Abstract

This paper provides a critical assessment of classical liberals’ view of foreign and security policy. In the United States, the defenders of free enterprise and limited government have embraced a neorealist perspective on international relations, which typically prescribes restraint for a country’s engagement overseas. Neorealism and classical liberalism, however, make strange bedfellows. Neorealism does not share the commitment to methodological individualism embraced by the classical liberal tradition and ignores the problems related to the aggregation of individual preferences into concepts such as the “national interest.” Neorealism also downplays the importance of institutions, understood as rules of the game, in favor of crude power calculus. Finally, neorealism is incompatible with the universalist, cosmopolitan outlook of classical liberalism.