| This study is about structural theorizing in International Relations. Based on a review of current theories of International Relations, it argues that current approaches are not purely structural but hybrid theories composed of conflicting unit and structural level assumptions, which produce internally inconsistent theories and externally partial depictions of international politics. The study attempts to develop a purely structural theoretical framework that argues that international structure, which is composed of anarchy and the distribution of power, shapes state identities, motivations, behaviors and international outcomes. In anarchic systems, units struggle neither for power nor for security. International politics is a struggle for autonomy. Units populating anarchic systems are concerned with sustaining their autonomy and a system is anarchic if the units can rely on their own capabilities in a specific distribution of power. In concentrated power structures, states are concerned with sustaining the status quo but take offensive actions which tend to produce minor conflicts rather than major systemic wars. In distributed power structures, states are concerned with change but take defensive actions that tend to produce major systemic wars. The study measures these theoretical predictions against the history of the Cold War. The case study is divided into three time periods according to the specific power structures: concentrated (1945-1957) and (1979-1991) eras and an intervening distributed power structure (1957-1979). It is concluded that the history of the Cold War provides strong support for the arguments developed on state motivations, behaviors and their international outcomes. While the first and third eras of the Cold War were characterized by status quo-oriented motivations and centrifugal, aggressive behaviors in the periphery, the second era was characterized by change-oriented motivations and centripetal defensive behaviors on the central issue areas. While the first and third eras can be characterized as the times of minor conflicts, the second era was the time of the real Cold War that consists of major superpower confrontations. |
