Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs,”Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 12, No.3, 1983, pp. 205-235.
13 Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, Free Press,1992.
14 Stephen D. Krasner, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999.
15 Samuel. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003; Mohamed Elhachmi Hamdi, "Islam and Liberal Democracy: The Limits of the Western Model," Journal of Democracy, Apr. 1996, pp. 81-85; Larry Diamond and Marc F. Plattner, eds., Nationalism, Ethnic Conflict, and Democracy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994.
16 Roland Paris,“Peacebuilding and the Limits of Liberal Internationalism,”International Security, Vol. 22, No. 2, 1997, pp. 54-89
17 Emin Fuat Keyman, Globalization, State, Identity/Difference: Toward a Critical Social Theory of International Relations, New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1997; Samuel P. Huntington,“The Clash of Civilizations,”Foreign Affairs, Vol.72, No.3, 1993, pp.22-50.
18 Jonathan Mercer, "Anarchy and Identity," International Organization, Vol.49, No.2, 1995, pp. 229-252.
19“All politics are identities; all identities, political.”Quoted from Richard Thompson Ford, "Political Identity as Identity Politics," UNBOUND, Vol. 1, 2005, p. 53.
20 John Ikenberry, After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars, Princeton University Press, 2001.
21 Thanasis Pinakas, "The Notion of Solidarity in European Foreign Policy: A Realist-Constructivist Approach" Paper presented at the Research student conference on European foreign policy, LSE - 2-3 July 2004. http://www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/intrel/EFPC/Papers/Pinakas.doc
22 Nir Halevy, Gary Bornstein, and Lilach Sagiv,“‘In-Group Love’and‘Out-Group Hate’as Motives for Individual Participation in Inter-group Conflict: A New Game Paradigm,”Psychological Science, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2008, pp. 405– 411; Marilynn B. Brewer,“The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?”Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 55, No. 3, 1999, pp. 429-444.
23 Dale Copeland,“The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A Review Essay,”International Security, Vol.25, No.2, pp.187-212.
24 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.7.
25 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p. 325.
26 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”p. 338.
27 [美]尼古拉斯·奥努夫:《建构主义的哲学渊源》,载《世界经济与政治》,2006年第9期,第1-15页。
28例如Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics.
29例如Mikael Baaz, A Meta-Theoretical Foundation for the Study of International Relations in a Global Era: a Social Constructivist Approach, Goteborg University, 2002.
30 [美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版,第7页。
31温特指出,“第二层面理论”属于“社会研究的基本假设问题(the fundamental assumptions of social inquiry)”,是本体论、认识论与方法论问题;而“第一层面理论”研究的则是“特定领域”(domain-specific)问题,所涉及的是确定谁是具体的相关行为体、他们之间的关系是如何被结构化的以及这种关系将如何发展等实在问题。参见[美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),第一章。
32 Nicholas G. Onuf,“A Constructivist Manifesto”, in eds., Kurt Burch and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp.7-17.
33 John Gerard Ruggie, "What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge,”International Organization, Vol.52 , No.4, p. 856.
34关于建构主义核心信条的经典总结可参见[美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),第一章;也可参见Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics," Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.4, 2001, p. 393.
35 Andre Kukla, Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Science, London: Routledge, 2000; Dale C. Copeland,“The Constructivist Challenge to the Structural Realism”, International Security, Vol. 25, No. 2, 2000, pp.187-212.
36 Stefano Guzzini,“A Reconstruction of Constructivism in International Relations,”European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2000, p. 149.
37 Robert Jackson & Georg Sorensen, Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches, Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 164.
38建构主义通常被认为是关注构成性关系(constitutive relation)而不是因果性关系(casual relation )。但也有不少建构主义学者认为,建构主义突出强调构成性作用,并不妨碍它可以成为一种因果解释理论的可能性。有关讨论可参见David Dessler,“Constructivism Within a Positivist Social Science,”Review of International Studies, Vol. 25, 1999, pp.123–37; Alexander Wendt,“On Constitution and Causation in International Relations,”Review of International Studies, Vol. 24, 1998, pp.101-118; Craig Parsons, "Constructivism Can Be as Causal as Anything Else," Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Aug 31, 2006. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p152834_index.html
39有关常规建构主义(conventional constructivism)和批判建构主义(critical constructivism )的分歧,可参见Ted Hopf,“The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory,”International. Security, Vol.23, No.1, Summer 1998, pp.171-200; Karin M. Fierke,“Critical Methodology and Constructivism,”in Karin M. Fierke and Knud Erik Jorgensen, eds., Constructing International. Relations: The Next Generation, New York: M. E. Sharpe, 2001, pp. 115-135.
40 Heikki Patom?ki and Colin Wight,“After Postpositivism? The Promises of. Critical Realism,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol.44 , No. 1, pp.222.
41持有此类观点的建构主义学者诸如Alexander Wendt, Peter Katzenstein, Christian Reus-Smit, John Ruggie, Emmanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, Ted Hopf, and Martha Finnemore等。相关作品可参见Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999; Peter Katzenstein, Cultural Norms and National Security. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996; Martha Finnemore, National Interests in International Society. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996; John Ruggie, Constructing the World Polity:Essays on internationalization, London and New York: Routledge, 1998; Emanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, Security Community, Cambridge. University Press,1998; Christian Reus-Smit,“The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the. Nature of Fundamental Institutions,”International Organization, Vol.51, No.4, 1997, pp. 555-589; Ted Hopf, Social Construction of International Politics: Identities and Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002.
42参见Jim George, Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re) Introduction to International Relations, Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. , 1994
43持有此类观点的建构主义学者诸如David Campbell, Jim George, James Der Derian, R. B. J. Walker, Andrew Linklater and Ann Tickner等。相关文献可参见; David Campbell, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998; Jim George, Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re) Introduction to International Relations, Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc.., 1994; R.B.J. Walker,Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993; James Der Derian,eds., International Theory: Critical. Investigations, New York: New York University Press,1995; Andrew Linklater, The Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian Era, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998; J. Ann Tickner, Gender in International Relations: Feminist. Perspectives on Achieving Global Security, New York: Columbia University, 1992.
44如何在分析上恰当的处理好结构与施动者之间的关系?就当前的争论而言,存在三种影响较广的解决方案:(1)时间序列方案(temporal-sequential patterns);(2)涵括战略(bracketing strategy);(3)关系式解决(relational solutions)。相关讨论可参见Alexander Wendt,“The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory,”International. Organization, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1987, pp. 335-370; David Dessler, "What's at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate? " International Organization, Vol. 43, No. 3, 1989, pp.441-473; Walter Carsnaes, "The Agency-Structure Problem in Foreign Policy Analysis," International Studies Quarterly, Vol.36, No.3, 1992, pp. 245-270; Colin Wight, Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology. Cambridge University Press, 2006
45 Alexander Wendt,“The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory,”p. 337.
46 [美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版,第18页。
47 Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics," Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.4, 2001, p. 393.
48 [美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版,第19页。
49 Nicholas G. Onuf,“Constructivism: A User’s Manual,”in Nicholas G. Onuf, Paul Kowert, eds., International Relations in a Constructed World, New York: M.E. Sharp, 1998, p.68.
50温特认为,作为一种社会结构,无政府状态可以因“敌人”、“对手”和“朋友”三种不同身份关系而相应获得霍布斯、洛克和康德三种文化含义。Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, pp. 246-312.
51 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, p. 106.
52 Alexander Wendt, "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics,”International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2, 1992, p. 394.
53 Jeffrey Checkel,“The constructivist turn in international relations theory,”World Politics, Vol.50, No. 2, 1998, p. 326.
54 [美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版,第35-36页。也可参见Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics," Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.4, 2001, p. 393.
55就国际关系理论的构成逻辑而言,不少学者强调新现实主义和新自由制度主义实际上是作为分析方法的理性主义分别与政治现实主义世界观、政治自由主义世界观的复合。持此论较典型的学者如J. Samuel Barkin, "Realist Constructivism," International Studies Review, Vol. 5, No.3, 2003, pp.325 -342.
56有关“偏好”在国际关系解释中的作用,可参见Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Harvard University Press,1971; Andrew. Moravcsik, "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics." International Organization, Vol.51, No.4, 1997, pp.513-553; Jeffry A. Frieden, "Actors and Preferences in International Relations," in Strategic Choice and International Relations, edited by David A. Lake and Robert Powell, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999, pp.39-76.
57相关讨论和总结可参见:Aaron Wildavsky,“Choosing Preferences by Constructing Institutions: A Cultural Theory of Preference Formation,”The American Political Science Review, Vol. 81, No. 1, 1987, pp. 3-22; Dionyssis G. Dimitrakopoulos and Hussein Kassim,“Deciding the Future of the European Union: Preference Formation and Treaty Reform,”Comparative European Politics, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2004 , pp. 241-260; William Roberts Clark,“Agents and Structures: Two Views of Preferences, Two Views of Institutions,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol.42, 1998, pp.242-270; [美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版。
58例如,穆拉维斯克总结道:理念自由主义(ideational liberalism)重在传播自由民主观念;商业自由主义(commercial liberalism)侧重支持国际自由贸易;而共和自由主义(republican liberalism)偏好于维护自由国家的国内政治体制。Andrew. Moravcsik, "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics." International Organization, Vol.51, No.4, 1997, pp. 513-553.
