×
Log in to StudySoup
Get Full Access to UM - INST 101 - Class Notes - Week 1
Join StudySoup for FREE
Get Full Access to UM - INST 101 - Class Notes - Week 1

Already have an account? Login here
×
Reset your password

UM / International Studies / INST 101 / Does the economy of the united states affect world markets?

Does the economy of the united states affect world markets?

Does the economy of the united states affect world markets?

Description

School: University of Miami
Department: International Studies
Course: Global Perspectives
Professor: Hanna kassab
Term: Spring 2015
Tags: International Studies, Global Studies, and Perspectives
Cost: 25
Name: INS 101 - Course Notes
Description: These are notes on all of the readings that we had over the course of the semester.
Uploaded: 10/02/2016
177 Pages 44 Views 1 Unlocks
Reviews


Why Study IR?


Does the economy of the united states affect world markets?



International Relations in Everyday Life

- the study of relationships and interactions between countries;  

- interdisciplinary inquiry

- early 20th century 

- divided world —> nation-states;  

- people can’t escape from the effects of nation states on their lives;  - state — unambiguous and bordered territory, with a permanent population, under the  jurisdiction of supreme government that is constitutionally separate from all foreign  governments (sovereign);  

- international state system;  

- states involved with international markets —> affect economic policies;  - state system — politically organising populated territory;  


What was happening in europe in the 16th century?



We also discuss several other topics like What is yale's approach to an attitude change?

• world of states = territorial world;  

- social values: security, freedom, order, justice, welfare;  

• the state is involved as the leading institution in the protection of these social values;  • security dilemma If you want to learn more check out Who wrote the age of reason according to encyclopedia?

• national security:

- military power —> balanced military power;

- alliance/defence organisations;  

• freedom —> war vs. peace;  

- when the country is not free the people are not free either;  

- peace and progressive change go together;  

• order and justice:  

- uphold international law 


What is the relationship between the state and the government?



• then states can coexist and interact on the basis of stability, certainty, and  predictability;

- follow accepted practices of diplomacy;  

- support international organizations;  

1

- uphold human rights;  

• upholding the population’s socioeconomic wealth and welfare;  

- expanding the global marketplace

- overall inequality;  

- national protectionism vs. economic interdependence;  

• people take these values for granted until something goes wrong;  

• WWI —> demonstrated the importance of peace between great powers;  

• WWII —> demonstrated the danger of great powers getting out of control and the  policy of appeasement;  If you want to learn more check out How does artificial selection affect the environment?

• Great Depression — caused by collapsing market conditions;  

• Global inflation of the 1970’s and early 1980’s — interconnectedness of the global  economy can be a threat to national and personal welfare anywhere;  

- life inside states is better than life outside of them or without them;  • states need to uphold the 5 social values;  

- states and the state system are territory-based social organisations which exist primarily  to establish, maintain, and defend basic social conditions and values, particularly the 5  basic values;  

Brief Historical Sketch of the State System  We also discuss several other topics like What percentage of learners are profoundly gifted?

- state system = historical institution —> social organisation;  

- international transformation — growing interdependence among states;  - states and the state system managed to adapt to significant historical change;  - state system began in 16th century in Western Europe;  

- states & modernity;  

- relations between independent political groups;  

• state system — relations between separate human groupings which occupy distinctive  territories, are not under any higher authority or power, and enjoy and exercise a  measure of independence from each other;  We also discuss several other topics like What is a group of people in a particular place who see themselves as a collective or community?

• ancient times — city-states — largely based on religion;  

• Middle Ages — empires — based on religion and politics;  

2

- medieval ages — lack of territorial political organisation and control;  - king vs. ruler;  

- different organisations operating at different levels of social life were looking after  the social values;  

• modern international system — sovereign states —> power and authority given to the  king and his government;  

- controlled all the social values;  

- sovereign ruler —> sovereign state —> popular sovereignty;  

- war — key institution for resolving conflicts and enforcing international law;  • development of international rivalries;  

- construction of independent territorial states across Europe;  

- began after the Thirty Years War and the Peace of Westphalia (17th century);

- states were the only legitimate political systems of Europe, based on their own  separate territories, their own independent governments and their own political  subjects;  Don't forget about the age old question of What is the meaning of the money market?

- consisted of adjoining states only in Europe;  

- relations of European states were subject to international law and diplomatic  practices;  

- balance of power to prevent hegemony;  

• revisionists —> Westphalian myth;  

- vs. traditional or classical view;  

Globalisation and the State System  

- global ascendancy and supremacy of the West (16th century — middle of 20th century);  

• Western Europe had colonised much of the non-Western world at the time that the  modern state system emerged;  

- 1st stage of globalisation — incorporation of non-Western states that could not be  colonised by the West;  

• the states had to accept the rules of the Western state system;  

- 2nd stage — anti-colonialism by the colonial subjects of Western Empires;  

• spread of European political and economic control beyond Europe eventually proved  to be an expansion of the state system which became completely global in the second  half of the 20th century;  

3

- 3rd stage — dissolution of Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia;  - through the globalisation of the state system the number of states that were members of  the UN kept on increasing;  

IR and the Changing Contemporary World of States  

- sovereign statehood — the central historical institution of world politics;  - state — contested theoretical concept;  

• two dimensions:

- state as government vs. state as country 

• internal aspect — state as a government;

- state-society relations;  

• external aspect — state as a country;  

- interstate relations;  

- second dimension divides the external aspect;  

• juridicial statehood = constitutional independence and recognition;  - state as a formal or legal institution in its relations with other states; - there are fewer independent countries than there might be;  

• the international state system is unsympathetic to the idea of dividing the  territory of countries;  

• bias in favor of the preservation of existing borders between countries;  • empirical statehood;  

- states as substantial political-economic organizations;  

- how well the state does what it is supposed to;  

- how states’ capabilities influence what they are like and the way that they  interact with other states;  

• states differ greatly:

- strong states vs. quasi states;  

- major powers vs. marginal/peripheral states;  

- IPE scholars — vulnerability of underdeveloped states;  

4

• the international economy is one overall world system with the developed  capitalist states at the center flourishing at the expense of the weak,  underdeveloped states suffering on the periphery;  

- developed and underdeveloped states as part of the same international system;  

• previously domestic issues caused by lack of development are now international  issues;  

- the dynamics of International Relations;  

• changing conditions;  

• changing cultural values;  

• social change;  

• state system also causes change;  

• economic growth;  

• technological innovation;  

• scientific discoveries;  

• competition of the independent European states within their state system led to  European leadership in the international world;  

