Neorealism and Its Critics

Keohane organizes the volume into three parts. First, four core chapters from Waltz's Theory of International Politics (1979) are reprinted to present neorealism's foundational claims: laws and theories, reductionist and systemic theories, political structures, and anarchic orders and balances of power . Second, five critical essays from scholars published between 1981 and 1984 follow, representing different theoretical perspectives—John Ruggie on continuity and transformation, Keohane on structural realism and beyond, Robert Cox on social forces and world orders, Richard Ashley on the poverty of neorealism, and Robert Gilpin on the richness of political realism . Third, Waltz writes a new response addressing his critics .

The critics raise several fundamental objections. John Ruggie argues that Waltz's theory contains only a logic of reproduction, lacking any logic of transformation—it cannot explain change in the international system . Keohane concludes that realism is better at explaining why we are in an anarchic predicament than how to escape it . Robert Cox and Richard Ashley, writing from Marxist and critical perspectives, treat neorealism as an intellectual product of Western imperialism, condemned to obsolescence with capitalism itself . Barry Buzan's review notes that Ashley and Cox operate from an epistemological divide: Waltz works in the positivist tradition while they prefer historicist, situational modes of thought .

Waltz's response, titled 'Reflections on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critics,' defends his systemic approach against accusations that it neglects change, economic structures, and unit-level factors . He accepts Cox's classification of his work as 'problem-solving theory' but argues that this limitation is deliberate: his purpose is narrow and specific, seeking only to separate system-level from unit-level analysis to theorize structure's effects . Buzan argues that many criticisms miss the point—Waltz was not attempting a complete theory of international relations, and attacks that he ignores economics or says little about units are therefore irrelevant to his project .

Barry Buzan's review in International Affairs argues that despite the high quality of individual papers, the overall debate fails to communicate effectively across epistemological divides. Waltz writes with notable clarity, yet 'he has clearly failed to communicate his purpose to some of the best minds currently working in the field' . Buzan contends that Keohane and Ruggie, despite sharing Waltz's positivist position, treat his theory as if it were meant to be complete and castigate it for shortcomings on that basis. He concludes that the debate process is 'less coherent and less constructive than it might have been,' and that the more productive path would have been to build on Waltz's systemic starting point rather than criticize it for not being something else .

The book is widely assigned in graduate and advanced undergraduate courses as a comprehensive introduction to the neorealism debate. As one reviewer notes, 'if you are looking to understand the fundamentals of current international relations theory and the debate that surrounds its future direction, this is a unique and invaluable book' . Another emphasizes that while it should not be considered elementary reading, for senior students and academics it 'presents a wonderful review of the arguments' . The debate format—core theory, critical essays, and the theorist's rebuttal—makes the volume an effective teaching tool that illustrates how theoretical disagreements unfold in the discipline .