59例如温特的理论指出,在频繁的社会互动中,国家通过复杂社会学习形成自身偏好,偏好的形成乃是“拉马克式”文化选择的结果;而费丽莫则强调,国家偏好形成于国际规范、国际组织等机构行为者的教化和传授。详细论述可参见[美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版;[美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版。
60 Andrew Moravcsik,“Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics,”International Organization, Vol. 51, No. 4 , Autumn 1997, p. 524.
61 [美]肯尼思·华尔兹:《国际政治理论》(苏长河,信强译),上海人民出版社2003年版,第20页。
62例如John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton, 2001; Richard Ned Lebow, The Tragic Vision of Politics. Ethics, Interests and Orders, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
63这一观点的表达见于结构现实主义各流派,典型阐述可参见[美]肯尼思·华尔兹:《国际政治理论》(苏长河,信强译),上海人民出版社2003年版。
64 John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton, 2001, p.22.
65例如Joseph M. Grieco,“Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism,”International Organization, Vol.42, No.3, 1988, pp.285-507.
66可参见Kenneth A. Oye, Cooperation under Anarchy, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986; Helen Milner, "International Theories of Cooperation among Nations: Strengths and Weakness," World Politics, Vol.44, No.3, 1992, pp.466-496.
67 Andrew. Moravcsik, "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics." International Organization, Vol.51, No.4, 1997, pp. 513-553.
68相关论述可参见Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence, New York: Harper Collins, 1989; John Ruggie,“International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Post-War Economic Order,”International Organization, Vol. 36, pp. 379-415.
69“建构主义”在本文中有两种使用情形:其一、作为社会分析方法(approach)或元理论(meta-theory)的建构主义;其二、作为国际关系实在理论(substantive theory of IR)的建构主义。相关阐述导论部分已有涉及,在此加以强调。
70相关论述可参见Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, Cabridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999; Dale C. Copeland,“The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A Review Essay,”International Security, Vol.25, No.2, 2000, pp.187-212; Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading”, International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, pp.73-97.
71 [美]玛莎·费里莫:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社2001年版,第13页。
72 Nicholas G. Onuf,“A Constructivist Manifesto”, in eds., Kurt Burch and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp.7-17.
73 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p. 331.
74有关后果性逻辑和适当性逻辑讨论,可参见James G. March and Johan P. Olson,“The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Order,”International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998, pp. 943-969; Ian Hurd,“Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics,”International Organization VoL.53, No.2, 1999, 380-381; Thomas Risse,“Let's Argue: Communicative Action in World Politics,”International Organization, Vol.
54, No. 1, 2000, pp. 1-39; Ole Jacob Sending,“Constitution, Choice, and Change: Problems with the‘Logic of Appropriateness’and its Use in Constructivist Theory,”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.8, No.4, 2002, pp.443-470;
75 James G. March and Johan P. Olson,“The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Order,”International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998, pp. 943-969.
76有关这一观点的阐述,可参见Jonathan Mercer, "Anarchy and Identity," International Organization, Vol.49, No.2, 1995, pp. 229-252; Charles W. Perdue, John F. Dovidio, Michael B. Gurtman and Richard B. Tyler, Us and Them: Social Categorization and the Process of Inter-group Bias," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.59, No.3, pp.475-486; N. R. Branscombe, D. L Wann, J. G Noel & J. Coleman,“In-group or Out-group Extremity: Importance of the Threatened Social Identity,”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol.19, 1993, pp. 381–388; C. Kelly & S. Breinlinger, The Social Psychology of Collective Action: Identity, Injustice, and Gender, London: Taylor and Francis, 1996.
77 Daniel Levy, Max Pensky and, John Torpey, Old Europe, New Europe and Core Europe: Transatlantic Relations after the Iraq War, London: Verso, 2005.
78 Arie M. Kacowicz, Zones of Peace in the Third World: South America and West Africa in Comparative Perspective, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1998.
79参见James D. Fearon and David D. Laitin,“Violence and the Social Construction of Ethnic Identity,”International Organization, Vol.54, No.4, 2000, pp. 845–87; Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso, 1991.
80 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2002, pp.73-9; Jonathan Mercer, "Anarchy and Identity," International Organization, Vol.49, No.2, 1995, pp. 229-252.
81 Iver B. Neumann,“Self and Other in International Relations,”European Journal of International Relations Vol.2, No.2 , 1996, p.140; James D. Fearon,“Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy, and Theories of International Relations,”Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.1, 1998, p. 297.
82许多建构主义文献指出,身份的建构关键取决于行为体彼此在互动中如何看待和对待对方。“如果你将他者看作是‘朋友’,在反复的交往实践中,他者就有可能以同样的方式对待你,最终他者可能成为会真正的朋友;反之亦然。”就此而言,身份概念总是体现一定的社会关系特征。
83 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, pp. 92-138.
84参见Colin Hay, "Constructivist Institutionalism: Or, Why Interests into Ideas Don't Go" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott, Loews Philadelphia, and the Pennsylvania Convention Center, Philadelphia, PA, Aug 31, 2006.
85例如Stephen M. Walt, "International Relations: One World, Many Theories," Foreign Policy, No. 110, Spring 1998, pp. 29-32.
86 Peter J. Katzenstein, Robert O. Keohane, and Stephen D. Krasner,“International Organization and the Study of World Politics,”in Peter J. Katzenstein, Robert O. Keohane, and Stephen D. Krasner, eds., Exploration and Contestation in the Study of World Politics, Cambridge: The MIT Press,1999, pp.5-45.
87 Ole Waever,“The Rise and Fall of the Inter-Paradigm Debate,”in Steve Smith, Ken Booth and Marysia Zalewski, eds., International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, pp.149-185.
88这里主要是指以“经济理性人”假定为基础的理性选择理论(rational choice theory)。
89例如J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003,pp.325-342; Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Competing Paradigms or Birds of a Feather? Constructivism and Neoliberal Institutionalism Compared,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol.44, No.1, 2000, p. 97; John Mearsheimer,“The False Promise of International Institutions,”International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994/95, pp. 37-47.
90 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.338.
91 John Mearsheimer,“The False Promise of International Institutions,”International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994/95, pp. 37-47.
92 Stefano Guzzini and Anna Leander, eds., Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and His Critics, London & New York: Routledge, 2006.
93 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.339.
94 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2002, p.76.
95例如Bruce Russett, "A Neo-Kantian Perspective on Democracy, Interdependence and International Organizations in Building Security Communities", in Emmanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.368-394; Birgit Locher and Elisabeth Prügl, " Feminism and Constructivism: Worlds Apart or Sharing the Middle Ground? " International Studies Quarterly, Vol.
45, No. 1, 2001, pp. 111-129.
96 Friedrich Kratochwil, Rules, Norms, and Decisions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
97 Thomas Risse,“' Let's Argue!' Communicative Action in International Relations,”International Organization, Vol. 54, No.1, 2000, pp.1-39.
98巴尔金指出,哈贝马斯一般被认为是批判性理论家,但在某些方面他却是自由理想主义者。之所以是理想主义的,是因为他有着关于什么构成了政治进步和良好政治生活的清晰概念;之所以是自由主义的,是因为他关于良好政治生活的概念建立在个人表达和一种理性形式的基础之上。参见J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.339.
99 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.340.
100有关现实主义与建构主义对立的批判总结,可参见J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, pp.325-342; Jeffrey T Checkel,“The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,”World Politics, Vol. 50, No.2, pp. 324-348; James Fearon and Alexander Wendt Rationalism vs. Constructivism: A Skeptical View, in Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth A. Simmons, eds., Handbook of International Relations, New York: Sage Publications, 2002, pp.52-72.
101相关文献可参考Michael Winnerstig,“Shared Values or Power Politics?: Transatlantic Security Relations 1981-94,”Stockholm, Swedish Institute for International Affairs, 1996; Andreas Gofas,“Structure, Agency and Inter-subjectivity: Re-capturing the EMU Policy Process in a Constructivist Realist Framework”, Paper prepared for the 2nd workshop of the European Political-economy Infrastructure Consortium, May 2002;Henry Nau, At Home Abroad: Identity and Power in American Foreign Policy, Ithaca Cornell University Press , 2002; Patrick T. Jackson & Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”, Jennifer Serling-Folker, “Realist-Constructivism and Morality”, Janice B. Mattern,“Power in Realist-Constructivism Research”, Richard N. Lebow,“Constructive Realism”, J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism and Realist-constructivisms?”in “Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue”, International Studies Review, No.6, 2004,pp.337-352; Jeffrey Checkel,“Social Constructivisms in Global and European Politics:A Review Essay.”Review of International Studies,Vol. 30,No.1 ,2004, pp.229-244; Ilan Peleg ,“The Zionist Right and Constructivist Realism: Ideological Persistence and Tactical Readjustment,”Israel Studies– Vol.10, No.3, 2005, pp. 127-153.
102 Peter J. Katzenstein (ed.), The Culture of National Security, Norms and Identity in World Politics, Columbia University Press,1996;Emanuel Alder and Michael Barnett, Security Communities , Cambridge University Press, 1998.