• state system both reacts and is a cause of change;  

A Short History of International Law

Ancient Worlds  

- ideas & state practice;  

- Herodotus — silent trading between the Carthaginians and a North African tribe (6th  century BC);  

- definition of international law — very ambiguous because of unclear beginning;  - ancient Eurasia — systems of city-states: 

• diplomatic relations;  

• treaty-making;  

• conduct of war;  

- advent of the great universal religions — more broadly-based systems of world order;  • Islamic Empire of the 7th century AD;  

5

- Roman Empire in Western history;  

• no over-arching ethical or religious basis;  

- Stoics — a single world city-state;  

• law of nature;  

• Cicero — law of nature being spread through the whole human community,  unchanging and eternal;  

- jus naturale vs. jus gentium;  

The Middle Ages: the Natural Law Era  

- European Middle Ages became the great age of natural-law thought;  • Catholic Church;  

• legacy of classical Stoic and Roman legal traditions;  

- voluntarism (natural law by God) vs. rationalism/intellectualism (Thomas Aquinas —  natural law susceptible of discovery and application by human reason);  - medieval natural law — teleological;  

• all-embracing;  

• universal grand plan;  

• law was meant to move society toward the direction indicated by reason and the law  of nature;  

• sense of mission;  

• international law — a collection of laws common to all nations, affecting individuals in  all walks of life and dealing with all aspects of human social affairs;  

- an ethical system of universal or trans-cultural scope, setting out general norms of  conduct;  

- there was no strong tendency to think that any body of law existed that was  applicable uniquely to international relations as such;  

• just war ideas;  

- first emerged in personal debates and issues but later expanded to the inter-state  level;  

• jus jentium — universal customs of human creation; ethical system of universal or  trans-cultural scope, setting out general norms of conduct;  

6

• rationalist natural law;  

- many of the urgent practical issues were treated by secular writers rather than by  theologians;  

- late Middle Ages;  

• laws applied to immediate political and military issues;  

• much of state practice consisted of traditional ways inherited from ancient times;  • laws for commerce — to facilitate a different sort of commerce between peoples;  • 11th century bilateral treaties between European states;  

- for reciprocal guarantees of fair treatment;  

- granted a range of privileges to the foreign merchants based in the contracting  states;  

- medieval international law was a jumble of different beliefs and practices;  

The Classical Age (1600-1815)  

- 17th and 18th centuries;  

- Hugo Grotius;  

• secularisation of natural law thought;

• God wasn't required for the existence of natural law — the law of nature would be the  same even if God didn't exist;  

• rationalist natural law;  

• jus gentium —> law of nations;  

- distinct from the law of nature;  

- applied to rulers of States;  

- created by the States in the course of their conduct of day-to-day practical affairs; - the law which has received its obligatory force from the will of all nations or of many  nations;  

- “voluntary” law of nations;  

- States as entities;  

• permanently existing, corporate entities in their own right, separate from the rulers  who governed them at any given time;  

7

• treaties binding of states not just their rulers;

• permanent government bureaucracies — task was to regulate and monitor the  activities of the nation as a whole, in the general national interest;  

- international matters vs. domestic affairs;  

• law of nations only governs relations between states;  

• rulers are at liberty to govern as they please within their respective domains;  • sharp distinction;  

- age of systematic jurisprudence — natural law was rehoused in grand logical edifices of  a hypothetic-deductive nature, modelled on that most magnificent of all intellectual  constructions, mathematics;  

• Samuel Putendorf — “The Law of Nature and Nations”

• Christian Wolff;  

- law of nature + law of nations => modern law of nations;  

• rooted in state practice as well as grand theory;  

• Emmerich de Vattel — “The Law of Nations” — international law textbook;  - first systematic international-law treatise of the modern kind;  

- handbook for lawyers and statesmen;  

- full of practical applications of the law as well as illustrations from recent practice;  • dualistic method in practice;  

- view of war (law enforcements/sanction vs. duel);

• natural law on just wars allowed a state to resort to force in self-help to vindicate  a legal right that had been actually violated;  

• voluntary law was not concerned over which party had the stronger claim to use  force;  

• natural law saw war in terms of law enforcement and as a sanction for  wrongdoing;  

• voluntary law saw war in terms of a duel;  

- economic relations;  

• freedom of trade;  

• the two bodies of law reinforced one another;  

- voluntary law:  

8

• practical and utilitarian character;  

• dynamic;  

• laws made by treaties or by custom/usage;  

- treaty law — unstable due to doctrine of necessity;  

• Pufendorf — duty of self-preservation — a state’s highest obligation was its natural law duty to itself;  

- conceptual problem with custom;  

• custom = form of legislation (bottom-up view) Middle Ages;  

• contractual view — custom as private agreement or wide-ranging contract  (horizontal);  

The Nineteenth Century (1815-1919)  

- the Positivist tradition:

• new historical stage (after theological and metaphysical);

• scientific, objective, or empirical;  

• promised to bring the final liberation of the human mind from the superstitions and  dogmas of the past;  

• study of objective and ascertainable facts;  

• planned and systematic improvement of the lot of the human species;  • law = human institution;  

• positivism = heir to the voluntary law;  

• Grotius — father of international law;  

• Thomas Hobbes — international law made from beneath by the states for their own  convenience;  

- denied that the pre-political state had been an orderly and law-governed condition;  - it was chaotic, even violent, world, with self-preservation as the only true natural  right;  

- security came only through the conscious creation by way of contract of a richer  system of interlocking rights and duties;  

• voluntary law vs. positivism;  

- positivism was much more doctrinaire;  

9

- voluntary law came to be regarded as the only true source of law;  • international law = law between states;  

- the rules of law binding upon States emanate from their own free will;  • independent nation-States;  

- fundamental unit of international law;  

- pluralist cast;

- sovereign;  

- rule of non-intervention of States into the internal affairs of one another;  • pluralistic mentality:

- law was the means for the attainment of goals decided on by political processes;  - law was a servant not a master;  

• business-like character to the study and practice of law;  

• national lawyers were reluctant to trespass into areas of political controversy;  - instrumentalist approach — moral ambivalence;  

- fundamental national security interests in the hands of politics;

- high politics vs. low politics;  

- war = an inevitable and permanent feature of the inter-State system;  • International law as an established profession;  

• legislation through multilateral treaties:

- Declaration of Paris of 1856;  

- Declaration of St. Petersburg (1868);  

- Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907;  

• difference of style between Anglo-American writers and Europeans;  - state practice, court decisions vs. logic and systematics;  

