Neorealism, neoclassical realism and the problem(s) of history

Following scholarship on IR’s ‘historical turn’ as well neorealism and neoclassical realism, this article finds fault particularly in neorealism’s implicit reliance the historically contingent but incompletely conceptualised transmission of systemic factors into state behaviour. Instead, it suggests that realism (NCR) is well-suited to leveraging ‘history’ systematic general explanation. This interrogates two routes towards a sensitive NCR (intervening variables structural modifiers), how they enable different operationalisations sequence events, cognitive tool or collective narrative. The first route history underpins concepts currently used by realists. Here, more easily operationalised allows clearer view at learning emulation processes. It also clearly scoped, therefore less ‘costly’ terms paradigmatic distinctiveness. second route, which modifies incentives constraints, theoretically challenging especially differentiating from constructivist approaches, lends itself theorising change. Both provide fruitful avenues for realist theorising, can serve emancipate IR foster cross-paradigmatic dialog. Examining be leveraged interrogating other ‘mainstream’, positivist approaches should leverage historical contingency, context evidence explain international processes outcomes.