103 Daniel Nexon and Patrick Jackson, Paradigmatic Faults: Why The Divisions Between 'Schools' of IR Theory Aren't All They're Cracked Up To Be. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel,, Mar 17, 2004.
104 John J. Mearscheimer:“The False Promise of International Institutions,”International Security, Vol. 19, No. 3, Winter 1994/95, pp. 5-49.
105关于这一方面的总结可以参见美国国际研究协会(ISA)的会议论文:“Realism Reconsidered,”which convened at the 2006 annual meeting of the International Studies Association in San Diego, California, USA,22 March, 2006.
106这一术语借自于Stefano Guzzini。参见Stefano Guzzini,“The Enduring Dilemmas of Realism in International Relations”, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.10, No.4, 2004, pp. 533-68.
107奥利?韦弗尔(Ole W?ver)指出,“现实主义仍是当前国际关系研究的主导范式,但绝大多数国关学者尤其是年轻学者都不是现实主义者。现实主义主要是作为一个批判标靶而存在的。”Ole W?ver,“Figures of International Thought: Introducing Persons Instead of Paradigms,”In I. B. Neumann and Ole W?ver (eds.), The Future of International Relations: Masters in the Making? London: Routlege, 1997, p.26.
108“最小现实主义”是指放松或偏离现实主义基本命题的理论,只保留某些现实主义的基本命题,比如理性主义和无政府命题。相关论述参见Jeffrey W. Legro and Andrew Moravcsik,“Is Anybody Still a Realist?”International Security, Vol. 24, No. 2, 1999, p.19.
109比如Peter J. Katzenstein, Robert O. Keohane & Stephen D. Krasner, "International Organization and the Study of World Politics ", International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998, pp. 645-685; James Fearon and Alexander Wendt,“Rationalism vs. Constructivism: a Skeptical View,”in Walter Carlnaes, Thomas Risse and Beth Simmons (eds.), Handbook of International Relations, London: Sage, 2002.
110 Lapid, Yosef and Friedrich Kratochwil (eds.) The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory, Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1996.
111例如Michael Winnerstig,“Shared Values or Power Politics?: Transatlantic Security Relations 1981-94,”Stockholm, Swedish Institute for International Affairs, 1996; Magnus Ericson,“A Realist Stable Peace: Power, Threat and the Development of a Shared Norwegian-Swedish Democratic Security Identity 1905-1940”, Lund, Department of Political Science, 2000;Andreas Gofas,“Structure, Agency and Inter-subjectivity: Re-capturing the EMU Policy Process in a Constructivist Realist Framework ,”Paper prepared for the 2nd workshop of the European Political-economy Infrastructure Consortium, May 2002.
112 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.338.
113 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.7.
114 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.338.
115 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, pp. 329-334.
117巴尔金关于“现实建构主义”的详细阐述可参见J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”,pp.325-342.另外,有关巴尔金“现实建构主义”的回应文章可参考:“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue,”International Studies Review, No.6, 2004, pp.337-341;秦亚青、[美]亚历山大·温特:《建构主义的发展空间》,《世界经济与政治》杂志2005年第1期;以及最新的评论文章Brent Steele,“Liberal-Idealism: A Constructivist Critique.”International Studies Review,No.9, 2007, pp. 23-52.
119这里的“理性社会人”是与“理性经济人”相对的,前一“理性”时更宽泛意义上的理性,即涵括工具理性,也涵括价值理性,既指预测理性,同时也指规范理性。而后一“理性”着重指工具理性、预测理性。
120 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing,”International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No.1, 2002, p.73.
121比如,斯特林-福克尔指出,自然选择机制下,同样是为了争夺和开发更多的资源以维持和延续生命,人类和鸟类都在进化,但为什么人类会进化出双手而鸟类会进化出翅膀?Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the constructivist challenge: rejecting, reconstructing, or rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, p.80.
122相关文献可参考Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the constructivist challenge: rejecting, reconstructing, or rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, pp. 73-97; "Realist-Constructivism and Morality," International Studies Review, vol. 6, No. 2, 2004;“Evolutionary Tendencies in Realist and Liberal Theory,”In Evolutionary Interpretations of World Politics,ed. William R. Thompson. New York: Routledge, 2001; "Realist Global Governance: Revisiting Cave! hic dragones and Beyond." In Contending Perspectives on Global Governance: Coherence, Contestation, and World Order. Matthew Hoffmann and Alice Ba, eds. London: Routledge, 2005;“Realism and Constructivism: From Debate to Dialogue,”Presenter at conference organized by Patrick Thaddeus Jackson and Daniel Nexon, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, April 29-30, 2005; Theories of International Cooperation and the Primacy of Anarchy: Explaining U.S. International Monetary Policy-Making After Bretton Woods. Albany, NY: SUNY Series in Global Politics, 2002.
124 Brent Steele,“Eavesdropping on Honored Ghosts': from Classical to Reflexive Realism”, Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.10, No. 3, 2007, pp. 272-300.根据Brent Steele的概括总结,“反思性现实主义”的典型作品还包括:Richard Ned Lebow, The Tragic Vision of Politics; Anthony Lang, Agency and Ethics: The Politics of Military Intervention, Albany: SUNY Press, 2002; Michael C. Williams, The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations, Cambridge University Press, 2005.
125 Brent Steele,“Eavesdropping on Honored ghosts': from classical to reflexive realism”, Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.10, No. 3, 2007, pp. 272-300.
126 Bill McSweeney, Security, Identity and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999, p. 213.
127例如,温特建构主义带有浓厚的目的论哲学色彩。这种“目的论哲学”往往忽视施动者的施动性所造成的历史偶然性(contingency),因而预言国际关系会朝向某个预先设定的历史目标演进。参见Alexander Wendt, "Why a World State is Inevitable: Teleology and the Logic of Anarchy," European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2003, pp. 491-542.
128 Daniel Nexon and Patrick Jackson,“Paradigmatic Faults: Why the Divisions in International Relations aren’t all they’re Cracked up to be.”Paper resented at the Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, 2004.
129也有人将这一形态的自由主义称之为“观念自由主义(ideational liberalism)”。例如Andrew Moravcsik, " Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics," International Organization, Vol. 51, No.4, 1997, p.515.
130 Patrick T. Jackson and Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”International Studies Review, No.6, 2004, pp. 337-341.
131 Alexander Wendt,“Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics,”International Organization, Vol.41, No.3, pp. 392-425.
132 Stefano Guzzini, Realism in International Relations in and International Political Economy: the Continuing Story of a Death Foretold, NY: Routledge, 1998, pp.190-210.
133 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing,”International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No.1, 2002, p.73.
134 [美]尼古拉斯·奥努夫:《建构主义的哲学渊源》,载《世界经济与政治》,2006年第9期,第1-15页。
135 Nicholas G. Onuf,“A Constructivist Manifesto,”in eds., Kurt Burch and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp.7-17.
136 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.336.
137 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the constructivist challenge: rejecting, reconstructing, or rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, p.85.
138有关这些建构主义的分类总结,可参见秦亚青:《建构主义的发展空间》,《世界经济与政治》2005年第1期,第8-12页。
139 "Realist Constructivism, Constructivist Realism" Panel at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, August 1998.
140 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, pp. 325-342.
141相关论述可参见Michael Winnerstig,“Shared Values or Power Politics?: Transatlantic Security Relations 1981-94,”Stockholm, Swedish Institute for International Affairs, 1996; Andreas Gofas,“Structure, Agency and Inter-subjectivity: Re-capturing the EMU Policy Process in a Constructivist Realist Framework”, Paper prepared for the 2nd workshop of the European Political-economy Infrastructure Consortium, May 2002;Henry Nau, At Home Abroad: Identity and Power in American Foreign Policy. Ithaca Cornell University Press , 2002; Jennifer Sterling-Folker, Theories of International Cooperation and the Primacy of Anarchy: Explaining U.S. InternationalMonetary Policy-Making After Bretton Woods. Albany, NY: SUNY Series in Global Politics, 2002.
142详细论述可参见:Joseph Jupille et al., "Integrating Institutions: Rationalism, Constructivism, and the Study of the European Union," Comparative Political Studies, Vol.36, 2003, No.1-2, pp.7-40.
143“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue”, International Studies Review, No.6, 2004,pp.337-352;
144 Patrick Thaddeus Jackson and Daniel Nexon,“Paradigmatic Faults: Why the Divisions in International Relations aren’t all they’re Cracked up to be.”Paper resented at the Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, 2004 and at the Pan-European Conference on International Relations, 2004
145“Realism and Constructivism: From Debate to Dialogue,”Conference organized by Patrick Thaddeus Jackson and Daniel Nexon, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, April 29-30,2005.
146秦亚青、[美]亚历山大·温特:《建构主义的发展空间》,《世界经济与政治》2005年第1期,第8-12页。
147 Brent J. Steele ,“Liberal-Idealism: A Constructivist Critique.”International Studies Review,Vol.9, 2007, pp.23-52.
148 Kari Mottola,“The European Union as a Critic of the International Order: the Power of a Normative Power,”paper submitted on International Studies Association (ISA) Annual Convention, 2007.