• negative aspects of positivism:

- doctrinaire quality;  

- narrow horizons;  

- lack of high details,  

- aura of superficiality raised to the pitch of dogma;  

10

- narrowly technocratic character;

- ready subservience to power;  

• peaceful settlement of disputes — inter-State arbitration;  

- Jay Treaty of 1794;  

• economic and material betterment;  

- arguments for freedom of trade;  

- lawyers provided the necessary legal infrastructure for improvements;  - technocratic project for global economic development and public works;  - effort for global freedom of economic intercourse on a liberal capitalist basis;  - widespread freedom of migration;  

- currency linking through gold standard;  

- general economic integration by the 20th century;  

- Natural-law Remnants:

• use of force — measures short of war;  

• war = matter of state security policy; business of politicians and not lawyers;  • measures short of war — law-enforcement actions;  

• forcible reprisals;  

- armed action against States that were alleged to have committed some kind of  breach of law;  

- most common cause was injury to nationals that had gone unrepressed by the  target country;  

• actions under the heading of necessity;  

- self-defence — action in the face of a crisis that is instant, overwhelming, leavening  no choice of means and no moment of deliberation;  

- acts not taken to punish a wrongdoer but to protect the state from some actual or  impending harm;  

• punitive expeditions;  

• rescue of imperilled nationals;  

• a lot of abuses of the exceptions;  

• developed vs. developing worlds;  

- armed reprisal actions were almost exclusively against the developing countries;  11

- Historicist (Romantic) tradition:

• later evolution of natural law;  

• Hegel;  

- nation-States — fundamental unit of study;  

- state = the political vehicle for the cultural and psychological aspirations of peoples;  • left — liberal nationalism and self-determination;  

• right — progressive and atavistic States;  

• history had an inner coherence, a direction which was susceptible of comprehension;  

• Quadruple Alliance — readiness to intervene militarily when necessary for European  peace and security;  

- they were guiding history;  

- interest in general European peace and security;  

- teleological guidance was in their hands;  

- Congress of Vienna in 1814-1815;

- rooted in the public law of Europe (Talleyrand);  

• based on adherence to treaty commitments, respect for established laws and  legitimate governments and property rights within the states of Europe;  

- duty on the part of rulers to earn their legitimacy by providing responsible and  efficient government to their peoples and also by cooperating with movements for  orderly and peaceful change;  

• post-1815 system;  

- great-power oversight;  

- diversified national interests;  

• Holy Alliance formed — concerned with suppressing revolution rather than with  advancing orderly change;  

- “Concert of Europe” — intervened in crises only;  

• Britain generally opposed to an active intervention policy;  

- the powers considered themselves entitled to intervene in peace settlements after  wars, if the terms imposed on the losing side looked to be too destabilising for the  continent as a whole;  

• humanitarian considerations;  

- not able to prevent WWI;  

12

The Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries (1919- )  

- the Inter-war Period;  

• a permanently existing organisation dedicated to the maintenance of peace was  needed to prevent future wars;  

• League of Nations;  

- Versailles Treaty of 1919;  

- open, parliamentary, democratic character;

- conservatism & boldness;  

• preservation of nation-States;  

• procedural requirements for war;  

- Covenant’s provision for automatic enforcement action against any League  member state resorting to war without observing the peaceful settlement rules;  - war vs. procedures short of war;  

• Pact of Paris (1928) — self-defence action permitted;  

• Stimson Doctrine of 1932 — any situation brought about by aggression would not  be accorded legal recognition by the US;  

- Italian invasion of Ethiopia (1935-36) — sanctions;  

- the league failed against aggression;  

• the automatic sanctions were only triggered by a resort to war, but not by  measures short of war;  

• states started to search for alternative sources of security to the League  Covenant;  

• a time of ferment, experiment, and excitement unprecedented in the history of the  discipline;  

- World Court established;  

- codification of international law;  

- first multilateral initiatives on human rights;  

• bilateral conventions for protection of minorities (not very effective);  13

- Sacred trust of civilization — principle of trusteeship of dependent territories was  embodied in the mandates system, in which ex-colonies of the defeated countries  were to be administered by member States of the League;  

- labours for the relief of refugees;  

- After 1945:

• period of unprecedented confidence and prestige;  

• International lawyers = heroic crusaders;

• United Nations (1945);

- new International Court of Justice (ICJ)

- Security Council;

• great-power dominance (permanent seats & veto power)

- prohibited the use of force in general (except self-defence);  

- economic & armed action against aggressors;  

• decision of the Security Council

• International Trade Organisation (ITO);  

• increase in international law-making;  

- International Law Commission;  

• more importance of international cooperation;  

- States of the world in general were welded together into a tighter global community;  • free will of the States;  

- sovereign equality of states;  

• self-determination became a fundamental human right;  

• human rights became more important;  

• optional succession to treaties;

• second round of optimism;  

- international law might be entering an age of new and dangerous challenge;  - international lawyers threatening to bring international norms to bear upon states in  an intrusive manner;  

• activism

• economic globalisation became controversial—> economic inequality;  14

- the “outside” world at large has done far more to mould international law than vice versa;  

Chapter 2: IR as an Academic Subject

Introduction

- IR has to with issues concerning the development and change of sovereign statehood in  the context of the larger system or society of states;  

- war and peace = central problem;  

- IR also concerned with other subjects, not just political relations;  

- International Studies / World Politics;  

- 4 major classical theoretical traditions: 

• liberalism;

• realism;  

• International Society;  

• International Political Economy (IPE);  

- recent alternative approaches;  

• social constructivism;  

• post-positivism;  

- IR thinking has developed through distinct phases, characterised by specific debates  between groups of scholars;  

- IR thinking is influenced by other academic subjects;  

- also responds to historical and contemporary developments in the real world;  • terrorist attacks;  

• financial crisis;  

• wars;  

- 4 major debates: 

• utopian liberalism vs. realism;  

• traditional approaches vs. behaviouralism;  

• neorealism/neoliberalism vs. neo-Marxism;

• established traditions and post-positivist alternatives;  

15

- IR = dynamic academic subject that continues to evolve;  

Utopian Liberalism: the Early Study of IR  

- WWI sparked IR;  

• determination never to allow human suffering on such a scale to happen again;  

• required coming to grips with the problem of total warfare between the mechanised  armies of modern industrial states which were capable of inflicting mass destruction;  

• Battle of the Somme = “bloody holocaust”;  

• justification for all the death and destruction became less and less clear with the  years;  

- sparked by search for answers;  

- WWI was attributable to the egoistic and short-sighted calculations and miscalculations  of autocratic leaders in the heavily militarised countries involved;  

• unrestrained by democratic institutions;

• pressure from the generals;  

• distorted images of one’s self;

- the alliances which were intended to keep the peace are what propelled all the  European powers into war;  

• the obsolete theory of the balance of power and the alliance system had to be  fundamentally reformed;  

- Wilson — “The world must be made safe for democracy. We have no selfish ends to  serve.”

