Christian Reus-Smit - Contribution To International Relations Theory

Contribution To International Relations Theory

Reus-Smit’s most significant contribution to the field is reflected in his answer to the question of the 'enigma of fundamental institutions,' laid out in 'The Moral Purpose of the State.' Here he analysed the different practices and norms of very different international societies, including ancient Greece, the Renaissance city-states and the modern states system. He argued that underpinning each is an assemblage of three elements that he refers to as 'constitutional structures.'

“Constitutional structures are coherent ensembles of intersubjective beliefs, principles and norms that perform two functions in ordering international societies: they define what constitutes a legitimate actor entitled to all the rights and privileges of statehood: and they define the basic parameters of rightful state action.”

These three intersubjective, normative elements are:

1. An hegemonic belief about the moral purpose of the state
2. An organizing principle of sovereignty
3. A norm of pure procedural justice

This hegemonic belief about the moral purpose of the state is arguably the most important, because it provides the normative basis on which the other two develop. As Reus-Smit puts it: ‘historically different international societies, in which different ideals of legitimate statehood prevailed, have developed different institutional orders, with multilateral diplomacy and contractual international law only emerging in a world where liberal states, and their principles of governance, have been ascendent’.

Other early work explored the relationship between critical international theory and constructivism. One of the key arguments he presented in an early article he co-authored with Richard Price ‘Dangerous liaisons? Critical international theory and constructivism’, is that constructivism, in spite of its engagement with the mainstream ‘on issues of interpretation and evidence, generalizations, alternative explanations and variation and comparability’, remains compatible with critical international theory.