149 Janice B. Mattern,“Power in Realist-Constructivism Research”, in“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue,”pp.343-346.
150 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism and Realist-Constructivisms.”in“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue,”International Studies Review, No.6, 2004, p.351.
151详细论述参见:Patrick T. Jackson & Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”in“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue”, International Studies Review, No.6, 2004, pp.337-341; Daniel Nexon and Patrick Jackson,“Paradigmatic Faults: Why The Divisions Between 'Schools' of IR Theory Aren't All They're Cracked Up To Be.”Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Mar 17, 2004; Richard Ned Lebow,“Thucydides the Constructivist”; Ashley Thomas,“The Peloponnesian War: A Constructivist Account of International Politics.”Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, September 2004.
152 Daniel Nexon and Patrick Jackson,“Paradigmatic Faults: Why The Divisions Between 'Schools' of IR Theory Aren't All They're Cracked Up To Be.”
153 Patrick T. Jackson & Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”.
154相关论述参见: Linus Hagstr?m, "Relational Power for Foreign Policy Analysis: Issues in Japan’s China Policy," European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 11, No. 3, 2005, pp.395-430; Stefano Guzzini, "Structural Power: The Limits of Neorealist Power Analysis," International Organization, Vol. 47, No. 3 , Summer 1993, pp. 443-478; Patrick Thaddeus Jackson, "Relational Constructivism: A War of Words," in Making Sense of International Relations Theory, ed. Jennifer Sterling-Folker, Lynne Rienner, 2005, pp. 139-155; Michael C. Williams, The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations, Cambridge University Press, 2005.
155 Michael C.Williams,“Why Ideas Matter in International Relations: Hans Morgenthau Classical Realism and the Moral Construction of Power.”International Organization, Vol. 58, 2004, pp. 633-665.
156拥护这一主张的学者认为,现实建构主义应当恪守建构主义的基本信条,并往往引用如下经典文献,以佐证建构主义旨在强调国际政治的社会建构性。例如:Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge University Press, 1999 &“Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics," International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2, 1992; Ted Hopf, Social Construction of International Politics: Identities and Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002; Beate Jahn, The Cultural Construction of International Relations: The Invention of the State of Nature ,New York: Palgrave, 2000; Nicholas J. Onuf, World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations, Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1989; Peter J Katzenstein, The Culture of National Security, Norms and Identity in World Politics, Columbia University Press, 1996.
157 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism and Realist-Constructivisms.”& Janice B. Mattern,“Power in Realist-Constructivism Research”.
158系统总结可见:Brent Steele, "The Reflexive Realists," Paper presented at the British International Studies Association annual meeting Cork, Ireland, December 2006; Brent Steele,“Eavesdropping on honored ghosts': from classical to reflexive realism”, in Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.10, No. 3, September 2007 , pp. 272-300; Rodney Bruce Hall, "Moral Authority as a Power Resource," International Organization, Vol.51, 1997, pp. 591-622.; Willian Bain, "Deconfusing Morgenthau: Moral Inquiry and Classical Realism Reconsidered," Review of International Studies, Vol. 26,2000, pp. 445-464.
159 Jennifer Serling-Folker,“Realist-Constructivism and Morality,”in“Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue,”International Studies Review, No.6, 2004, pp. 341-343.
160参见[日]野家启一:《库恩——范式》(毕小辉译),石家庄:河北教育出版社,2002年版,第141-150页。
161有关“自由建构主义”的相关论述可参见: Thomas Risse-Kappen, Collective Identity in a Democratic Community: The Case of NATO, In Peter J. Katzenstein, ed., The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York: Columbia University Press 1996, pp.357-399; Jeffrey T. Checkel, The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory, World Politics, Vol.50, No.2: 1998, pp.324-348; Latha Varadarajan,“Constructivism, identity and neoliberal (in)security,”Review of International Studies,Vol.30, 2004, pp.319-341; Pooja Rishi, "(Re)Constructing Constructivism: Bringing Governmentality In". Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association 48th Annual Convention, Hilton Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA, Feb 28, 2007.
162 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism,”p 332.
163参见秦亚青:“译者前言”,第29页。载[美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版社,2000年。
164 Andrew T. F. Lang,“Reconstructing Embedded Liberalism: John Gerard Ruggie and Constructivist Approaches to the Study of the International Trade Regime,”Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 9, No. 1, March 2006 pp. 81-116.
165 Tim Dunne, Inventing International Society:A History of the English School, London:Macmillan Press Ltd.,1998.; Alexander Wendt, "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics ,"International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2 (Spring, 1992), pp. 391-425.
166“All politics are identities; all identities, political.”Quoted from Richard Thompson Ford, "Political Identity as Identity Politics," UNBOUND, Vol. 1, 2005, p53.
167“All truth of the political derives from the distinction between friend and enemy.”See Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, trans., George Schwab. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996, p27.
168 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, pp. 92-138.
169有关这一观点的表达可参见温特的作品:Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge University Press, 1999.
170有关这一观点的表达可参见施密特的作品: Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, trans., George Schwab. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
171在这里,本文区别自由主义者所使用的包容性“集体认同”(inclusion-based collective identity)和现实建构主义所使用的排他性“群体认同”(exclusion-based group identity)。
172在此意义上,一些建构主义学者的作品被学界称之为“规则建构主义”(Onuf)或“规范建构主义”(Kratochwil)。诸如:Nicholas J. Onuf, World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations, Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1989; Friedrich Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decisions, On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
173 Brent Steele, "Utopian Dreams: Some Much-Needed Constructivist Distinctions with Liberal-Utopianism"
174 Zaki La?di,“Are European Preferences Shared by Others ?”speech given at the Conference sponsored by CERI, Centre d’Etudes Européennes de Sciences Po and held in Paris on 23-24th of June 2006.
175 Reus-Smit认为,建构主义内部的各种争论主要是围绕规范性问题、分析层次和方法论三个轴心维度展开,其中在规范性维度上可大致区分为社会学制度主义者、哈贝马斯式沟通行动理论家和福柯式系谱学家等三个派别。(Christian Reus-Smit, "Imagining society: constructivism and the English School," British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 4, No. 3, October 2002 , pp. 487-509. ) Jackson和Nexon则更为明确的指出,现实建构主义和自由建构主义之区分乃是持两种不同政治立场的建构主义之区分。自由建构主秉持哈贝马斯的政治哲学观点,相信在“理想话语条件”下,权力政治最终能为行为体之间的沟通行动所取代;而现实建构主义则坚持一种福柯立场,认为即使是在“理想话语条件”下,某些权力仍然是不可超越的。( Patrick T. Jackson & Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”pp.340-341.)受惠于上述理论观点,本文提出如果以不同导向的社会化理论为基准,作为划分现实建构主义与自由建构主义之标准,应该更能彰显二者之差别。
176相关经典论述可参见:Jonathan Mercer, "Anarchy and Identity," International Organization, Vol.49, Spring 1995, pp.229-252; Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing or Rereading”; Dale C. Copeland,"The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A Review Essay," International Security, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Autumn, 2000), pp. 187-212; Johan M.G. van der Dennen,“Ethnocentrism and In-group/Out-group Differentiation: A Review and Interpretation of the Literature,”in Reynolds, ed., The Sociobiology of Ethnocentrism, Athens: University of Georgia, 1987, pp. 1-47; Trine Flockhart, "A Mission Bound to Fail?: The United States as Socializer of Democratic Norms in Post-War Iraq," The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, Winter/Spring 2005, pp.53-68.
177总结于Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political. & Chantal Mouffe, The Return of the Political. London–New York: Verso, 1993.
178例如温特的“世界国家”理论。Alexander Wendt, "Why a World State is Inevitable: Teleology and the Logicof Anarchy." European Journal of International Relations, Vol,9, No,4, pp.491-542.
179 John J. Mearsheimer, "A Realist Reply," International Security, Vol. 20, No. 1, Summer, 1995, pp. 82-93.
180 Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing or Rereading,”p76.
181有关结构现实主义是静态理论和结构理论的批评和指责,见于:John Gerard Ruggie, "Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis," World Politics, Vol. 35, No. 2, January 1983, pp.261-285; R. B. J. Walker, "Realism, Change, and International Political Theory," International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 31, No. 1, March 1987, pp. 65-86; Robert Jervis, "Realism in the Study of World Politics," International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, Autumn 1998, pp. 971-991; Dale Copeland, "The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A Review Essay," International Security, Vol. 25, No.2, 2000, pp.187-212.
182总结于Jennifer Sterling-Folker,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing or Rereading,”; Rodney Hall,“Human Nature as Behavior and Action in Economics and International Relations Theory,”Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.9, No.3,2006, pp.269-287.
183 Rousseau pointed out in his second Discours:“The characteristics we attribute to human nature may be the effect, not the cause of sociopolitical phenomena.”Quoted from Asash Abizadeh, "Does Collective Identity Presuppose an Other? On the Alleged Incoherence of Global Solidarity," American Political Science Review, Vol. 99, No. 1 February 2005, p54.
184例如以新现实主义和新自由主义为代表的美国国际关系理论。参见:Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics. McGraw-Hill. New York: 1979; Robert Keohane, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton University Press , 1984.