- US contribution to the war;  

• military intervention determined outcome — victory for the democratic allies and  defeat for the autocratic powers;  

• supported liberal way of thinking;

• Wilson —desire to spread democracy;  

- 14-point programme delivered as an address to Congress in 1918;  • end to secret diplomacy;  

• freedom of navigation on the seas;  

• no barriers to free trade;

• reduced armaments;  

16

• self-determination;  

• general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the  purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial  integrity of all nations (League of Nations);  

- influenced Paris Peace Conference — tried to institute a new international order  based on liberal ideas;  

- liberal thinkers had clear ideas and strong beliefs of how to avoid major disaster;  • reforming the international system;  

• reforming domestic structures of autocratic countries;  

- belief that democratic governments do not and will not go to war against each other —>  promotion of democracy and self-determination;

- peaceful cooperation —> international relations should be regulated by a set of common  rules of international law —> to put relations between states on a firmer institutional  foundation;  

- basic claim — it is possible to tame states and states people by subjecting them to the  appropriate international organizations, institutions, and laws;  

• against Realpolitik (power politics);  

- Immanuel Kant — “Perpetual Peace”;  

- Norman Angell:

• illusion — war serving profitable purposes;  

• territorial conquest is actually extremely expensive and politically divisive because it  severely disrupts international commerce;  

• modernisation —> states need things from the outside;  

- interdependence —> change in relations between states;  

- modernisation and interdependence involve a process of change and progress  which makes war and the use of force obsolete;  

- liberal view of human beings and human society:

• rational;  

• by applying reason to international relations they can set up organisations for their  benefit;  

• public opinion = constructive force;  

- Kellog-Briand Pact (1928) — international agreement to abolish war;  

- utopian liberalism:

17

• political and economic developments of the 1920’s and 1930’s;  

- fascism in Italy and Spain;

- Nazism in Germany;  

- autocratic, authoritarian, and militaristic states emerged;

- liberal states were not very democratic;  

• League of Nations — never really strong;  

- Germany and Russia didn't join initially;  

- Japan left;  

- Britain and France — didn't regard it as an important institution;  

- US refused to join — isolationism;  

- League of Nations:

• Council — 15 members;  

• Assembly — all members;  

• Secretariat;  

• unanimous voting;  

• principle of collective security — duty to intervene in international conflicts;  • power to institute political and economic sanctions;  

- modernisation and interdependence failed:

• Wall Street Crash in 1929;  

• economic protectionism;  

• World trade decreased;  

• industrial production declined;  

• each country for itself;  

Realism and the Twenty Years’ Crisis  

- 1930’s:

• no peaceful cooperation;  

• authoritarian regimes conducted expansionist power politics;  

- E. H. Carr:

18

• we should assume that there are profound conflicts of interest both between countries  and between people;  

• struggle between conflicting interests and desires;  

• realist position;  

- Hans J. Morgenthau:

• human nature — the base of international relations;  

• humans = self-interested and power-seeking;  

- results in aggression;  

- many autocratic and tyrannical leaders enjoyed widespread popular support;  - Einstein — human lust for hatred and destruction;  

• Freud — a world government was needed to impose the necessary discipline on the  dangerously anarchic international system;  

- doubted that humans have the capacity to overcome their irrational attachments to  national and religious groups;  

- pessimistic about fundamentally reducing the role of war in world politics;  - Christian explanation:

• humans — endowed with original sin and a temptation for evil ever since Adam and  Eve were thrown out of paradise;  

• human nature — plain bad;  

- International politics = struggle for power;  

• no world government;  

• system of sovereign states and armed states facing each other;  

• international anarchy;  

• 1940’s — 1950’s — struggle for power and survival;  

• “haves” vs. “have-nots”;  

- only response — the creation of countervailing power and intelligent utilisation of that  power to provide for national defence and to deter potential aggressors;  

• essential to maintain an effective balance of power to preserve peace and prevent  war;  

- negotiations and diplomacy — not enough for security and survival in world politics;  - cyclical view of history:

19

• continuity and repetition;  

• same mistakes through generations;  

• sovereign states as political organisation —> continuation of power politics —> states  need to look after their security and prepare for war;  

• peace only when there’s balance of power;  

- realism:  

• pessimistic view of human nature;  

• notion of power politics between states which exist in an international anarchy;  

• independent states in an anarchic international system — permanent feature of  international relations;  

- 1st debate — won by realism;  

• dominant way of thinking about IR;  

• liberalism didn't disappear;  

- liberals rejected the idea that humans are plain bad;  

- post-war period = struggle for power & survival; cooperation and international  institutions;  

The Voice of Behaviouralism in IR  

- debate in methodology;  

• first generation — humanistic and historical approach; judgement;  - emphasises the normative character of the subject which involves profoundly  difficult moral questions that neither politicians nor diplomats nor anyone else can  escape;  

- traditional/classical approach;  

• after WWII — rigorous methodological approach;  

- different academic background;  

- different ideas about IR;  

- behaviouralism — novel methodology which seeks to be scientific;  - main task — collect empirical data about IR and use it for measurement,  classification, generalization, and validation of hypotheses

20

• scientifically explained patterns of behavior;  

• finding recurrent patterns — the laws of international relations;  

- facts vs. values;  

- scientific procedure;  

- traditional approach:  

• holistic;  

• accepts the complexity of the human world;  

• sees international relations as part of the human world;  

• seeks to understand IR in a humanist way by getting inside it;  

- behaviourism:

• values cannot be studied objectively/scientifically;  

• theorist stays outside the subject;  

- anti-behaviourist — the theorist of human affairs is a human being who can never  separate himself from human relations; he should be inside the subject;  

- some scholars try to reconcile both approaches;  

• historically conscious about IR;  

• come up with general models that seek to explain world politics;  

• compromise — each type of effort can inform and enrich the other and can also act as  a check on the excessive endemic in each approach;  

Neoliberalism: Institutions and Interdependence  

- Cold War — US vs. Soviet Union;  

- renewed liberal approach;  

- possibility of progress and change;  

- no idealism;  

