Download - LSE Theses Online - London School of Economics and ...

power of great powers, such as the Permanent Five members of the UN SecurityCouncil. Finally, respect for the principle of non-interference assists in limiting thescope of great power action within weaker states, and also protects theconstituencies of rising regional powers from interference in their domestic affairs.Recent realist scholarship recognises the centrality of ethics to the realist politicaltradition. Indeed, Classical Realism has been singled out for possible synergies withmore normative approaches to international relations, 158 given its recognition of thesocial bases of national power, and its more differentiated view of the state,compared to neorealism. 159 Hence, classical realism is not entirely dismissive ofinternational morality, while it may have been sceptical of it. 160 Neorealism, on theother hand, would not take international morality into account at all, as this wouldbe characteristic more of an international society of states – whose existence itdenies - than an international system, and also because neorealism does notentertain the possibility that states have any other option but to obey the dictates ofa self-help anarchical system in which any but selfish actions, in the nationalinterest, would be punished by conquest or similar losses. This thesis, in positing aplace for internationalism in a neoclassical realist approach to the rise of emergingpowers, finds a place for a specific international outlook in the foreign policycalculations of states. Internationalism, an ethical stance, is a domestic-level factorthat mediates the state’s responses to external challenges and opportunities.This thesis, in examining the foreign policy postures of two emerging powers, facesa choice between internationalism as a form of morality in international politics, andinternationalism as a cloak for the national interest, or, realpolitik. Brown has argued,however, that this is a false dichotomy, as states may rarely, if ever, be expected toact without any regard for self-interest, and it is quite plausible to expect that states,like human beings, face complexity in their motivations for action: interest and158 Richard Beardsworth, “Cosmopolitanism and Realism: Towards a TheoreticalConvergence?”, Millennium, 37, No.1 (2008).159 See John Hobson, “Chapter 2: Realism”, in The State and International Relations.Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, for a comparison between the classical realistand Waltzian neorealist conceptions of the state.160 Andrew Hurrell, “Who speaks for the Global South? Emerging Powers and GlobalJustice”, paper presented at the 51 st International Studies Association Convention, NewOrleans, 17-20 February, 2010.85