?
Ideology and international institutions
The International Relations discipline (IR) has seen various theories that have attempted to explain an actor’s processes, practices, and motivations in international life. After the deep moral crisis of the World Wars, IR received a certain institutional form in both the UK and the US. The first theoretical developments concerned the realist school of IR and its prominent contributors were Edward Carr’s ‘Twenty Years’ Crisis’ (1939) and Hans Morgenthau’s ‘Politics among Nations’ (1948) which justified anarchy in international relations and the natural struggle 78 BOOK REVIEWS of the only actors in politics which are nation-states. Realistic update resulted from the process’s complexity and is associated with Kenneth Waltz, John Mearsheimer, Robert Gilpin. For a long time, liberalism in the IR was hidden in the shadows and realism adherents called it idealism. However, liberalism underwent some changes during the Cold War and was registered in a logical theoretical structure called neoliberalism. John Ikenberry, Robert Keohane, Francis Fukuyama, and Joseph Nye were the founders of this school of thought. Neoliberalism, which received several branches, became the de facto leading theory after the totalitarian USSR collapsed and the unipolar moment arrival. Liberal theorists argue that after World War II multilateral order reflects the values and priorities of the United States (42). A similar trend is observed with the functionalism theory and Ernst . B has made a significant contribution to its development. The bipolar standoff’s end has revived interest in theoretical developments in IR. Many such theories as constructivism, the English and Copenhagen school’s feminism, and others. The research of Alexander Wendt, Barry Buzan, Helen V. Milner, AnneMarie Slaughter has significantly expanded the theoretical knowledge of IR, introducing new ideas and concepts. The theoretical framework enables us to understand how institutional commitments hang together and may unravel together posing challenges to the liberal institutional order. First, it is the basis, backbone, and core of the scientific approach. Second, it is around theoretical reflection and further area in which studies are built. No one scientist can pass by the bold, original and theoretical monograph ‘Ideology and International Institutions’. The book by Georgetown University Professor Erik Voeten puts forward a bold hypothesis about IR ideology and especially IGO’s. The author’s motives in writing this work are clear: He is trying to say that ideology does not feature prominently in international relations (IR) scholarship (19). The book’s purpose is not just to argue that ideological contestation matters but also to offer measures and scales – a modelling framework, and empirical illustrations.