- formulate theories and apply new methods which are scientific;  

- 1950’s — regional integration in Western Europe;  

• certain functional activities across borders offered mutually advantageous long-term  cooperation;  

• integration fed on itself;  

21

- social liberalism — strand of neoliberal thinking which emphasises the impact of the  expanding cross-border activities;  

• Karl Deutsch — such interconnecting activities help create common values and  identities among people from different states and paves the way for peaceful,  cooperative relations by making war increasingly costly and more unlikely;  

- interdependence liberalism;  

• Robert Keohane & Joseph Nye — relationships between Western States are  characterised by complex interdependence;  

- many forms of connections;  

- absence of hierarchy among issues (military not on top);

- other actors beside states;  

• violent conflict is not on the agenda;  

- institutional liberalism:

• states set up international institutions to deal with common problems due to  interdependence;  

• institutions promote cooperation across international boundaries by providing  information and by reducing costs;

• can be formal international organisations or less formal sets of agreements which deal  with common activities or issues;  

• Oran Young and Robert Keohane;  

- Republican liberalism:

• liberal democracies enhance peace because they do not go to war against each  other;  

• rapid spread of democratisation after the Cold War;  

• Michael Doyle — democratic peace is based on 3 pillars:

- peaceful conflict resolution between democratic states;  

- common values among democratic states;  

- economic cooperation among democracies;  

- different strands are mutually supportive in providing a consistent argument for more  peaceful and cooperative international relations;  

• challenge to the realists;  

- Kenneth Waltz — reformulated realism;  

22

Neorealism: Bipolarity and Confrontation  

- Kenneth Waltz:

• substantially different realist theory inspired by behavioralism;  

• neorealism;  

• formulate “law-like” statements about international relations that are scientifically valid;  • no interest in the ethics of statecraft or the moral dilemmas of foreign policy;  

• focus on the structure of the international system and the consequences of that  structure for international relations;  

- the international system is anarchy;  

- no worldwide government;  

- the international system is composed of like units with similar set of government  functions;  

- states differ in their power — relative capabilities;  

- anarchy is likely to endure because states want to preserve their autonomy;  - after WWII, the international system was dominated by the two superpowers — US and  Soviet Union;  

• bipolar system;  

- when the Soviet Union collapsed, the system consisted of several great powers, but the  US was the predominant power in the system;  

• multipolar system;  

- great powers will always tend to balance each other;  

- smaller and weaker states will have a tendency to align themselves with great powers in  order to preserve their maximum autonomy;  

- states are power-seeking and security conscious not because of human nature but  rather because the structure of the international system compels them to be that way;  

- cooperating states will always strive to maximise their relative power and preserve their  autonomy;  

- 1980’s — confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union reached a new level; • Ronald Reagan — Soviet Union=evil empire;  

• arms race intensified;  

23

• trade wars and other disputes between the Western democracies — confirmed the  neorealist hypothesis about competition between self-interested countries that were  fundamentally concerned about their power position relative to each other;  

- neorealist and neoliberals — shared a common analytical starting point in the 1980’s;  

• states are the main actors in the international anarchy and they constantly look after  their own best interests;  

• more common ground;  

• supported the scientific project;  

• most neoliberals accepted most neorealist assumptions as starting points;  

• Robert Keohane — attempted to formulate a synthesis of neorealism and  neoliberalism from the neoliberal side — still no complete synthesis;  

- the debate continues;  

International Society: the English School  

- 1950’s and 1960’s — American scholarship completely dominated the developing but  still youthful IR discipline;  

• Stanley Hoffman — IR was born and raised in the US;  

- 1990’s — after Cold War, American predominance was less pronounced;  - UK — the English School;  

• Martin Wight & Hedley Bull;

• rejected the behaviouralist challenge;  

• emphasised the traditional approach based on human understanding, judgement,  norms, and history;  

• rejected firm distinction between strict realist and strict liberal views;  - recognise the importance of power in international affairs;  

- focus on the state and the state system;  

- state as the combination of Machtstaat (power state) and Rechtstaat (constitutional  state);  

• power and law are both important features of international relations;  - international anarchy is a social and not an anti-social condition;  

• world politics is an anarchical society;  

24

- recognise the importance of the individual;  

- regard IGO’s and NGO’s (intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations) as  marginal and not central features of world politics;  

• emphasise the relations of states;  

• reduce importance of transnational relations;  

- realists are correct in pointing the importance of power and national interest;  

• there is warfare, but states are not continually preoccupied with each other’s power;  they don’t view that power just as threat;  

- there are common rules and norms that most states can be expected to follow most of  the time;  

• relations between states constitute an international society;  

• these rules and norms cannot guarantee international harmony and cooperation;  - UN shows how power and law are both present in international society;  • Security Council — set up according to the reality of unequal power among states;  - great powers have permanent seats and veto rights;  

- realist power and inequality element;  

• General Assembly — set up according to the principle of international equality;  - every member states is legally equal to other states;  

- majority prevails;  

- rationalist common rules and norms element;  

• importance of individual — international law of human rights;

- Universal Declaration of Human Rights;  

- humanitarian law;  

- cosmopolitan & solidarist element;  

- International Society theorists take a broader historical, legal, and philosophical  approach to international relations;  

• IR is about discerning and exploring the complex presence of all these elements and  the normative problems they present to state leaders;  

• power and national interests, common norms and institutions matter;  • states and human beings are important;  

25

- International Society — approach which tells us something about a world of sovereign  states where power and law are both present;  

- builds on classical realist and liberal ideas;  

• provides an alternative to both;  

• rejects the sharp division;  

• the historical world does not choose between power and law so categorically;  - do not see any possibility of the construction of laws of IR on the model of natural  sciences;  

• IR is a field of human relations — a normative subject;  

• cannot be fully understood in non-normative terms;  

• IR is about understanding, not explaining; exercise of judgement;  

- emphasise the simultaneous presence in international society of both liberal and realist  elements;  

• there is conflict and cooperation;  

• there are states and individuals;  

- argue for a humanist approach that recognises the presence of all these elements, and  the need for holistic and historical study of the problems and dilemmas that arise in that  complex situation;  

International Political Economy (IPE)  

- little concern with the weak states in the developing world;  

- after WWII — period of decolonisation;  

• new countries;  

• many other new states are weak in economic terms — “Third World”;  

• 1970’s — they started to press for changes in the international system to improve their  economic position in relation to developed countries;  

- neo-Marxism — an attempt to theorise about economic underdevelopment in developing  countries;  

