estrutura e processos interativos no sistema internacional
6 Considerações finais
A introdução de meios de interação ao estudo do dilema de segurança da Semiperiferia permite concluir a possibilidade de estratégias hierárquico-conscientes em qualificação e habilitação das estratégias anárquico-conscientes em sua gestão. O conceito de meios de interação como espaços de mediação do condicionamento estrutural da agência, na especificidade sócio-histórica de um conjunto de atores, engajou-se em conciliar duas ontologias da interação política internacional, a anárquica e a hierárquica. Buscaram-se as covalências e prevalências de maneira superordenada entre as abordagens, a fim de identificar as relações hierarquizadas possíveis entre atores na anarquia do Realismo Estrutural. Percebeu-se que a
14 Em termos cartesianos, a qualificação das estratégias anárquicas modifica o eixo da curva na Figura 6, sua habilitação é expressa pelo deslocamento de curva de indiferença para cima ou para cima e para a direita.
prevalência anárquica admite a covalência de comportamentos orientados tanto pela anarquia quanto pela hierarquia advinda de autoridade relacional (LAKE, 2007). Este estudo esteve a serviço de uma normatividade específica, a ampliação do leque de estratégias possíveis para atores de poder intermediário administrarem sua rígida assimetria de poder. Dessa forma, nos termos de Reus-Smit (2010), derivou-se de uma ontologia os limites da deontologia no problema em questão: discutiu-se como o que é condiciona a construção do que deve ser.
Como consequência, a relevância do aqui discutido está sujeita à possibilidade de teste da hipótese de habilitação e qualificação da gestão anárquica do dilema de segurança para a Semiperiferia. Entende-se que esse teste de hipótese deva incluir a mensuração de custos relativos das estratégias conscientes da anarquia e da hierarquia frente aos seus benefícios, tanto em matéria de segurança quanto em termos de externalidades para matérias não securitárias. Testes dessa natureza podem ser excutados em estudos de caso de um mesmo país ao longo do tempo, entre dois países semiperiféricos de uma mesma região ou, ainda, de distintas. Para tanto, é necessário avançar na operacionabilidade das dimensões descritas para complexidades de regimes15 e regiões específicas da inserção dos casos a serem estudados.
Referências
ALTER, Karen; MEUNIER, Sophie. 2009. The Politics of International Regime Complexity. Perspectives
on Politics, Vol. 7, Nº 1, p. 13-24.
ARRIGHI, Givanni. 1998. A Ilusão do Desenvolvimento. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1998.
BALDWIN, David. 1993. Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Columbia University Press.
BRAUDEL, Fernand. 1985. A Dinâmica do Capitalismo. Rio de Janeiro, Rocco.
BROOKS, Stephen; WOHLFORTH, Willian. 2008. World Out of Balance: International Relations and the
Challenge of American Primacy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
BENNET, Andrew. 2013. The mother of all isms: Causal mechanisms and structured pluralism in International Relations theory. European Journal of International Relations. Vol. 19, Nº 3, p. 459-481. BARNETT, Michael; DUVALL, Raymond. 2005. Power in International Politics. International Organization. Vol. 59, Nº 1, p. 39-75.
BURGES, Sean. 2008. Consensual Hegemony: Theorizing Brazilian Foreign Policy after the Cold War.
International Relations, Vol. 22, Nº.1, p. 64-85.
BURGES, Sean. (2013). Brazil as a bridge between old and new powers? International Affairs, Vol. 89, Nº 3, p. 577-594.
BUZAN, Barry; JONES, Charles; LITTLE, Richard. 1994. The Logic of Anarchy. New York: Columbia University Press.
BUZAN, Barry; WAEVER, Ole. 2003. Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
COX, Robert. 1983. Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method. Millennium –
Journal of International Studies, Vol. 12, p. 162-175.
DESTRADI, Sandra. 2010. “Regional Powers and their strategies: empire, hegemony and leadership.”
Review of International Studies, Vol. 36, Nº 4, p. 903-930.
DUNNE, Tim; HANSEN; WIGHT, Colin. 2013. The end of International Relations theory? European Journal
of International Relations. Vol. 19, Nº 3, p. 400-425.
ELMAN, Colin. 1996. Horses for Courses: Why not Neo-Realist Theories of Foreign Policy. Security Studies, Vol. 6, Nº 1, p. 7-53.
FAWCETT, Louise; HURRELL, Andrew. 1995. Regionalism in World Politics: Regional Organization and International Order. New York: Oxford Press.
FLEMES, Daniel. 2013. Network Powers: strategies of change in the multipolar system. Third World
Quarterly, Vol. 34, Nº 6, p. 1016 – 1036.
FRAZIER, Derrick,; STEWART-INGERSOLL, Robert. 2010. Regional Powers and Security: a framework for understanding order within regional security complexes. European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 16, Nº 4, p. 731-753.
GALTUNG, Johan. 1976. Conflict on a Global Scale: Social Imperialism and Sub-Imperialism – Continuities in the Structural Theory of Imperialism. World Development, Vol. 4, Nº 3, p. 153-165.