185例如英国学派和欧洲一体化理论者。参见:Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London, Macmillan, 1977; Hedley Bull and Adam Watson, (eds.) The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press.1984; Barry Buzan, From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
186 Alexander Wendt, "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics”.
187 Tim Dunne, Inventing International Society: A History of the English School, London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1998.
188 Christian Reus-Smit, "Imagining society: constructivism and the English School".
189 Alexander Wendt, "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics”, p 394.
190温特指出,无政府状态可以因“敌人”、“对手”和“朋友”三种不同身份关系而相应获得霍布斯、洛克和康德三种文化含义。Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, pp. 246-312.
191 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, p 106.
192 Alexander Wendt, "Why a World State is Inevitable: Teleology and the Logic of Anarchy".
193关于这一立场的经典讨论及其在国际关系理论中的应用总结,可参见:Asash Abizadeh, "Does Collective Identity Presuppose an Other? On the Alleged Incoherence of Global Solidarity" .
194 Michael Walzer,“The New Tribalism: Notes on a Difficult Problem.”Dissent Vol. 39, Spring 1992, p171.
195 Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, pp. 23- 58.
196 Samuel P. Huntington,“The Clash of Civilizations?”Foreign Affairs, vol. 72, no. 3, Summer 1993, pp. 22-49.
197 Asash Abizadeh, "Does Collective Identity Presuppose an Other? On the Alleged Incoherence of Global Solidarity,"pp.50-58.
198 Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, p 49.
199 Jonathan Mercer指出,国际关系体系之所以呈现为自助状态,主要不是因为结构或人类的权力欲望所致,而是因为人类天生就有划分群体并渴望得到承认和尊重的社会心理需求所致。Jonathan Mercer, "Anarchy and Identity," pp. 241-242.
200总结自Mika Ojakangas, "A Terrifying World without and Exterior: Carl Schmitt and the Metaphysics of International (Dis)Order," in The international political thought of Carl Schmitt : terror, liberal war and the crisis of global order, edited by Louiza Odysseos and Fabio Petito, London: Routledge, 2007, pp.205-221.
201 [美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版,第7章。.
202例如在此目的论哲学推论下,温特指出,世界国家是历史的必然。
203 Michael Walzer,“The New Tribalism: Notes on a Difficult Problem.”Dissent, Vol.39, 1992, p.171.
204 Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 1996.
205卡尔·施密特:《政治的概念》(刘宗坤等译),载刘小枫主编:《施密特文集第一卷:政治的概念》,上海:上海人民出版社2004版,第113页。
206卡尔·施密特:《政治的概念》(刘宗坤等译),载刘小枫主编:《施密特文集第一卷:政治的概念》,上海:上海人民出版社2004版,第113页。
207 Chantal Mouffe, The Return of the Political, London: Verso, 1993, p.115.
208相关文献参见Richard Price and Christian Reus-Smit,“Dangerous Liaisons? Critical International Theory and Constructivism.”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.4, pp. 259– 294; Michael C. Williams,“Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 511– 531.
209 Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man. Free Press, 1992.
210 Samuel P. Huntington,“The Clash of Civilizations?”Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3, 1993, pp. 22-49.
211 [美]汉斯·摩根索著:《国家间政治——权力斗争与和平》(第七版),北京:北京大学出版社2006版。
212 Leonard Liggio, "Christianity, Classical Liberalism are Liberty's Foundations", Religion & Liberty (Acton Institute), 2003; Mark Evans, ed., Edinburgh Companion to Contemporary Liberalism: Evidence and Experience, London: Routledge, 2001.
213 [美]罗伯特·基欧汉:《霸权之后:世界政治经济中的合作与纷争》,苏长和等译,上海:上海人民出版社,2001年版。
214 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, pp. 325-342.
216 J. David Singer,“The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations,”American Foreign Policy: Theoretical Essays, ed. G. John Ikenberry. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1989, p. 67.
217 Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics. Addison-Wesley, 1979, p. 175.
218 Colin Elman,“Horses for Courses: Why Not a Neorealist Theory of Foreign Policy,”Security Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1996, p.8.
219 Colin Elman,“Horses for Courses: Why Not a Neorealist Theory of Foreign Policy,”Security Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1996, p.59.
220 [美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版,第一章。
221 Jeffrey Checkel,“The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,”World Politics,Vol.50, No.1, p.341. .
222 Jeffrey Checkel,“The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,”World Politics,Vol.50, No.1, p.341.
223 Steve Smith.“Foreign Policy Is What States Make of It: Social Construction and International Relations Theory.”In V. Kubalkova, ed., Foreign Policy in a Constructed World. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, p.39.
224 Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.11.
225 [美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版,第四章。
226 [美]亚历山大·温特:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版2000年版,第四章。
227这种进程式层次分析方法借鉴了当前欧盟决策研究和对外政策分析中的双层博弈理论,在具体经验研究中已多有文献涉及(例如Michael Alan Brittingham, " The“Role”of Nationalism in Chinese Foreign Policy: A Reactive Model of Nationalism & Conflict ," Journal of Chinese Political Science,Vol.12, No. 2, 2007. )。在这里,它可以被看作是“施动者与结构相互构成”这一经典主张与传统层次分析方法的复合。
228 [美]威廉·内斯特编著《:国际关系: 21世纪的政治与经济》(姚远、汪恒译),北京:北京大学出版社2005年版。
229 Charles S.Gochman & Zeev Maoz.“Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816-1976.”in J. David Singer & Paul F. Diehl ed., Measuring the Correlates of War, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press1990, p.199.
230 [美]汉斯·摩根索:《国家间政治》,北京大学出版社2006版,第七章。
231例如“王朝观念”会建构“君主荣誉”成为国家利益的一部分,而“主权观念”则会导致领土边界成为不可侵犯的国家利益。
232 [美]戴维·卡莱欧:《欧洲的未来》(冯绍雷、袁胜育、王蕴秀译),上海世纪出版集团2003年版,第17页。
233转摘自李世安、刘丽云等著:《欧洲一体化史》,河北人民出版社2003年版,第19-20页。
234有关欧洲联合思想的详细历史叙述,可参见李世安、刘丽云等著:《欧洲一体化史》,河北人民出版社2003年版,第20-21页。
235 Stephen Walt,“International Relations: One World, Many Theories,”Foreign Policy, Vol.29, 1998, pp. 29-45.
236李世安、刘丽云等著:《欧洲一体化史》,河北人民出版社2003年版,第30页。
237 [美]戴维·卡莱欧:《欧洲的未来》(冯绍雷、袁胜育、王蕴秀译),上海世纪出版集团2003年版,第20页。
238 [美]戴维·卡莱欧:《欧洲的未来》(冯绍雷、袁胜育、王蕴秀译),上海世纪出版集团2003年版,第38页。
239 [美]戴维·卡莱欧:《欧洲的未来》(冯绍雷、袁胜育、王蕴秀译),上海世纪出版集团2003年版,第25页。
240李世安、刘丽云等著:《欧洲一体化史》,河北人民出版社2003年版,第30页。
241邱芝:《论欧洲一体化进程中集体认同的建构》,《世界经济与政治论坛》2007年第4期,第45页。
242 [德]尤尔根·哈贝马斯:“欧洲是否需要一部宪法”,哈贝马斯主编,曹卫东译:《后民族结构》,上海人民出版社,2002年版,第151—161页。
243高华:《北约欧盟双东扩:机遇、挑战和前景》,载李慎明、王逸舟主编:《2005年全球政治与安全报告》,社会科学文献出版社2005年版。
244邱芝:《论欧洲一体化进程中集体认同的建构》,《世界经济与政治论坛》2007年第4期,第45页。
245资中筠主编:《冷眼向洋》,生活·读书·新知——三联出版社2000年版,第336页。
246张生祥:《欧洲的新认同政治与欧洲认同的形成》,《当代世界社会主义问题》2006年底4期,第39页。
247张生祥:《欧洲的新认同政治与欧洲认同的形成》,《当代世界社会主义问题》2006年底4期,滴9页。
248 Kenneth N. Waltz, "Structural Realism after the Cold War," International Security, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2000, pp. 5-41.
249 Joseph M. Grieco,“Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism.”International Organization, Vol.42, No.3, 1988, pp. 485-507.
250 Ernst B. Haas, Beyond Nation State: Functionalism and International Organization, Stanford: Stanford University Press , 1964 , p . 34.
251崔宏伟:《欧盟国际“集体身份”的建构及其政策影响》http://www.escsass.org.cn/adm/UploadFiles/2006122919753443.doc
252吴志成、王霞:《欧洲化及其对成员国政治的影响》,《欧洲研究》2007年第4期,第45页。
253 Patrick M.Regan, Civil Wars and Foreign Powers: Outside Intervention in Intrastate Conflict. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2000.
254 K.J. Holsti,“War, Peace, and the State of the State,”International Political Science Review, Vol. 16, No. 4, 1995, p. 332.
255 James D. Fearon and David D. Laitin,“Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War,”American Political Science Review, Vol. 97, No.1, 2003, p. 277.