- IPE — who gets what in the international economic and political system;  - 3rd debate — neo-marxist critique of the capitalist world economy;  

26

• liberal IPE and realist IPE responses concerning the relationship between economics  and politics in international relations;  

- Neo-Marxism:

• attempt to analyse the situation of developing countries by applying the tools of  analysis developed by Karl Marx;  

• Marx focused on capitalism in Europe;  

• the global capitalist economy controlled by the wealthy capitalist states is used to  impoverish the world’s poor countries;  

• dependence is a core concept;  

• developing countries are subject to unequal exchange;  

• the situation is imposed upon poor countries by the wealthy capitalist states;  - Andre Gunder Frank:

• unequal exchange and appropriation of economic surplus by the few at the expense  of the many are inherent in capitalism;  

• as long as the capitalist system exists, there will be underdevelopment in the Third  World;  

- Immanuel Wallerstein:

• there is no room at the top for everybody;  

• capitalism is a hierarchy based on the exploitation of the poor by the rich;  - Liberal IPE:

• human prosperity can be achieved by the free global expansion of capitalism beyond  the boundaries of the sovereign state, and by the decline of the significance of these  boundaries;  

• Adam Smith — free markets together with private property and individual freedom  create a basis for self-sustaining economic progress for everyone involved;  

• people would not conduct exchange on the free market unless it was to their benefit;  

• see international capitalism as an instrument of progressive change for all countries  regardless of their level of development;  

- Realist IPE:

• Friedrich List;  

• economic activity should be put into the service of building a strong state and  supporting the national interest;  

• wealth should be controlled and managed by the state;  

27

• mercantilism — economic nationalism;  

• the creation of wealth is the necessary basis for increased power of the state;  • without a dominant or hegemonic power, there can be no liberal world economy;  - the decline of US leadership has weakened the liberal world economy;  - IPE issues:

• economic globalisation — the spread and intensification of all kinds of economic  relations between countries;  

• undermining national economies;  

• who wins and who loses;  

• relative importance of economics and politics;  

• state sovereignty;  

- distinct socioeconomic problems of developing countries;  

- IPE is a marked expansion of the academic IR research agenda to include  socioeconomic questions of welfare as well as political-military questions of security;  

- all 3 perspective are in a sharp disagreement with each other;  

• different views of IPE in terms of concepts and values;  

Dissident Voices: Alternative Approaches to IR  

- various critiques of the established traditions by alternative approaches;  • post-positivism;  

• dissident voices;  

- the end of the Cold War changed the international agenda;  

• a number of diverse issues emerged in world politics;  

• an increasing number of IR scholars expressed dissatisfaction with the neorealism of  Kenneth Waltz;  

- there is not much in neorealism that can point to change and the creation of a better  world;  

• post Cold War developments do not fit well with neorealist analysis;  - there has been no major balancing of US power;  

28

- the events of 9/11 are also a problem for neorealism because that analysis is state centric and focused on security threats between states while playing down the  importance of non-state actors;  

- liberalism — recognises the importance of non-state actors;  

• Francis Fukuyama — expected the global victory of liberal democracy in a context of  successful modernisation of all countries — hasn't happened;  

• a financial crisis and sharp inequalities in the liberal West have raised questions as to  the effectiveness of a liberal market economy;  

- new perspectives have emerged;

• regarding theory — how to best approach the study of IR;  

• regarding substantial issues — which issues should be considered the most important  ones for IR to study;  

- Social constructivism:

• neorealism and neoliberalism are materialist theories — focus on material power;  • the international system is constituted by ideas;  

- Post-positivist approaches:

• post-structuralism;  

• post-colonialism;  

• feminism;  

• criticise established theories on both methodological and substantial grounds;  

• not in agreement about what the best replacements for the methods and theories that  are now being rejected are;  

- claim that established traditions in IR fail to come to grips with the post-Cold War  changes of world politics;  

• new voices;  

Which Theory?  

- we all see the world through a certain pair of lenses;  

- theories tell us which facts are important and which are not;  

• they structure our view of the world;  

• based on certain values;  

29

• often contain visions of how we want the world to be;  

- it is better to get the most important theories out in the open and subject them to  scrutiny;  

• we should examine their concepts, their claims about how the world hangs together,  and what the important facts are;  

• we should probe their values and visions;  

- criteria for ranking theories:

• coherence;  

• clarity of expression;  

• unbiased;  

• scope;  

• depth;  

- there is no objective way of choosing between the evaluative criteria;  - people’s values and political priorities play a role in choosing one theory ahead of  another;  

- cooperation between theories is possible;  

Conclusion  

- the subject developed through a series of debates between different theoretical  approaches;  

• shaped and influenced by historical events;  

• methodological developments;  

- no single theoretical approach has clearly won in IR;  

- different approaches are necessary to capture different aspects of a very complicated  historical and contemporary reality;  

• world politics is shaped and influenced by many different issues and conflicts;  

The Middle East: The Origins of Arab-Israeli Wars

- the Middle East has been one of the most volatile and violent subsystems of the  international political system;  

30

- 7 major Arab-Israeli wars;  

The Level-of-analysis problem  

- J. David Singer;  

• 2 levels:

- international system and its impact on the behaviour of states  

- domestic influences on states’ behaviour vis-a-vis other states;  

- Kenneth Waltz:

• deals specifically with the causes of war;  

• discusses the contribution which classical political theory makes to our understanding  of the nature of international relations;  

• three principle themes or images of international relations:

- war as the consequence of the nature and behaviour of man;  

- war as the outcome of the internal organisation of states;  

- war as the product of international anarchy;  

• the state is the most important actor in international politics and the principle cause of  war in the international system;  

• all themes are concerned with influences that incline the states to go to war;  - personality and beliefs of leader;  

- domestic political forces;  

- regional and international power game;  

• Waltz thinks that the third set of influences is critical — war emanates from the  international environment;  

• analytical framework with universal applicability;  

- Arab-Israeli Wars lines of enquiry: 

• psychological factors rooted in human nature;  

• organisational and ideological factors rooted in the domestic environment;  • systemic factors rooted in the international environment;  

- broad and all encompassing;  

• no justification for assuming a priori that systemic factors connected with regional  and international power game are more important than other factors;  

31

• the relative weight of individual, domestic, and systemic influences is likely to vary  from one Arab-Israeli war to another;  

• the three sets of influences cannot always be fitted into neat and separate  categories;  

- new framework entered on the Middle East:

• three central factors contribute to the outbreak of wars in the Middle-East;  - Arab-Israeli conflict;  

