A Study Of The State Behavior In The Perspective Of Structural Realism

The development history of International Relations in 20th century is the competition history of various theoretical paradigms. After Morgenthau established the discipline position of Realist School, Realist School acts as an arena host of inter-paradigm debates in each period, which goes through the violent theoretical arguments and responses to the new development of International political reality according to the current situations. It achieves the self-update, self-development and self-surpass in theoretical configuration in continuous self-amended process and takes on a continuous tradition in the course of the theoretical development. It is obvious that there is strong vitality and profound influence in it. Therefore, it is regarded as "a perpetual flag". Since the Nation-state is founded, the logic of the state behavior becomes regular nightmare of the researchers of international relations. Until modern times, there is great betterment in persistent quest. Morgenthau's Humanity Realism and Waltz's Structural Realism make each distinct theoretical contribution in the research on the state behavior. However, the theoretical frame of Humanity Realism is filled with more empirical contents, pays more attention to historical empirical analysis and misses scientific and theoretical deduction. Exactly, Structural Realism makes up this deficiency. If Morgenthau's Humanity Realism can be regarded as the philosophical works on the nature and content of international politics which exhibit the classical tableau about struggle for power and position among the nations, Waltz's Structural Realism is a frame or general theory on the scientific theoretical explanation of the structure of international system which outguess the logic of the state behavior. Therefore Structural Realism is named as "the Realism of behavioral science". Hence, this paper chooses Structural Realism as the general theoretical frame which may work out the riddle of the state behavior, but the research doesn't insist on the formed opinion, rebuilds an assistant hypothesis in reason.On the research programme, this paper is compartmentalized for three big parts:Part 1: the perspective of the state behavior of Structural RealismThe 1st part firstly sums up the perspective of the state behavior of Structural Realism theoretically, and briefly discourses upon the meaning definition and type partition of the state behavior and the structure of international system, moreover, explains the function mechanism about the structure of international system acting on the state behavior.This paper points out that Structural Realism reforms the traditional approach of the research on the state behavior: from paying attention to the humanity and the national inner constitution to focusing on the definition and review of the structure of international system and its effects. Then, it briefly discourses upon the meaning definition and type partition of the state behavior and the structure of international system, divides the type of the state behavior into the types of cooperation and conflict and divides the structure of international system into systematic "deep structure" --international anarchy and systematic "distributed structure"--the power distribution situation among the international behavioral actors. Finally, through the analogy with "the structure of market restricting and shaping company behavior" in the microeconomics, it points out the function mechanism of the structure of international system shaping and restricting the state behavior through socialization of the actors and competition among them.Part 2: The theoretical evaluation: value and deficiencyThe 2nd part carries through the pertinent theoretical evaluation on Structural Realism from theoretical value and theoretical deficiency and points out that the key theoretical deficiency is the absence of interaction mechanism between the structure of international system and the state behavior, which makes a great distribution to tentatively modifying and combinedly rebuilding this deficiency in virtue of "agent-structure" interactive mutually-constructed model from Constructivism.In the guidance of dialectical perspective, this paper goes along the pertinent theoretical evaluation, attributes the theoretical contribution to two aspects: one is the reform of the research perspective, Structural Realism regards the structure of international system as the primary reason of the state behavior; the other is the methodology contribution, Structural Realism introduces structuralism methodology and magically operates levels of analysis. In explaining the theoretical deficiency of Structural Realism, this paper mostly emphasizes the absence of interaction mechanism between the structure of international system and the state behavior. Moreover, it points out the pertinacity inclination of Structural Realism and the single dimension of "agent-structure" interactive mutually-constructed model.Part 3: tentatively modify an assistant hypothesis of Structural RealismThe 3rd part mainly emphasize that it tentatively modifies an assistant hypothesis of Structural Realism in virtue of "agent-structure" interactive mutually-constructed model from Constructivism. Hereon, it illuminates that Structural Realism and Constructivism are both system-level theory and structuralist theory, which lays the foundation for organic synthesis between the two theories.In the aspect of feasibility, this part is mainly in virtue of the theory of symbolic interaction and science philosophy. In the field of science philosophy, it mainly bases on Lakatos's "the methodology of scientific research programmes", by which it deduces the possibility of inter-paradigm commensuration and conversion and points out that Structural Realism itself provides some space for developing further. Before the concrete operation, it brings forward three demands: regarding "distributed structure" as only "creative structure"; appropriately expanding the flexibility space of its explanation category; making the history perspective of evolution evident. In the course of concrete operation, it puts forward and defines the concept of "State Activity". Subsequently, state actors energetically exert "State Activity", the approach by which state actors acts on the structure of international system is the balance of power mechanism, and accordingly it establishes "agent-structure" interactive mutually-constructed model more abundantly. The logic of the state behavior is not passively adapted to forced restriction of the structure of international system, but actively and promisingly shapes the international system which is beneficial for its relative power and position.The commending originality of this research is that it introduces and defines the concept of "State Activity", which does no damage to intrinsic simplicity and power of this theory. Its aim points to consummating and developing Waltz's Structural Realism, promotes its explanation power and expands its explanation category, and thus in a certain sense it embodies originality.Therefore, the critique this paper makes is not subversive but constructive, which doesn't contrive to destroy it and achieves its development and synthesis with other theories in the process of its critique.This theoretical attempt, of course, goes with a certain theoretical risks, but risks are accompanied with profits. If successful, it will be a prominent theoretical contribution. Hence, I would like to take these theoretical risks of promoting the research of the state behavior and deepening the comprehension of Structural Realism. I wish this research will make its contribution to the development of the theory of international relations.