256涂龙德:《达尔危机之透视》,《阿拉伯世界研究》2005年第4期,第2页。
257 Nelson Alusla,“The Arming of Rwanda and the Genocide,”African Security Review, Vol. 13, No.2, 2001, p.137.
258 David A. Lake and Donald Rothchild (eds.). The International Spread of Ethnic Conflict: Fear, Diffusion and Escalation, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998, pp.392-398.
259 Paul R. Kimmel, "Culture and Conflict," in The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice, eds.Morton Deutsch an Peter T. Coleman. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2000, p.456.
260 Edward A. Tiryakian, "Comparative Perspectives on Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflicts," International Journal of Comparative Sociology, Vol. 45, 2004, pp. 35-49.
261《达尔富尔:发展是关键》,《北京周报》2007年第33期8月16日版。
262 Renner, Michael, Fighting for Survival: Environmental Decline, Social Conflict, and the New Age of Insecurity. New York: W.W. Norton, 1997.
263《墨子·尚同中》。
264 K. J. Holsti, International Politics: A Framework for Analysis, Prentice Hall, 1988, p.67
265 J. Samuel Barkin,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, p.340.
阿查亚,阿米塔著:《建构安全共同体:东盟与地区秩序》(王正毅、冯怀信译),上海人民出版社,2004年版。
奥努夫,尼古拉斯:《建构主义的哲学渊源》,《世界经济与政治》2006年第9期。
波普尔,卡尔著:《猜想与反驳:科学知识的增长》,上海译文出版社,2005年版。
方长平:《国家利益的建构主义分析》,当代世界出版社,2002年版。
费里莫,玛莎著:《国际社会中的国家利益》(袁正清译),浙江人民出版社,2001年版。
哈贝马斯,于尔根主编:《后民族结构》(曹卫东译),上海人民出版社,2002年版。
华尔兹,肯尼思著:《国际政治理论》(苏长河、信强译),上海人民出版社,2003年版。
黄泽全:《非洲发展亮点多》,载《人民日报》2006年01月16日第七版。
黄泽全:《卢旺达大屠杀十年祭》,载《人民日报》2004年04月06日第三版。
霍布斯,托马斯:《利维坦》(犁思复等译),商务印书馆,1985年版。
基欧汉,罗伯特著:《霸权之后:世界政治经济中的合作与纷争》(苏长和等译),上海人民出版社,2001年版。
吉登斯,安东尼:《社会理论与现代社会学》(文军、赵勇译),北京·社会科学文献出版社,2003年版。
卡莱欧,戴维著:《欧洲的未来》(冯绍雷、袁胜育、王蕴秀译),上海世纪出版集团,2003年版。
卡赞斯坦,彼得著:《文化规范与国家安全》(李小华译)北京·新华出版社,2002年版。
康德,伊曼纽尔:《论永久和平》,《历史理性批判文集》(何兆武译),商务印书馆,1990年版。
库芭科娃,温都尔卡等主编:《建构世界中的国际关系》(肖锋译),北京大学出版社,2006年版。
雷纳,皮埃尔著:《科学》(刘成富译),上海文艺出版社,2003版。
李慎明、王逸舟主编:《2005年全球政治与安全报告》,社会科学文献出版社,2005年版。
李世安、刘丽云等著:《欧洲一体化史》,河北人民出版社,2003年版。
刘放桐等编著:《新编现代西方哲学》,人民出版社,2000年。
刘小枫主编:《施密特文集第一卷:政治的概念》,上海人民出版,2004版。
罗天虹:《哥本哈根学派的安全理论评析》,《教学与研究》1999年第8期。
摩根索,汉斯著:《国家间政治——权力斗争与和平》(第七版),北京大学出版社,2006版。
内斯特,威廉编著:《国际关系:21世纪的政治与经济》(姚远、汪恒译),北京大学出版社,2005年版。
秦亚青、温特,亚历山大:《建构主义的发展空间》,《世界经济与政治》2005年第1期。
秦亚青:《权力?制度?文化:国际关系理论与方法研究文集》,北京大学出版社,2005年版。
秦亚青主编:《文化与国际社会:建构主义国际关系理论研究》,世界知识出版社,2006年版。
邱芝:《论欧洲一体化进程中集体认同的建构》,《世界经济与政治论坛》2007年第4期。
苏长和:《理性主义、建构主义与世界政治研究——兼评世界政治理论的探索与争鸣》,《国际政治研究》2006年第2期。
孙吉胜:《国际关系中的言语与规则建构——奥努弗建构主义研究》,《世界经济与政治》2006年第6期。
王逸舟:《西方国际政治学:理论与历史》,上海人民出版社,2006年版。
韦弗尔,伊曼?奥勒主编:《未来国际思想大师》(肖锋、石泉译),北京大学出版社,2003年版。
温特,亚历山大:《国际政治的社会理论》(秦亚青译),上海人民出版,2000年版。
温特,亚历山大:《世界国家的出现是历史的必然——目的论与无政府逻辑》(秦亚青译),《世界经济与政治》,2003年第11期。
吴志成、王霞:《欧洲化及其对成员国政治的影响》,《欧洲研究》2007年第4期。
野家启一:《库恩——范式》(毕小辉译),河北教育出版社,2002年版。
袁正清:《从安全困境到安全共同体:建构主义的解析》,《欧洲研究》2003年第4期。
袁正清:《国际政治理论的社会学转向:建构主义研究》,上海人民出版社,2005年版。
袁正清:《国际政治理论的社会学转向:建构主义研究》,上海人民出版社,2005年版。
袁正清:《建构主义与外交政策分析》,《世界经济与政治》2004年第9期。
袁正清:《交往行为理论与国际政治研究——以德国国际关系研究视角为中心的一项考察》,《世界经济与政治》2006年9期。
朱立群:《加速演进的规范化进程》,《世界经济与政治》,2006年第11期。
朱宁:《安全与非安全化——哥本哈根学派安全研究》,《世界经济与政治》2003年第10期。
资中筠主编:《冷眼向洋》,生活?读书?新知—三联出版社,2000年版。
Abizadeh, Asash, "Does Collective Identity Presuppose an Other? On the Alleged Incoherence of Global Solidarity," American Political Science Review, Vol. 99, No. 1 February 2005, pp.50-58.
Adler, Emmanuel and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Anderson, Benedict, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso, 1991.
Baaz, Mikael, A Meta-Theoretical Foundation for the Study of International Relations in a Global Era: a Social Constructivist Approach, Goteborg University, 2002.
Bain,Willian, "Deconfusing Morgenthau: Moral Inquiry and Classical Realism Reconsidered," Review of International Studies, Vol. 26, 2000, pp. 445-464.
Barkin, J. Samuel,“Realist Constructivism”, International Studies Review, No.5, 2003, pp.325-342.
Branscombe, N. R., D. L. Wann, J. G Noel and J. Coleman,“In-group or Out-group Extremity: Importance of the Threatened Social Identity,”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol.19, 1993, pp. 381–388.
Brewer, Marilynn B.,“The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?”Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 55, No. 3, 1999, pp. 429-444.
Bull, Hedley and Adam Watson, (eds.) The Expansion of International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.1984.
Bull, Hedley, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London, Macmillan, 1977.
Burch, Kurt and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997.
Buzan, Barry, From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Campbell, David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998.
Carl Schmitt, Tterror, Lliberal War and the Crisis of Global Order, edited by Louiza Odysseos and Fabio Petito, London: Routledge, 2007.
Carsnaes, Walter, "The Agency-Structure Problem in Foreign Policy Analysis," International Studies Quarterly, Vol.36, No.3, 1992, pp. 245-270.
Checkel, Jeffrey T.,“Social Constructivisms in Global and European Politics:A Review Essay.”Review of International Studies,Vol. 30, No.1 ,2004, pp.229-244.
Checkel, Jeffrey T.,“The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory,”World Politics, Vol. 50, 1998, pp. 324-348.
Clark,William Roberts,“Agents and Structures: Two Views of Preferences, Two Views of Institutions,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol.42, 1998, pp.242-270.
Copeland, Dale C.,“The Constructivist Challenge to the Structural Realism,”International Security, Vol.25, No.2, 2000, pp.187-212.
Copeland, Dale,“The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A ReviewEssay,”International Security, Vol.25, No.2, pp.187-212.
Dennen, Johan M.G. van der,“Ethnocentrism and In-group/Out-group Differentiation: A Review and Interpretation of the Literature,”in Reynolds, ed., The Sociobiology of Ethnocentrism, Athens: University of Georgia, 1987, pp.1-47.
Derian, James Der, eds., International Theory: Critical. Investigations, New York: New York University Press, 1995.
Dessler, David, "What's at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate? " International Organization, Vol. 43, No. 3, 1989, pp. 441-473.
Dessler, David,“Constructivism Within a Positivist Social Science,”Review of International Studies, Vol.25, 1999, pp.123-137.
Diamond, Larry and Marc F. Plattner,eds., Nationalism, Ethnic Conflict, and Democracy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994
Dimitrakopoulos, Dionyssis G. and Hussein Kassim,“Deciding the Future of the European Union: Preference Formation and Treaty Reform,”Comparative European Politics, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2004, pp. 241-260.