- inter-Arab relations;  

- the involvement of great powers in the affairs of the region;  

• threefold division;  

• focuses on three sets of interactions between states;  

• states are the principle unit of analysis;  

• the states in question are Israel, its Arab neighbours, and the great powers;  

Israel, the Arab states, and the Great Powers  

- 2 dimensions:

• Isreali-Palestinian;  

• Israeli-Arab;  

- origins — Zionist movement conceived the idea of building a national home for the  Jewish people in Palestine;  

• bitter opposition from the Arabs in the country;

• two peoples and one land;  

- the neighbouring Arab states became involved in the conflict on the side of the  Palestinian Arabs in the 1930’s;  

- 1967 — the conflict was further complicated by Israel’s capture of the West Bank from  Jordan, the Golan Heights from Syria, and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt;  

- Arabs — root cause is the dispossession and dispersal of the Palestinian Arabs;  - Israelis — root cause is the Arab rejection of Israel’s very right to exist as a sovereign  state in the Middle East;  

- relations among Arab states:

• theory — all Arab states subscribe to the ideal of Arab unity;  

32

• practice — inter-Arab relations have more conflict than cooperation;  

• opposition to Israel follows naturally from the belief that the inhabitants of the various  Arab states form a single nation and that Israel has grossly violated the sacred rights  of this nation;  

• rhetorical level — the Arab states have been largely united in their commitment to  oppose Israel;  

• operational level — they remain deeply divided;  

• conservative states — containment of the Jewish state;  

• radical states — confrontation;  

• the question of how to deal with Israel has been a serious source of dissension and  discord in inter-Arab politics;  

- great power interest in the Middle East:

• geostrategic importance;  

• oil reserves;  

• the Middle East has intensive, pervasive, and profound impact of great power  involvement;  

• Ottoman Empire, Britain, and France, US, and the Soviet Union;  

• Yapp — the dominant feature in the relations between international and regional  powers is the manipulation of the former by the latter;  

- Fawaz Gerges:  

• the superpowers were rarely able to impose their will on the smaller states of the  Middle East;  

• they managed to maintain considerable freedom of action;  

- the international politics of the Middle East are so complex, endemically unstable, and  prone to violence and war;  

The Palestine War, 1948  

- climax of the conflict between the Jewish and the Palestinian national movements;  - Britain had tried and failed to find a solution;  

- The UN passed its famous resolution which proposed the partition of Palestine into one  Arab and one Jewish state;  

• Jews accepted;  

33

• all Arab states and the Palestinians rejected it;  

- Palestinian launched a campaign of violence to frustrate partition;  

• the Jews proclaimed the establishment of an independent state which they called  Israel;  

- war started;  

- defeat for the Arabs;  

- disaster for the Palestinians;  

- Arab solidarity in the struggle for Palestine was more apparent than real;  

• King of Jordan — reluctant to play the part assigned to him in the Arab League’s  invasion plan;  

- this invasion plan was designed to prevent the creation of a Jewish state;  - his plan was to let the Jews have their state and annex to his kingdom much of the  territory assigned by the UN to the Arab state;  

- British influence:

• pro-Zionist writers have assigned to Britain a large share of the blame for the outbreak  of the Palestine War, claiming that Britain armed its Arab allies and encouraged them  to wade into Palestine and destroy the Jewish state at birth;  

• Britain refused to assume responsibility for implementing the UN partition plan on the  grounds that the use of force would be required;  

• allowed Palestine to slide into chaos, violence, and bloodshed;  

- US influence:

• US policy — a series of swings of the pendulum between the pro-Zionist White House  and the pro-Arab State Department;  

• Truman decided to support partition;  

• State Department — proposal for a UN trusteeship over Palestine;  - Soviet Union — supported partition and the creation of a Jewish state chiefly in order to  weaken the British position in the Middle East;  

- critical factor in the outbreak of the Palestine War — the dispute between the Jews and  the Arabs;  

- none of the great powers wanted war in Palestine;  

34

The Suez War, 1956  

- pitted Britain, France, and Israel against Egypt;  

- Britain and Israel joined arms to attack Egypt;  

- Britain and France where on the same side;  

- Britain came under growing pressure to withdraw its forces from the strategically  important Suez Canal base;  

- Egypt became the standard-bearer of radical pan-Arab nationalism;  - Nasser — chief enemy to the British presence in Egypt; chief threat to the entire British  position in the Arab world;  

• right response — confrontation;  

• Nasser would have to be removed from power;  

- French also saw Nasser as an enemy;  

- Nasser was dangerous for the Israeli;  

- the three countries each had their own reasons for wanting to go to war with Egypt;  • infamous collusion;  

• Protocol of Sevres;  

- Suez war was a result of a war plot;  

• Britain, France, and Israel deliberately, carefully, and secretly planned their joint attack  on Egypt;  

• Arab World:

- radical states (led by Egypt) vs. conservative monarchies (led by Iraq);  

The Six-Day War, 1967  

- Arab-Israeli War;  

- result of a slide into crisis;  

- Nasser seemed to be challenging Israel to a duel;  

- Israel was massing troops on Syria’s border;  

• Nasser deployed his troops in Sinai near Israel’s border;  

• expelled the UN emergency;  

35

• closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping;  

- Israel launched a short sharp war —> military defeat for Egypt, Syria, and Jordan;  - inter-Arab rivalries — decisive trigger;  

• the Arab world was in a state of considerable turmoil arising out of conflict and  suspicions between the radical and conservative regimes;  

• Nasser deployed the Egyptian army in Sinai as a political manoeuvre designed to  deter the Israelis and to shore up his own prestige at home and in the Arab world;  

- started a chain reaction;  

• the Arabs were more preoccupied with one another than with Israel;  - the superpowers did very little to prevent the slide towards war;

• the Soviet Union fed Nasser with a false report about Israeli troop concentrations and  supported the troops deployment;  

• then it tried to restrain Nasser but failed;  

• the US — tried to explain the causes and outcome of the war;  

• the US position during the upswing phase of the crisis was hesitant, weak, and  ambiguous;  

• Johnson was against giving Israel the “green light” to attack;  

The War of Attrition, 1969-1970  

- Israeli-Egyptian war;  

- Israel had won a resounding military victory;  

• ended the war in possession of large tracts of Arab land;  

• UN resolution 242;  

• Israel became attached to the new territorial status quo and was confident of its ability  to maintain this status quo indefinitely;  

• its strategy was to sit tight on the new ceasefire lines until the Arabs had no alternative  but to accept its terms for a settlement;  

