A Comparison of Neorealism, Liberalism, and Constructivism in Analysing Cyber War

Rika Isnarti


Cyberwar can be considered as one of phenomena in International Relations. However, recently, there are not many literature about International Relations theory talking about cyber war or cyberspace generally. The phenomena of cyberspace is matter to International Relations as it involved sovereignty, state interactions and other elements in International Relations theory. On the other hand, cyber space blurs many concept in International Relations such as sovereignty is borderless in the realms of cyber space. Therefore, this articles analyses three perspectives in International Relations in analyzing cyber war. It explains what cyber war in context of International Relations, how three theories in International Relations with their elements analyses actors and interaction in cyber space. Finally, it found that Neorealism is the most adequate theory among other two theories in analyzing cyber war.

Full Text:



Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics. European Journal of International Relations, 3(3), 319-363.

Agius, C. (2013). Social constructivism. In A. Collins (Ed.), Contemporary Security Studies (3 ed., pp. 87-103): OUP Oxford.

Barlow, J. (2010). Cyber War and U.S. Policy: Part I, Neo-realism. The journal of education, community and values, 10(5), 1-11.

Burchill, S. (2005). Liberalism Theories of International Relations (3 ed., pp. 55-83). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Caplan, N. (2013). Cyber War: the Challenge to National Security. Global Security Studies, 4(1), 93-115.

Cavelty, M. D. (2010). Cyberwar. In G. Kassimeris & J. Buckley (Eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Modern Warfare (pp. 123-144). Aldershot: Ashgate.

Cavelty, M. D. (2013). Cyber security. In A. Collins (Ed.), Contemporary Security Studies (3 ed., pp. 361-378): OUP Oxford.

Choucri, N. (2012). Cyberpolitics in International Relations. Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Choucri, N., & Goldsmith, D. (2012). Lost in cyberspace: Harnessing the Internet, international relations, and global security. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 68(2), 70-77.

Clarke, R. A., & Knake, R. (2010). Cyber War: The Next Threat to National Security and What to Do About It: HarperCollins.

CNN. (2009, 8 July 2009). U.S. government sites among those hit by cyberattack. Retrieved 1 June, 2015, from http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/07/08/government.hacking/index.html?iref=24hou rs

Dunne, T, Kurki, M., & Smith, S. (2013). International Relations Theories. Oxford: OUP Oxford.

Eriksson, J., & Giacomello, G. (2006). The Information Revolution, Security, and International Relations: (IR) relevant Theory? International Political Science Review, 27(3), 221-244.

Gorman, S., Cole, A., & Dreazen, Y. (2009, April 21, 2009). Computer Spies Breach Fighter-Jet Project. Retrieved 1 June 2015, 2015, from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124027491029837401

Guilliatt, R. (2015, 2 May 2015). Interpol alerted as teenage hacker from Perth flees to Europe. Retrieved 1 June 2015, 2015, fromhttp://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/interpol-alerted-as-teenage-hacker-from-perth-flees-to-europe/story-e6frg6nf-1227330838160

Hancock, B. (1999). Security views. Computers & Security, 18(7), 553-564.

Howard, R. (2014). Richard A. Clarke: Cyberwar in 2013. Retrieved 10 June, 2016, from https://youtu.be/Ewtxa88o6xo

Jervis, R. (1978). Cooperation under the Security Dilemma. World Politics, 30(2), 167-214.

Jørgensen, K. E. (2010). International Relations Theory: A New Introduction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kassab, H. S. (2013). In Search of Cyber Stability: International Relations, Mutually Assured Destruction and the Age of Cyber Warfare. In J. F. Kremer & B. Müller (Eds.), Cyberspace and International Relations: Theory, Prospects and Challenges (pp. 59-76). Berlin: Springer.

Katzenstein, P. J. (1996). Introduction: alternative perspectives on national security. In P. J. Katzenstein (Ed.), the culture of national security: norms, and identity in world politics (pp. 1-32). New York: Columbia university press.

Kirk, D. (2014, 18 December 2014). North Korea's Cyber Warriors: Privileged Elite In Isolated Society. Retrieved 9 June 2015, 2015, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/donaldkirk/2014/12/18/north-koreas-cyber-warriors-a-privileged-elite-in-an-isolated-society/2/

Libicki, M. C. (2014). Why Cyber War Will Not and Should Not Have Its Grand Strategist. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 8(1), 23-39.

Maximilian,M, Mariana,C & Ruth,.K (2014). The Global Politics of Science and Technology: An Introduction The Global Politics of Science and Technology - Vol. 1 Concepts from International Relations and Other Disciplines (pp. 1-38): Springer.

Nazario, J. (2009). Politically motivated of Denial of service attacks. In C. Czosseck & K. Geers (Eds.), The Virtual Battlefield: Perspectives on Cyber Warfare (pp. 163-181). virginia: Ios Press.

Rawls, J. (2001). Democratic peace and its stability. In J. Rawls (Ed.), The Law of Peoples: With, The Idea of Public Reason Revisited (4 ed., pp. 44-53). USA: Harvard University Press.

Razumovskaya, O. (2015, 8 May 2015). Russia and China Pledge Not to Hack Each Other. Retrieved 1 June, 2015, from http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/05/08/russia-china-pledge-to-not-hack-each-other/

Rueter, N. C. (2011). The Cybersecurity Dilemma. (master of arts), Duke University, Durham.

Shimko, K. L. (2008). Contending perspectives on international politics. In K. L. Shimko (Ed.), international relations perspectives and controversies (2 ed., pp. 47-74). Boston: Houghton Mifflin


Singer, P., & Friedman, A. (2014). Cyber security and cyberwar what everyone needs to know. New York: Oxford University press.

Touré, H. I. (2011). The quest for cyber peace: international telecommunication union.

Weaver, M. (2009, 8 July 2009). Cyber attackers target South Korea and US. Retrieved 1 June 2015, 2015, from http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jul/08/south-korea-cyber-attack


  • There are currently no refbacks.