𓆰𓆪 Desolation Angel 𓆰𓆪

In the 2016 film Arrival directed by Denis Villeneuve, like the titular aliens’ tentacles, Lovecraftian science-fiction intersects and weaves itself with the political and speculative. In a similar manner in which international Relations (IR) scholars analyse historical events and contemporary politics through the theoretical lenses of Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism, the film’s imagined crisis can also be examined with a similar methodology, using its fantastical inter-terrestrial conflict as a literal interpretation on IR as well an allegory for various crises that may similarly “arrive” one day, whether it be nuclear armageddon, a pandemic, the climate crisis, etc. 

One key concept which can be analysed and applied to Arrival is the Three Levels of Analysis, and in particular the second level, the State. The film challenges the idea of sovereignty and statehood, and argues that the idea of the state is dynamic, through the actors of Professor Banks, the US Military, and the aliens. Each actor in the film can be seen projecting their own sovereignty and statehood in their unique ways, and only through a dynamic redefinition of the constructed “state” does the film reach a peaceful conclusion, radically resisting the idea that “states are likely to remain central actors in world politics” prevalent in theories of Realism and Liberalism.

While Realism and Liberalism provide useful insights into Arrival, the Constructivist view is the most helpful when examining the implications of IR of the film. The Constructivist capacity for introspection allows a flexible interpretation of the state at everly level of analysis, which explains how actors in the film are able to transcend the limitations of their respective “levels”. Furthermore, a Constructivist analysis of the film allows a reflection on the language of IR and how the linguistic traditions of the discipline could potentially manifest harmful conclusions. By introducing a fourth level of analysis and challenging assumptions about language in IR, Arrival uses a Constructivist lens in order to examine the capacity of individual actors to make change in international politics. 

Immediately, the arrival of the hepta-pods challenge a fundamental assumption of IR; the notion of the Three Levels of Analysis. In IR, the Individual, States, and International System are separated into distinct Images. Yet the extraterrestrials do not belong within this hierarchy. In an exploration of Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism in Arrival, each theory’s flexibility to this invented fourth level of analysis reveals strengths and limitations of each tradition. 

Firstly, Realism is defined as “the shifting distribution of power among states”. Furthermore, a system of anarchy is a fundamental assumption of Realism. Kenneth Waltz argues that the “state (first) seeks to ensure survival” in this system of anarchy. The existence and arrival of the hepta-pods can be seen as further evidence of this anarchy. Another central aspect of Realism, the Security Dilemma can be seen playing out in Arrival. In the anarchic system represented by the aliens, Russia and China’s defensive military preparations trigger similar responses from Sudan and the US, and a communications blackout. Furthermore, the assumption of Realism that “politics are necessarily conflictual” is a blind spot, as each state incorrectly assumes they are in a competition. The 12 alien ships arrive in states with different levels of power, from the US and China to Sudan and Denmark. The even distribution of knowledge can be seen as a metaphor that contradicts the notion that a multipolar system is more likely to cause war, and that the power imbalance is inherent in IR.  Realist theories assume that certain states must hold more power than others for stability, such as in Adams’ “Offence-Defence-Deterrence Balance”. Yet the film puts equal emphasis on the 1/12 of knowledge each state receives. 

Another lens that is helpful in examining Arrival is Structural Realism. Structural Realism differs from Classical Realism in that it does not consider human nature to be a relevant factor, and instead argues that structure informs behaviour. As a structural Realist scholar, Waltz defends a state-centric structure of analysis by arguing that states are the key “units” by which IR operates. At first glance, this analysis is accurate to Arrival. Immediately, each nation becomes a unit when dealing with the aliens, evidenced by the recurring prop of the conference call with each nation clearly labelled as its distinct entity. China and Russia threaten offensive military measures out of fear rather than aggression. However, the pivotal interaction between the United States and China are made not through official State diplomacy, but rather through an intimate and personal phone call. In fact, Banks is forced to go as far as commit an act of treason against her state in order to achieve peace. China as an entire state is represented through one character – General Shang – throughout the entire movie. Thematically and in the narrative, the actions of actors on an Individual level far outweighs state behaviour. Here Realism, nor Structural Realism adequately explains how individuals and their humanity are able to have such an extensive impact on the international and intergalactical stage. Arrival challenges the state-centric worldview of Realist theory.

The definition of Liberalism is contested; Duncan Bell notes that the term is “overextended” and instead gives a more general definition as “the sum of the arguments that have been classified as liberal, and recognised as such by other self-proclaimed liberals, across time and space”. One key argument classified as liberal is that freedom and individual rights produce good outcomes. Doyle argues that while liberalism has contributed to a “separate peace” among liberal states, it also poses challenges in relations with non-liberal states, potentially leading to conflict. The aliens are a perfect example of a non-liberal state. As Snyder states, Liberalism “fails to understand that democracies regimes survive only if they safeguard military power and security”. With the arrival of the fourth level of analysis (aliens), each state’s first response is that of the military. Despite being a liberal democracy, the US immediately turns to martial laws and extensive reduction of rights, such as closing of borders and restriction of gun sales. Arrival’s depiction of immediate military response means that Liberalism’s emphasis on rights are not helpful in an analysis of Arrival. Furthermore, in a line spoken by a TV reporter, it is reported that the “financial markets across the world are in crisis”, and “that the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell by over 2000 points”. In the face of the aliens, economic considerations are immediately thrown out of the window. Economic Liberalism, and its assumption that free markets and trade will promote peace is unable to account for the chaos caused by the 4th level of analysis.

