ABSTRACT
The objective of this article is to develop a novel distinction among four IR approaches by introducing a new conceptual category called ‘offensive liberalism’; this four fold division is based not only on a distinction between realism and liberalism, but also on an internal division inside each camp between offensive and defensive approaches. Indeed, besides the distinction between offensive and defensive realism, there also exists an overlooked parallel division between offensive and defensive liberalism. As I will show, this distinction goes deeper and has lasted much longer than the recent debate on the neoconservative agenda during the Bush presidency.1 While sharing the same liberal objectives, offensive and defensive liberals diverge sharply in the means they are willing to deploy to advance these aims, specifically on the desirability of the use of force in the democratisation of non-democratic societies.2
