Abstract
The paper examines the claim that Europe is committed to a Kantian liberal model of international order, while the United States is committed to a Hobbesian realist model of international order. The paper argues that the realist approach to international order is more plausible than the liberal approach. Furthermore, the realist approach to international order remains fully consistent with the project of European political integration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Archibugi, D. (1992) ‘Models of International Organization in Perpetual Peace Projects’, Review of International Studies 18(4): 295–317.
Ash, T.G. (2004a) Free World: America, Europe, and the Surprising Future of the West, New York: Random House.
Ash, T.G. (2004b) ‘What to do about Bush’, Guardian, 11 November.
Beer, S.H. (1993) To Make a Nation: The Rediscovery of American Federalism, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Doyle, M. (1983) ‘Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Policy, Parts 1 and 2’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 12, 205–235; and 12, 323–353.
Doyle, M. (1986) ‘Kant: Liberalism and World Politics’, American Political Science Review 80(4): 1151–1169.
Fukuyama, F. (2004) ‘Atlantic Avenue’, Commentary, 1 December.
Habermas, J. (2004) Der Gespaltene Westen, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Haseler, S. (2004) Super-State: The New Europe and Its Challenge to America, London: I.B. Taurus.
Hinsley, F.H. (1963) Power and the Pursuit of Peace, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hobbes, T. (1990) Leviathan, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Howorth, J. and Keeler, J.T.S. (eds.) (2003) Defending Europe: The EU, NATO and the Quest for European Autonomy, London: Palgrave.
Hurrell, A. (1990) ‘Kant and the Kantian Paradigm in International Relations’, Review of International Studies 16(3): 183–205.
Hutton, W. (2002) The World We’re In, London: Little Brown.
Ikenberry, J. (2001) After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Building of Order after Major Wars, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Judt, T. (2003) ‘America and the World’, New York Review of Books, 10 April.
Kagan, R. (2002) ‘Power and Weakness’, Policy Review 113, 1–18.
Kagan, R. (2003) Of Power and Weakness: America and Europe in the New World Order, New York: Knopf.
Kant, I. (1983) Perpetual Peace and Other Essays, Indianapolis: Hackett.
Keohane, R. (2002) ‘Ironies of Sovereignty: The European Union and the United States’, Journal of Common Market Studies 40(4): 743–765.
Krauthammer, C. (2001) ‘The New Unilateralism’, Washington Post, 8 June.
MacCormick, N. (1999) Questioning Sovereignty: Law, State, and Nation in the European Commonwealth, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mearsheimer, J. (2001) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton.
Miller, D. (1998) ‘The Left, the Nation-State, and European Citizenship’, Dissent 45(3): 47–51.
Moravcsik, A. (2002) ‘The Quiet Superpower’, Newsweek, 17 June.
Morgan, G. (2003) ‘Hayek, Habermas, and European Integration’, Critical Review 15(1–2): 1–22.
Morgan, G. (2005) The Idea of a European Superstate: Public Justification and European Integration, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Nye, J. (2002) The Paradox of American Power: Why the World's Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone, New York: Oxford University Press.
Nye, J. (2004) Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, New York: Public Affairs.
Owen, J. (1997) Liberal Peace, Liberal War: American Politics and International Security, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Rakove, J. (1982) The Beginnings of National Politics: An Interpretive History of the Continental Congress, Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Reid, T.R. (2004) The United States of Europe: The New Superpower and the End of American Supremacy, New York: Penguin Press.
Rifkin, J. (2004) The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future is Quietly Eclipsing the American, New York: Penguin.
Rose, G. (1998) ‘Review Article: Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy’, World Politics 51(1): 144–172.
Schmitter, P.C. (2000) How to Democratise the European Union … And Why Bother?, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Tocqueville, A.de (1969) Democracy in America, New York: Harper and Row.
Walt, S. (1987) The Origins of Alliances, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Walt, S. (1998) ‘The Ties that Fray: Why Europe and America Are Drifting Apart’, The National Interest 54(Winter 1998/99): 3–11.
Walt, S. (2002) ‘Keeping the World ‘Off-Balance’: Self Restraint and US Foreign Policy’ in J. Ikenberry (ed.) America Unrivalled: The Future of the Balance of Power, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 121–154.
Waltz, K. (1979) Theory of International Politics, New York: John Wiley.
Waltz, K. (1993) ‘The Emerging Structure of International Politics’, International Security 18(2): 44–79.
Waltz, K. (1999) ‘Globalization and Governance’, PS: Political Science & Politics 32(4): 693–700.
Waltz, K. (2002) ‘Structural Realism after the Cold War’ in J. Ikenberry (ed.) America Unrivalled: The Future of the Balance of Power, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 29–68.
Wight, M. (1987) ‘An Anatomy of International Thought’, Review of International Studies 13(3): 221–227.
Zakaria, F. (1998) From Wealth to Power: The Unusual Origins of America's World Role, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morgan, G. realism and european political integration: the lessons of the united states. Eur Polit Sci 4, 199–208 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210022
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210022