In contrast, Constructivism provides the most helpful framework with which Arrival can be analysed. Defined as “a social theory—or family of theories—that lacks a priori commitments on identity, nature, interests, and behaviour of important actors and the structure of world politics”, Constructivist thought is most adaptable to the new knowledge brought by the arrival of the aliens. By definition, states lack a priori knowledge of the aliens. Through the radical redefinition of states that is possible through Constructivism is it possible for actors to transcend the boundaries of their “levels”.

The State is defined as a “political entity separated by its goal regarding order and security, territory, and sovereignty”. In Arrival, Banks, the US Army, the aliens, and the rogue terrorists all exhibit signs of statehood. Banks single-handedly invokes international diplomacy, the US Army – under emergency powers – create a “quarantine zone” enforced by force and exhibit their own sovereignty, the aliens have their own goals of self-preservation regarding humanity’s help in 3000 years, and the terrorists also act upon their own sense of threatened security. K.M Fierke’s assertion that Constructivists “emphasise… the possibility of change” is especially notable in the face of the literal and metaphorical alien, for nothing is more radically different than an alien spaceship. Wendt notes that “sovereignty is an institution, and so it exists only in virtue of certain intersubjective understandings and expectations; there is no sovereignty without another”. The failure of states in the face of the arrival, we see actors exhibit their own “sovereignty” in order to survive. State-centrism is also threatened when what can be constituted as a state is dynamic. Quebec’s Separatist Referendum was 0.59% away from swinging to a yes vote. The fragility and arbitrary nature of the state can be seen in history and in film. 

The Constructivist view is further helpful in examining another key theme of the movie; the way in which language shapes meaning and perception. The film challenges what assumptions are being made through language. For Banks, this is revealed to be time, and her chronotropic study is the exact point at which “science” and “fiction” intersect in the film. For explorations in IR, similar linguistic assumptions are made in the combative and war-like language of theories. For example, structural realism is separated into war like metaphors of defensive vs offensive. This language bleeds into the way theory is taught. Studies have shown that the metaphors we use can have a direct impact on how policies are perceived. Aggressive language in IR can therefore impact the way theories could be perceived. Debates are framed as polar opposites as in lectures, employing words such as “vs” and “face-off” in search of a clear victor. Or whether it be “zero-sum game” or “Game Theory” we may be making the same mistakes the Chinese scientists make in the movie. Their use of Mahjong, a strategy game, leads them to interpret “tool” as “weapon” due to the combative nature of their language of interpretation. While war and conflict is an inevitable part of IR, Arrival, and a Constructivist lens questions whether the use of combative language potentially leads to more combative outcomes.

In conclusion, the Constructivist perspective offers the most insightful framework for analysing the IR themes within the film Arrival. Its emphasis on introspection provides a versatile approach to understanding state actions across all levels of analysis, illustrating how the characters overcome their inherent constraints to foster peace. Moreover, Constructivism encourages a critical examination of IR language, suggesting that traditional linguistic norms could lead to detrimental outcomes. By proposing a fourth level of analysis and questioning established beliefs about language in international politics, Arrival employs a Constructivist approach to explore the influence of individual actors in effecting change on the global stage.

Bibliography

“1995 Referendum on Québec’s Accession to Sovereignty.” Élections Québec. Accessed February 26, 2024. https://www.electionsquebec.qc.ca/en/results-and-statistics/1995-referendum-on-quebecs-accession-to-sovereignty/.

Adams, Karen Ruth. “Attack and Conquer? International Anarchy and the Offense-Defense-Deterrence Balance.” International Security 28, no. 3 (January 2004): 45–83. https://doi.org/10.1162/016228803773100075.

Arrival. Canada: Sony pictures home entertainment, 2016.

Bell, Duncan. “What Is Liberalism?” Political Theory 42, no. 6 (June 26, 2014): 682–715. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591714535103.

Doyle, Michael W. “Liberalism and World Politics.” American Political Science Review 80, no. 4 (December 1986): 1151–69. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055400185041. 

Fierke, K M. “Constructivism.” Chapter Nine. In International Relations Theories, 4th ed. Oxford University Press, 2016.

Genta, Benjamin Santos. “How Metaphors Make the World.” Aeon, 2024. https://aeon.co/essays/how-changing-the-metaphors-we-use-can-change-the-way-we-think.

Schramm, Madison. “Intro to IR- Constructivism” University of Toronto. Lecture, 2024.

Schramm, Madison. “Theories of IR – Liberalism.” University of Toronto. Lecture, 2024.

Schramm, Madison. “Theories of IR-The State and Levels of Analysis.” University of Toronto. Lecture, 2024.

Snyder, Jack. “One World, Rival Theories.” Foreign Policy, no. 145 (November 2004): 52. https://doi.org/10.2307/4152944.

Tinto, Daniel Rio. “IR Theory: Realism.” University of Toronto. Lecture, 2024.

Waltz, Kenneth N. “The Anarchic Structure of World Politics.” International Politics, 2011. Wendt, Alexander. “Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics (1992).” International Theory, 1995, 129–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-23773-9_7.