GILPIN, Robert. 1981. War and Change in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
GOLUB, Phillip. 2013. From the New International Economic Order to the G20: how the ‘global South’ is restructuring world capitalism from within. Third World Quarterly, Vol. 34, Nº 6, p. 1000 – 1015.
GRAMSCI, Antonio. 2006. Maquiavel. Notas sobre o Estado e a política. Cadernos do Cárcere: volume 3. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira.
HERZ, John. 1950. Idealist Internationalism and the Security Dilemma. World Politics, Vol. 2, Nº 2, p. 157–180.
HURRELL, Andrew. 2007. One World? Many Worlds? The place of regions in the study of international society. International Affairs, Vol. 83, Nº 1, p. 127-146.
HURRELL, Andrew. 2006. “Hegemony, liberalism and global order: what space for would-be great powers?.” International Affairs, Vol. 82, Nº 1, p. 1–19, 2006.
HURRELL, Andrew. 2013. “Narratives of emergence: Rising powers and the end of the Third World?”
Brazilian Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 33, Nº 2, p. 203-221.
HURRELL, Andrew. 2000. Some Reflections on the Role of Intermediate Powers in International Institutions. Latin American Program Working Paper, Woodrow Wilson Center, Nº 244.
IKENBERRY, G. John. 2011. The Future of Liberal World Order. Foreing Affairs, may/june.
KAHLER, Miles. 2013. Rising Powers and Global Governance: negotianting change in a resilient status quo. International Affairs, Vol. 89, Nº 3, p. 711-729.
KATZENSTEIN, Peter; SIL, Rudra. 2008. Eclectic theorizing in the study and practice of International Relations. In: REUS-SMIT, Christian; SNIDAL, Duncan (Eds). The Oxford Handbook of International
Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 109–130.
KEOHANE, Robert; MARTIN, Lisa. 2003. Institutional Theory as Research Program. In: ELMAN, C; ELMAN, M. (Eds.) Progress in International Relations Theory: Appraising the Field. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
KELLY, Robert. 2007. Security Theory in the ‘New Regionalism’. International Studies Review, Vol. 9, Nº 2, p. 197-229.
KEOHANE, Robert. 1969. Lilliputian’s Dilemmas: Small States in International Politics, International
Organization, Vol. 23, Nº 2, p. 291-310.
KEOHANE, R. et al. 1986. Neorealism and its critics. New York: Columbia University Press.
KEOHANE, Robert; NYE, Joseph. 1987. Power and Interdependence Revisited. International Organization, Vol. 41, Nº 4, p. 725-753.
KINDLEBERGER, Charles. 1973. The world in depression, 1929-39. Berkeley: University of California Press. KRASNER, Stephen. 1976. State Power and Structure of International Trade. World Politics, Cambridge, Vol. 28, Nº 3, p. 322-336.
KRASNER, Stephen. 1983. Transforming International Regimes: What the Third World Wants and Why.
International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 25, Nº 1, p. 119-48.
KRASNER, Stephen. 1982. Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables. International Organization, Vol. 36, Nº 2, p. 185-205.
LAKE, David 1996. Anarchy, Hierarchy, and the Variety of International Relations. International
Organizations, Vol. 50, Nº 1, p. 1-33.
LAKE, David. 2001. Beyond Anarchy: The Importance of Security Institutions. International Security, Vol. 26, Nº 1, p. 129-160.
LAKE, David. 2007. Escape from the State of Nature. Authority and Hierarchy in World Politics,
International Security, Vol.32, Nº1, p. 47–79.
LAKE, David. 1993. Leadership, Hegemony, and the International Economy: Naked Emperor or Tattered Monarch with Potential? International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 37, Nº 4, p. 459 489.
LAKE, David. 2009. Regional hierarchy: authority and local international order. Review of International Studies, Vol. 35, Nº 1, p. 35-58.
LAKE, David. 2011. Why ‘isms’ are evil: Theory, epistemology, and academic sects as impediments to understanding and progress. International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 55, Nº 2, p. 465–480.
LAKE; David; MORGAN, Patrick. 1997. Regional Orders: Building Security in a New World. Philadelphia: PennState University Press.
LAVOZCKA, Alexander. 2013. Beyond consent and coercion: using republican political theory to understand international hierarchies. International Theory, Vol. 5, Nº 3, p. 385-413.
LIMA, Maria Regina S. 2013. The Political Economy of Brazilian Foreign Policy: Nuclear Energy, Trade and
Itaipu. Brasília: Funag.
LOBO-FERNANDES, Luís. 2007. From Thucydides to Guicciardini, Permanent factors of Realism and the rise of the new Asian powers. Relações Internacionais, Vol. 16, p. 05-17.
LUCE, Matias. 2011. A teoria do subimperialismo em Ruy Mauro Marini: contradições do capitalismo
dependente e a questão do padrão de reprodução do capital: a história de uma categoria. Tese de
Doutorado. Porto Alegre: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul.
