Neoclassical realism and small states: systemic constraints and domestic filters in Georgia’s foreign policy

Abstract

Unlike structural realism, neoclassical realism focuses on how the interaction between systemic and unit-level variables influences foreign policy. This article assesses neoclassical realism against two alternative accountsbalance of threat and economic dependenceto explain change in Georgia's foreign policy. While structural realism highlights how the external security environment shapes general tendencies in foreign policy, specific strategies depend largely on unit-level factors, specifically elite cohesion and state capacity. The analysis of primary sources and exclusive interviews with high-level policy-makers suggests that neoclassical realism affords a more nuanced and precise account of foreign policy change over time than structural realism.

Balancing with Jokowi’s Characteristics: A Neoclassical Realism Approach to Indonesia’s Foreign and Security Policies in the South China Sea

“…In addition to the works reviewed by Rose, a number of important works employing neoclassical realism have been published (Brown et al, 1995;Christensen, 1996;Schweller, 1998;Wohlforth, 1993;Zakaria, 1998). The neoclassical realism framework had been applied to explain cases ranging from the US expansion in the post-Cold War era (Onea, 2012), Iranian foreign policy (Juneau, 2015), EU and NATO relations with Russia (Diesen, 2016), Taiwan's cross-strait relations (Chen, 2015), the North Korean nuclear test (Nakato, 2012), Japan's security policy (Saltzman, 2015), Japan and South Korea's security policy (Yoo, 2012), US-China relations (He, 2017), Australian foreign policy (McLean, 2016) and small states' behaviour (Gvalia et al, 2019). (Ripsman et al, 2016) was probably the most ambitious neoclassical realism project so far.…”

Forum: Rethinking Neoclassical Realism at Theory's End

“…Perceptions of national interests and domestic support matter for Indonesian policy vis-à-vis foreign separatists (Sari 2018). NCR analyzes not only Western cases, great powers, or democracies but can also contribute to the study of non-Western cases, including smaller, postcolonial or authoritarian states (Kropatcheva 2012;Romanova 2012;Yoo 2012;Sørensen 2013;Becker et al 2016;Ichihara 2017;Gelot and Welz 2018;Gvalia, Lebanidze, and Siroky 2019). Finally, because NCR focusses on decision-makers, it introduces subjectivity and lived experience that affect leader beliefs and decision-making styles.…”

Realist avenues to global International Relations

“…This shows that NCR analyzes not only democracies or Western great powers. NCR can contribute to studying great and small powers beyond the West—including postcolonial and authoritarian states (or a combination thereof) (Balci et al, 2018; Becker et al, 2016; Götz, 2017; Gvalia et al, 2019; Wivel, 2016).…”

“…They might also span states in Asia, Africa, and Latin America that neoclassical realists study. Gvalia, Lebadnize, and Siroky use primary documents and elite interviews with local decision-makers to assess neorealism’s and NCR’s explanatory power for Georgian foreign policy (Gvalia et al, 2019). Korolev and Portyakov investigate Chinese and Russian responses to international crises in respectively post-Soviet and Chinese spheres (Korolev and Portyakov, 2018).…”