19
Constructivism distinguishes itself as a theory of international relations by drawing
attention to the normative contexts within which leaders define their states’ national interests and
by analyzing how states’ identities help to shape their goals. It holds that, “Interests do not exist
to be ‘discovered’ by self-interested, rational actors. Interests are constructed through a process
of social interaction” (Katzenstein, 1996, 2). The kind of argument that constructivism wants to
make about the way international relations operate is particularly directed against the two
prevailing IR theories, neorealism and neoliberalism. These theoretical perspectives explain
states’ behavior in international politics by arguing that states rationally pursue their material
interests in ways that are determined primarily by their power position within the international
system (Waltz, 1979, Keohane, 1986). Obviously, neorealism and neoliberalism differ in crucial
respects, most notably in the attention they give to economic concerns and the possibilities they
see for international cooperation, but they are completely consistent in their guiding assumptions
about international behavior as being exclusively defined as the rational pursuit of material self-
interests. As John Gerard Ruggie explains, “Both take the existence of international anarchy for
granted, though they may differ as to its precise causal force. Both stipulate that states are the
primary actors in international politics. Both stipulate further that the identities and interests of
states are given, a priori and exogenously—that is to say, external and unexplained within the
terms of their theories. On that basis, both assume that states are rational actors maximizing their
own expected utilities, defined in material terms as power, security, and welfare” (Ruggie, 2001,
96-97). Ruggie thus groups the two theories together under the heading “neo-utilitarianism” to
emphasize their shared emphasis on the rational pursuit of material interests. Neo-utilitarian
theories were unable to explain how the Cold War could end as it did, and constructivists have
therefore set about trying to fill in their (large) gaps by turning to social theory.
Convention