MARTIN, Lisa; SIMMONS, Beth. 2001. International Organizations and Institutions. In: CARLSNAES, W; KISSE, C; SIMMONS, B. (Eds.) Handbook of International Relations. New York: Sage.
MEARSHEIMER, John. 1994. The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security, Vol. 13, Nº 3, p. 5-49.
MEARSHEIMER, John. 2001. Tragedy of Great Powers Politics. London and New York: Norton.
MITTELMAN, James. 2013. Global Bricolage: emerging market powers and polycentric governance.
Third World Quarterly, Vol. 34, Nº1, 2013.
NARLIKAR, Amrita. 2007. All that Glitter is not Gold: India’s rise to power. Third World Quarterly, Vol. 25, Nº5, 983-996.
NARLIKAR, Amrita. 2013. Negotiating the rise of new powers. International Affairs, Vol. 89, Nº 3, p. 561-576.
NOLTE, Deltlef. 2010. How to compare regional powers: analytical concepts and research topics. Review
of International Studies, Cambridge, Vol.36, Nº4, p.881-901.
PAPE, Robert. 2005. Soft Balancing against the United States. International Security, Vol. 30, Nº 1, p. 7-45.
PAUL, Thaza V. 2005. Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy. International Security, Vol. 30, Nº 1, p. 47-71.7
PEDERSEN, Thomas. 2002. Cooperative hegemony: power, ideas and institutions in regional integration. Vol. 28, Nº 4, p. 677-696.
POSEN, Barry. 2003. Command of Commons: the military foundation of U.S. hegemony. International
Security, Vol. 28, Nº 1, summer.
POSEN, Barry. 2014. Restraint: a New Foundation for U.S. Grande Strategy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. REUS-SMIT, Christian. 2013. Beyond Metatheory? European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 19, Nº 3, p. 598-608.
RODRIGUEZ, Julio Cesar. 2012. Cordeiros ou Chacais? O Brasil frente aos desafios e oportunidades do sistema internacional. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, Vol.55, Nº 2, p. 70-89.
RUGGIE, John G. 1983. Contituity and Transformation in World Polity: Toward a New Realist Sinthesis.
World Politics, Vol. 35, Nº 2, p. 261-285.
SCHWELLER, Randall. 1994. Bandwagoning for Profit: Bringing the Revisionist State Back In.
SCHWELLER, Randall. 1996. Neorealism’s status‐quo bias: What security dilemma? Security Studies, Vol. 5, Nº 3, p. 90-121.
SCHWELLER, Randall. 2010. The logic and illogic of the security dilemma and contemporary realism: a response to Wagner’s critiques. International Theory, Vol. 2, Nº2, p. 288-305.
SCHIRM, Stephan. 2010. Leaders in need of followers: emerging powers in global governance. European
Journal of International Relations, Vol. 16, Nº 2, p. 197-221.
SIDHU, Pal; MATHA, Paratap; JONES, Bruce. 2013. Shaping the Emerging World. Washington, Brooking Institute Press.
TILLY, Charles. 2005. Indenties, Boundaries and Social Ties. Boulder and London: Paradigm. TILLY, Charles. 2003. The Politics of Collective Violence. Cambridge: Camabridge University Press. WAEVER, Ole. 1996. The rise and fall of the inter-paradigm debate. In: SMITH, Steve; BOOTH, Ken; ZALEWSKI, Marysia (eds). International Theory: Positivism and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 149–185.
WAGNER, Robert. 2007. War and The State: The Theory of International Politics. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.
WALLERSTEIN, Immanuel. 1974. The Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.
WALLERSTEIN, Immanuel. 1979. The Capitalist World-Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. WALT, Stephen. 1990. The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
WALT, Stephen; MEARSHEIMER, John. 2013. Leaving theory behind: Why simplistic hypothesis testing is bad for International Relations. European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 19, Nº 3, p. 427-457. WALTZ, Kenneth. 1979. Theory of International Politics. Berkeley: Addison-Wesley, 1979.
WALTZ, Kenneth. 2001. Men, The State and War: A Theoretical Analisis. New York: Columbia University Press.
WENDT, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge Univeristy Press. SNIDAL, Duncan; WENDT, Alexander. 2009. Where is the International Theory now? International Theory, Vol. 1, Nº 1, p. 1-14.
WENDT, Alexander; FRIEDHEIM, Daniel. 1995. Hierarchy under Anarchy: Informal Empire and the East German State. International Organization, Vol. 49, Nº 4, p. 689-721.
IKENBERRY, G. John; MATSANDUNO, Michael; WOHLFORTH, Willian (Eds). 2011. International Relations
Theory and the Consequences of Unipolarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
YOUNG, Oran. 1991. Political leadership and regime formation: on the development of institutions in international society. International Organization, Vol. 45, Nº 3, p. 281-308.
Recebido em: 06 janeiro 2015 Aceito em: 13 julho 2015