Doyle, Michael W.,“Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs,”Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 12, No.3, 1983, pp. 205-235.
Dunne, Tim, Inventing International Society: A History of the English School, London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1998.
Elman, Colin,“Horses for Courses: Why Not a Neorealist Theory of Foreign Policy,”Security Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1996, p.8-59.
Evans, Mark, eds., Edinburgh Companion to Contemporary Liberalism: Evidence and Experience, London: Routledge, 2001.
Fearon, James D. and David D. Laitin,“Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War,”American Political Science Review, Vol. 97, No.1, 2003, pp.75-90.
Fearon, James D. and David D. Laitin,“Violence and the Social Construction of Ethnic Identity,”International Organization, Vol.54, No.4, 2000, pp. 845–87.
Fearon, James D.,“Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy, and Theories of International Relations,”Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.1, 1998, pp. 289-313.
Fearon, James, and Alexander Wendt,“Rationalism vs. Constructivism: A SkepticalView,”in Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth A. Simmons, eds., Handbook of International Relations, New York: Sage Publications, 2002, pp.52-72.
Fierke, Karin M.,“Critical Methodology and Constructivism,”in Karin M. Fierke and Knud Erik Jorgensen, eds., Constructing International. Relations: The Next Generation, New York: M. E. Sharpe, 2001, pp. 115-135.
Finnemore, Martha and Kathryn Sikkink, "Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics," Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.4, 2001, pp. 391-416;
Finnemore, Martha, National Interests in International Society. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996.
Flockhart, Trine, "A Mission Bound to Fail?: The United States as Socializer of Democratic Norms in Post-War Iraq," The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, Winter/Spring 2005, pp.53-68.
Frieden, Jeffry A., "Actors and Preferences in International Relations," in Strategic Choice and International Relations, edited by David A. Lake and Robert Powell, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999, pp.39-76.
Fukuyama, Francis, The End of History and the Last Man. Free Press, 1992.
George, Jim, Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re) Introduction to International Relations, Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc., 1994.
Gofas, Andreas,“Structure, Agency and Inter-subjectivity: Re-capturing the EMU Policy Process in a Constructivist Realist Framework,”Paper prepared for the 2nd workshop of the European Political-economy Infrastructure Consortium, May 2002. http://aei.pitt.edu/725/01/C2W3_Gofas.pdf
Grieco, Joseph M.,“Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism,”International Organization, Vol.42, No.3, 1988, pp.285-507.
Guzzini, Stefano and Anna Leander, eds., Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and His Critics, London & New York: Routledge, 2006.
Guzzini, Stefano, "Structural Power: The Limits of Neorealist Power Analysis,"International Organization, Vol. 47, No. 3, 1993, pp. 443-478.
Guzzini, Stefano,“A Reconstruction of Constructivism in International Relations,”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.6, No.2, 2000, pp.147-183.
Guzzini, Stefano, Realism in International Relations in and International Political Economy: the Continuing Story of a Death Foretold, NY: Routledge, 1998.
Guzzini, Stefano,“The Enduring Dilemmas of Realism in International Relations,”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.10, No.4, 2004, pp. 533-568.
Hagstr?m, Linus, "Relational Power for Foreign Policy Analysis: Issues in Japan’s China Policy," European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 11, No.3, 2005, pp.395-430.
Halevy, Nir, Gary Bornstein and Lilach Sagiv,“‘In-Group Love’and‘Out-Group Hate’as Motives for Individual Participation in Inter-group Conflict: A New Game Paradigm,”Psychological Science, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2008, pp. 405– 411.
Hall, Rodney Bruce, "Moral Authority as a Power Resource," International Organization, Vol.51, 1997, pp. 591-622.
Hall, Rodney,“Human Nature as Behavior and Action in Economics and International Relations Theory,”Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.9, No.3, 2006, pp. 269-287.
Hamdi, Mohamed E., "Islam and Liberal Democracy: The Limits of the Western Model," Journal of Democracy, Apr. 1996, pp. 81-85.
Hay, Colin, "Constructivist Institutionalism: Or, Why Interests into Ideas Don't Go" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Aug 31, 2006.
http://www.asu.edu/clas/polisci/cqrm/APSA2006/Hay_Constructivism.pdf Hoffmann, Matthew and Alice Ba, eds., Contending Perspectives on Global Governance: Coherence, Contestation, and World Order. London: Routledge, 2005.
Hoffmann, Matthew and Alice Ba, eds., Contending Perspectives on Global Governance: Coherence, Contestation, and World Order. London: Routledge, 2005.
Holsti, K. J.,“War, Peace, and the State of the State,”International Political Science Review, Vol. 16, No. 4, 1995, pp. 319-339.
Hopf, Ted,“The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory,”International. Security, Vol. 23, No.1, 1998, pp.171-200.
Hopf, Ted, Social Construction of International Politics: Identities and Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002.
Hughes, Barry. Continuity and Change in World Politics: The Clash of Perspectives, New Jersey:Prentice Hall, 1991.
Huntington, Samuel P.,“The Clash of Civilizations,”Foreign Affairs, Vol.72, No.3, 1993, pp. 22-50.
Huntington, Samuel, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003.
Hurd, Ian,“Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics,”International Organization, Vol.53, No.2, 1999, pp. 380-381.
Ikenberry, John, After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars, Princeton University Press, 2001.
Jackson, Patrick T. and Daniel H. Nexon,“Constructivist Realism or Realist-Constructivism?”International Studies Review, No. 6, 2004, pp.337-352.
Jackson, Patrick T., "Relational Constructivism: A War of Words," in Making Sense of International Relations Theory, ed. Jennifer Sterling-Folker, Lynne Rienner, 2005, pp. 139-155.
Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus and Daniel Nexon, Theories of International Cooperation and the Primacy of Anarchy: Explaining U.S. International Monetary Policy-Making After Bretton Woods. Albany, NY: SUNY Series in Global Politics, 2002.
Jackson, Robert and Georg Sorensen, Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches, Oxford University Press, 2007.
Jahn, Beate, The Cultural Construction of International Relations: The Invention of the State of Nature, New York: Palgrave, 2000.
Jervis, Robert, "Realism in the Study of World Politics," International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, Autumn 1998, pp. 971-991.
Jupille, Joseph, et al., "Integrating Institutions: Rationalism, Constructivism, and the Study of the European Union," Comparative Political Studies, Vol.36, 2003, No.1-2, pp.7-40.
Kacowicz, Arie M., Zones of Peace in the Third World: South America and West Africa in Comparative Perspective, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1998.
Katzenstein, Peter J., Robert O. Keohane and Stephen D. Krasner, "International Organization and the Study of World Politics ", International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998, pp. 645-685.
Katzenstein, Peter, Cultural Norms and National Security. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1996.
Kelly, C. and S. Breinlinger, The Social Psychology of Collective Action: Identity, Injustice, and Gender, London: Taylor and Francis, 1996.
Keohane Robert O. and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence, New York: Harper Collins, 1989.
Keohane, Robert O., After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton University Press, 1984.
Keyman, Emin Fuat, Globalization, State, Identity/Difference: Toward a Critical Social Theory of International Relations, New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1997.
Kiersey, Nicholas J., "World State or Global Governmentality? Constitutive Power and Resistance in a Post-Imperial World," Global Change, Peace & Security, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2008, pp. 357-374.
Krasner, Stephen D., Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999.
Kratochwil, Friedrich, Rules, Norms, and Decisions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Kukla, Andre, Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Science, London: Routledge, 2000.
La?di, Zaki,“Are European Preferences Shared by Others ?”speech given at the Conference sponsored by CERI, Centre d’Etudes Européennes de Sciences Po and held in Paris on 23-24th of June 2006.
http://www.garnet-eu.org/fileadmin/documents/events/5.1.1%20Conference%20Programme.pdf
Lang, Andrew T. F.,“Reconstructing Embedded Liberalism: John Gerard Ruggie and Constructivist Approaches to the Study of the International Trade Regime,”Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 9, No. 1, March 2006 pp. 81-116.
Lapid, Yosef and Friedrich Kratochwil (eds.) The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory, Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1996.
Lebow, Richard Ned, The Tragic Vision of Politics. Ethics, Interests and Orders, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Legro, Jeffrey W. and Andrew Moravcsik,“Is Anybody Still a Realist?”International Security, Vol. 24, No. 2, 1999, pp.5-55.
Levy, Daniel, Max Pensky and John Torpey, Old Europe, New Europe and Core Europe: Transatlantic Relations after the Iraq War, London: Verso, 2005.
Linklater, Andrew, The Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian Era, Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998.
Locher, Birgit and Elisabeth Prügl, " Feminism and Constructivism: Worlds Apart or Sharing the Middle Ground? " International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 45, No. 1, 2001, pp. 111-129.
Lott, Anthony D., Creating Insecurity: Realism, Constructivism, and U.S. Security Policy, Ashgate, 2004.
Magnus Ericson,“A Realist Stable Peace: Power, Threat and the Development of a Shared Norwegian-Swedish Democratic Security Identity 1905-1940.”Lund: Department of Political Science, 2000. http://de.scientificcommons.org/magnus_ericson
March, James G., and Johan P. Olson,“The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Order,”International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1998, pp. 943-969.
