AS20103

TEORI HUBUNGAN
ANTARABANGSA
KULIAH 6,

16 NOVEMBER 2020

THE ENGLISH SCHOOL (INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY)

?

“…international politics cannot be understood by using

either the dominant tradition of realism or its historic
alternative, idealism. Instead, he unrelentingly pursued
a middle course that recognized that states form an
international society, which is an arena that exhibits
more order than the realists believed but less justice
than the idealists wished.”
Hedley Bull (1932-1985)
RUJUKAN ASAS:

• Paul R. Viotti & Mark V. Kauppi, 2012,International

Relations Theory, (fifth edition), chapter 5 (The English
School: International Society & Grotian Rationalism).
• Wang Jiangli & Barry Buzan,2014, ‘The English School &
Chinese Schools of International Relations: Comparisons &
Lessons,’ The Chinese Journal of International Politics,
vol. 7, no. 1, (Spring), pp.1-46.
• Fred Halliday,1994, Rethinking International Relations,
New York: Palgrave, chapter 5 (International Society as
Homogeneity).
-2

• Robert Jackson & Georg Sorensen, 2013, Introduction

to International Relations: Theories and Approaches,
(fifth edition),New York: OUP, chapter 5 (International
Society).
• Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki & Steve Smith (eds), 2013,
International Relations Theories: Discipline &
Diversity, Oxford: OUP, pp. 132-152.
• Hedley Bull, 1977, The Anarchical Society: A Study of
Order in World Politics, London: Macmillan.
-3

• Hedley Bull, 1975, “New Directions in the Theory of

International Relations,” International Studies, vol. 14, hal.
280-290.
• John Vincent, 1986,Human Rights and International
Relations, Cambridge:CUP.
• Terry Nardin, 1983, Law, Morality and the Relations of
States, Princeton:PUP
SOALAN & PERSOALAN.

• Apakah prinsip asas the English School?

• Pada pendapat anda mana satu istilah yang anda lebih
bersetuju, the English School atau International Society?
• Apakah perbezaan aliran ini dengan aliran realism dan
liberalism?
-2

• Siapakah tokoh-tokoh utama dalam pendekatan the English

School?
• Siapa dia Hedley Bull, Martin Wight, John Vincent, Terry
Nardin dan Michael Walzer?
• Apakah karya-karya utama yang dihasilkan sarjana2 di
atas?
-3

• Adakah anda bersetuju jika dikatakan bahawa the English

School adalah lanjutan daripada first major debate? Apa
hujjah anda?
• Sejauh manakah pendekatan the English School ini dapat
menjelaskan realiti sebenar hubungan antarabangsa?
BACKGROUND OF THE ENGLISH
SCHOOL.
• During the 1950s & 1960s American scholarship dominated the
development of the IR discipline.

• In the 1970s & 1980s the IR agenda was

preoccupied with the Neo-Liberalism & Neo-
Realism debate – in the 1990s after the end of
the Cold War American predominence in the
discipline became less pronounced.
-2

• In the UK a school of IR (the English School) had existed

throughout the period of Cold War which was different in 2
ways:
i. The English School rejected the behaviouralist challenge &
emphasized the traditional approach (based on human
understanding, judgment, norms & history).
-3

ii. The English School also rejected any firm distinction

between a strict realist and a strict Liberal view of
International Relations.
ENGLISH SCHOOL –
INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY
• The name of English School is far too narrow- it overlooks
the fact that several of the English School leading figures
were not English & many were not even from the UK,
rather they were from Australia, Canada, U.S., etc.
• For that reason we also use ‘the International Society.’
WHO THE ES/IS LEADING
SCHOLARS?
• Hedley Bull-
• Terry Nardin-
• John Vincent-
• Michael Walzer-
• Martin Wight-
-1

• The ES theorists recognize the important of power in

international relations. The ES also focus on the state and
the state system, BUT
• The ES reject the narrow realist view that world politics is a
Hobbesian state of nature – in which there is no
international norms at all.
-2

• The ES view the state as the combination of a Machstaat

(power state) & a Rechtstaat (constitutional state) –power
& law are both important features of International
Relations.
• It is true that there is an international anarchy, BUT
international anarchy is a social & not an anti-social
condition.
THE ES THEORISTS & REALISTS
PERSPECTIVE.
• The ES theorists find that realists are correct
in pointing to the importance of power and
national interest.
• The view (that state would always be
preoccupied with playing the tough game of
power politics- no mutual trust) is clearly
misleading: there is warfare, but state are not
continually preoccupied with each other’s
power, nor do they conceive of that power
exclusively as a threat.
THE ES THEORISTS-LIBERAL
PERSPECTIVE.
• Liberal view-all relations between states are
governed by common rules in a perfect world
of mutual respect & the rule of law –
• That view is clearly misleading. The rule &
norms cannot by themselves guarantee
international harmony & cooperation. Power
& the balance of power still remain very
important in the anarchical society.
E.G-THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION
SYSTEM DEMONSTRATE HOW POWER &
LAW PRESENT IN INTERNATIONAL
SOCIETY.
• The Security Council is set up according to the reality of
unequal power among states. The 5 great powers are the
only permanent members with the authority to veto
decisions- that recognizes the reality of unequal power in
world politics- That is the realist power & inequality
element’ in international relations.
-2

• The General Assembly is set up according to the principle

of international equality (every member state is legally
equal to every other state; each state has one vote; the
majority rather than the most powerful prevail- that is the
liberalist common rules & norms element in International
society.
THE ES THEORISTS

• For ES theorists the study of IR is not about singling out

one of those elements (realists) & disregarding the others
(liberalists).
• The IS take a broader historical, legal & philosophical
approach to IR: power, national interests, norms &
institutions.
-2

• State are important, but so are human being.

• Statesmen have a national responsibility to their own
nation & international society- they have to follow
international law & respect the rights of other states.
CONCLUSION;

• International society/the English Schools an approach about

a world of sovereign state where power and
law/regulations are both present.
-2

• International relations is a world of states but it also a

world of human beings, and it will often be difficult to
bring two points of view the demand and claim of both.
-3

• The English School can be seen as an extension of the first

major debate (realists-liberalists debates).
• The ES builds on classical realists and liberal ideas,
combining and expanding them in ways which provides
an alternative to both.
-4

• English school adds another perspective to the first great

debate (between realism and liberalism) by rejecting the
sharp division between them.
TERIMA KASIH

•Thank you
Arigato gozaimasu,
Gambatte Kudasai
SOALAN TUTORIAL.

‘The English School perspective boleh dianggap sebagai

lanjutan daripada first major debate di antara realists dan
liberalists.’
Adakah anda bersetuju?