ABSTRACT
Neoliberal institutionalism is not based on realist theory; in fact, realism specifies a wider range of systemic-level constraints on cooperation than does neoliberalism. International tensions and conflicts during the 1970s undermined liberal institutionalism and reconfirmed realism in large measure. This chapter suggests the realism, its emphasis on conflict and competition notwithstanding, offers a more complete understanding of the problem of international cooperation than does its latest liberal challenger. Neoliberal institutionalism pays attention exclusively to the former, and is unable to identify, analyze, or account for the latter. Postwar events, and especially those of the 1970s, appeared to support realist theory and to invalidate liberal institutionalism. In contrast to earlier presentations of liberal institutionalism, the newest liberalism accepts realist arguments that states are the major actors in world affairs and are unitary–rational agents. Realism and neoliberal institutionalism offer markedly different views concerning the effects of international anarchy on states.