Mattern, Janice B.,“Power in Realist-Constructivism Research,”International StudiesReview, No.6, 2004, pp. 343-346.
McSweeney, Bill, Security, Identity and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Mearsheimer, John J., "A Realist Reply," International Security, Vol. 20, No. 1, 1995, pp. 82-93.
Mearsheimer, John J., The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton, 2001.
Mearsheimer, John,“The False Promise of International Institutions,”International Security, Vol.19, No.3, 1994/95, pp. 37-47.
Mercer, Jonathan, "Anarchy and Identity," International Organization, Vol.49, No.2, 1995, pp. 229-252;
Milner, Helen, "International Theories of Cooperation among Nations: Strengths and Weakness," World Politics, Vol.44, No.3, 1992, pp.466-496.
Moravcsik, Andrew, "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics." International Organization, Vol. 51, No.4, 1997, pp.513-553.
Moravcsik, Andrew, "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics." International Organization, Vol. 51, No.4, 1997, pp. 513-553.
Mottola, Kari,“The European Union as a Critic of the International Order: the Power of a Normative Power,”paper submitted on International Studies Association (ISA) Annual Convention, 2007. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/8/0/5/3/p180536_index.html
Mouffe, Chantal, The Return of the Political. London-New York: Verso, 1993. Nau, Henry, At Home Abroad: Identity and Power in American Foreign Policy. Ithaca Cornell University Press, 2002.
Neumann, Iver B.,“Self and Other in International Relations,”European Journal of International Relations,Vol. 2, No.2, 1996, pp.139-174..
Nexon, Daniel, and Patrick Jackson,“Paradigmatic Faults: Why The Divisions Between 'Schools' of IR Theory Aren't All They're Cracked Up To Be.”Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Mar 17, 2004.http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/7/3/5/7/p73575_index.html
Olson, Mancur, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Harvard University Press, 1971.
Onuf, Nicholas G.,“A Constructivist Manifesto”, in eds., Kurt Burch and Robert A. Denemark, Constructing International Political Economy, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1997, pp.7-17.
Onuf, Nicholas J., World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations, Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1989.
Oye, Kenneth A., Cooperation under Anarchy, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986.
Paris, Roland,“Peacebuilding and the Limits of Liberal Internationalism,”International Security, Vol. 22, No. 2, 1997, pp. 54-89.
Parsons, Craig, "Constructivism Can Be as Causal as Anything Else," Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Aug 31, 2006. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p152834_index.html
Patom?ki, Heikki and Colin Wight,“After Postpositivism? The Promises of. Critical Realism,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 44 , No. 1, pp.222.
Peleg, Ilan,“The Zionist Right and Constructivist Realism: Ideological Persistence and Tactical Readjustment,”Israel Studies,Vol.10, No.3, 2005, pp. 127-153.
Perdue, Charles W., John F. Dovidio, Michael B. Gurtman and Richard B. Tyler,“Us and Them: Social Categorization and the Process of Inter-group Bias," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.59, No.3, pp.475-486.
Pinakas, Thanasis, "The Notion of Solidarity in European Foreign Policy: A Realist-Constructivist Approach" Paper presented at the Research student conference on European foreign policy, LSE - 2-3 July 2004. http://www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/intrel/EFPC/Papers/Pinakas.doc
Price, Richard and Christian Reus-Smit,“Dangerous Liaisons? Critical International Theory and Constructivism.”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.4,pp. 259-294.
Regan Patrick M., Civil Wars and Foreign Powers: Outside Intervention in Intrastate Conflict. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2000.
Reus-Smit, Christian, "Imagining Society: Constructivism and the English School," British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 4, No. 3, 2002 , pp. 487-509.
Reus-Smit, Christian,“The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the. Nature of Fundamental Institutions,”International Organization, Vol.51, No.4, 1997, pp. 555-589.
Rishi, Pooja, "(Re)Constructing Constructivism: Bringing Governmentality In". Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association 48th Annual Convention, Hilton Chicago, Feb 28, 2007. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p179929_index.html
Risse, Thomas,“'Let's Argue!' Communicative Action in International Relations,”International Organization, Vol. 54, No.1, 2000, pp.1-39.
Risse, Thomas,“Let's Argue: Communicative Action in World Politics,”International Organization, Vol. 54, No. 1, 2000, pp. 1-39.
Risse-Kappen, Thomas,“Collective Identity in a Democratic Community: The Case of NATO,”In Peter J. Katzenstein, ed., The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics, New York: Columbia University Press 1996, pp.357-399.
Ruggie, John G., "What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge,”International Organization, Vol.52, No.4, p.856.
Ruggie, John,“International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Post-War Economic Order,”International Organization, Vol. 36, pp. 379-415.
Ruggie, John, Constructing the World Polity:Essays on internationalization, London and New York: Routledge, 1998.
Ruggie,John G., "Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward aNeorealist Synthesis," World Politics, Vol. 35, No. 2, January 1983, pp.261-285.
Russett, Bruce, "A Neo-Kantian Perspective on Democracy, Interdependence and International Organizations in Building Security Communities", in Emmanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.368-394.
Russett, Bruce, "A Neo-Kantian Perspective on Democracy, Interdependence and International Organizations in Building Security Communities", in Emmanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp.368-394.
Schmitt, Carl, The Concept of the Political, trans., George Schwab. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
Sending, Ole Jacob,“Constitution, Choice, and Change: Problems with the‘Logic of Appropriateness’and its Use in Constructivist Theory,”European Journal of International Relations, Vol.8, No.4, 2002, pp.443-470.
Singer, J. David,“The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations,”American Foreign Policy: Theoretical Essays, ed. G. John Ikenberry. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1989, pp.77-92.
Smith, Steve,“Foreign Policy Is What States Make of It: Social Construction and International Relations Theory.”In V. Kubalkova,ed., Foreign Policy in a Constructed World. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp.38-55.
Steele, Brent, "The Reflexive Realists," Paper presented at the British International Studies Association annual meeting Cork, Ireland, December 2006. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/7/8/4/9/p178496_index.html
Steele, Brent,“Eavesdropping on Honored Ghosts': from Classical to Reflexive Realism,”Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.10, No. 3, 2007, pp. 272-300.
Steele, Brent,“Liberal-Idealism: A Constructivist Critique.”International Studies Review, No.9, 2007, pp. 23-52.
Sterling-Folker, Jennifer,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting,Reconstructing, or Rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2002, pp.73-79.
Sterling-Folker, Jennifer,“Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting, Reconstructing, or Rereading”, International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, pp.73-97.
Sterling-Folker, Jennifer,“Realism and the constructivist challenge: rejecting, reconstructing, or rereading,”International Studies Review, Vol.4, No.1, 2002, pp. 73-97.
Sterling-Folker, Jennifer, Theories of International Cooperation and the Primacy of Anarchy: Explaining U.S. International Monetary Policy-Making After Bretton Woods. Albany, NY: SUNY Series in Global Politics, 2002.
Thomas, Ashley,“The Peloponnesian War: A Constructivist Account of International Politics.”Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, 2004. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/6/0/0/2/p60025_index.html
Thompson, William R., Evolutionary Interpretations of World Politics,. New York: Routledge, 2001.
Tickner, J. Ann, Gender in International Relations: Feminist. Perspectives on Achieving Global Security, New York: Columbia University, 1992.
Varadarajan, Latha,“Constructivism, identity and neoliberal (in)security,”Review of International Studies,Vol.30, 2004, pp.319-341.
Waever, Ole,“The Rise and Fall of the Inter-Paradigm Debate,”in Steve Smith, Ken Booth and Marysia Zalewski, eds., International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, pp.149-185.
Walker, R. B. J., "Realism, Change, and International Political Theory," International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 31, No. 1, March 1987, pp. 65-86.
Walker, R.B.J., Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Walt, Stephen,“International Relations: One World, Many Theories,”Foreign Policy,Vol.29, 1998, pp. 29-45.
Wendt, Alexander, "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics,”International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2, 1992, p. 394.
Wendt, Alexander, "Why a World State is Inevitable: Teleology and the Logic of Anarchy," European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2003, pp. 491-542.
Wendt, Alexander,“On Constitution and Causation in International Relations,”Review of International Studies, Vol. 24, 1998, pp.101-118.
Wendt, Alexander, Social Theory of International Politics, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Wendt, Alexander,“The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory,”International. Organization, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1987, pp. 335-370;
Wight, Colin, Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology. Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Wildavsky, Aaron,“Choosing Preferences by Constructing Institutions: A Cultural Theory of Preference Formation,”The American Political Science Review, Vol. 81, No. 1, 1987, pp. 3-22.
Williams, Michael C.,“Why Ideas Matter in International Relations: Hans Morgenthau Classical Realism and the Moral Construction of Power.”International Organization, Vol. 58, 2004, pp. 633-665.
Williams, Michael C.,“Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,”International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 511– 531.
Williams, Michael C., The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations, Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Winnerstig, Michael,“Shared Values or Power Politics? Transatlantic Security Relations 1981-94,”Stockholm, Swedish Institute for International Affairs, 1996. http://www.nato.int/structur/library/bibref/transatlantic.pdf