- Arab relations:

• the main division was between the advocates of a political settlement and those who  believe that what was taken by force could only be recovered by force;  

- three noes of Khartoom:

36

• no recognition;  

• no negotiations;  

• no peace with Israel;  

• uselessness of pan-Arabism as a framework for deciding a realistic policy towards  Israel;  

• Arab unity was preserved at the declaratory level;  

- at the practical level each Arab state was left to decide for itself how to go about  recovering the territory it had lost;  

• Nasser’s strategy had 3 phases:

- purely defensive phase of re-equipping and reorganising the Egyptian armed  forces;  

- phase of active deterrence;  

- liberation of the territory that had been lost;  

- aim — to lift the Middle East dispute from the local level to the international level;  • wanted to involve the Soviet Union deeply;  

- the Soviet Union stepped up its material and military support to Syria and Egypt after the  1967 defeat;  

• it became deeply involved in the diplomacy of the Middle East dispute;  • opposed to the War of Attrition;  

- the aim of the war was to bring about Israel’s withdrawal from Sinai;  • strategy — limited but prolonged war;  

• Israel’s aim — to preserve the territorial, political, and military status quo created by  the Six-Days war;  

- result — military draw between Israel and Egypt; followed by a deadlock on the  diplomatic front;  

The Yom Kippur War, 1973  

- Egypt and Syria launched their well-coordinated surprise attack against Israel;  - contributing factors:

• failure of all international initiatives for the resolution of the Arab-Israeli dispute;  • the emergence of an Arab coalition which was able and willing to do battle with Israel;  

• steady flow of arms from the superpowers to their regional clients;  37

- Israeli intransigence;  

- distinct shift in Egyptian policy away from military activity towards the quest for a political  solution with the new president;  

• public declaration for a peaceful agreement — turning point;  

• Israel refused to return to the lines of 1967;  

- Sadat put forward his own plan for an interim settlement — rejected by Israel;  • started planning the military offensive — Operation Spark;  

- Israel kept raising its price for a political settlement just when Egypt became convinced  of the need for a historic compromise;  

• immobilism;  

• Meir’s strategy — let Sadat sweat it out, with his range of options decreasing, until he  was left with no choice but to accept Israel’s terms for a settlement;  

- Arab states — incentive to formulate a joint strategy for the recovery of their territory;  

• early 1970s — an era of rapprochement and growing cooperation in inter-Arab  politics;  

• Sadat was the main mover and planner of the war;  

• strategy — to immobilise all the resources of the Arab world for the confrontation with  Israel;  

- Soviet policy (1970-3) — inconsistent and contradictory;  

• great caution in the Middle East;  

• Sadat expelled the Soviet military advisers from his country;  

• Soviet Union started supplying arms but it continued to urge its Arab allies to avoid  war;  

- US:  

• supported the Israeli policy of trying to maintain the status quo;  

• approached the Middle East from a global perspective and sought to keep the Soviet  union out of the area;  

• saw Israel as a strategic asset and a bastion of regional stability;  

• a strong Israel was the best deterrent to war in the Middle East;  

• provided economic and military aid to Israel;  

• standstill diplomacy;  

38

Lebanon War, 1982  

- the result of the unresolved dispute between Israel and the Arabs;  - origins — rise of power in Israel in 1977 of the Likud Party headed by Begin;  - Israel invaded Lebanon;  

- aim:

• to create a new political order in Lebanon;

• to establish Israeli hegemony in the Levant;  

• to pave the way to the absorption of the West Bank in line with the Likud’s nationalistic  ideology of Greater Israel;  

- Israeli intervention in domestic and regional Arab politics;  

- weakness of the Lebanese state;

- fragmentation of Lebanese politics;  

- Palestinian presence in Lebanon;

- Syria became the de facto arbiter of Lebanese politics;  

- President Sadat signed the Camp David accords with Israel in 1978 and a peace treaty  in 1979;  

• Sadat was denounced as a traitor and Egypt was drummed out of the Arab league;  - Ariel Sharon — using force to solve political problems;

• big plan:

- to destroy the military infrastructure of the PLO of southern Lebanon;  

• break the backbone of Palestinian resistance to the imposition of permanent  Israeli rule over the West Bank;  

- help Bashir Gemayel in his bid for power so as to bring about a new political order  in Lebanon which was expected to be amenable to a peace agreement with Israel;  - defeat the Syrian forces in Lebanon and to replace the Syrian protectorate of the  country with an Israeli protectorate;  

• aim — a politico-strategic revolution round Israel’s eastern and northern borders;  - the US had negotiated a ceasefire between the two arch-enemies — the PLO and  Israel;  

• anxiety in Jerusalem;  

• the war party was just waiting for a pretext to invade Lebanon;  

39

- Soviet Union role;  

• enabled the PLO to stockpile quantities of weapons in Lebanon;  

• urged the PLO to suspend military action and to moderate its position so as to open  the way to a political solution;  

- neither superpower was really interested in Lebanon, but they became involved in  response to promptings by their local allies;  

• US dragged in by Israeli ally;  

- Ronal Reagan — pro-Israeli views;  

- Israeli officials stressed that their plan would weaken pro-Soviet forces in the Middle  East;  

- the US would understand a military move only in response to an internationally  recognised provocation;  

• “green light” to invade Lebanon;  

- plan for a Palestinian homeland in association with Jordan — too late;  

Gulf War, 1991  

- provoked by Iraq’a invasion and annexation of Kuwait in 1990;  

- international crisis;  

- crisis in inter-Arab relations;  

• nadir of pan-Arabism;  

- origins in an intra-Arab conflict which Saddam Hussein tried to turn into an Arab-Israeli  conflict which ended up as a conflict between the Western powers and Iraq;  

- Iran-Iraq war:

• the Gulf states and the Western powers helped create a monster in the shape of  Saddam Hussein;  

• Saddam Hussein turned against his makers by gobbling up Kuwait; • Saddam accused Kuwait of stealing Iraqi oil;  

• he annexed Kuwait for both economic and geopolitical reasons;  

- big bank raid;  

- wanted to improve Iraq’s access to the Persian Gulf and to secure its dominance  over the entire region;  

40

- the Arabs were deeply divided in their response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait;  - some of the most conservative regimes in the Arab world found themselves on the same  side as the more radical regimes in opposing the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait;  - Israel’s position:

• Iraqi aggression against a fellow Arab country seemed to support the Israeli claim that  much of the violence and instability in the Middle East is unrelated to the Arab-Israeli  conflict;  

• Saddam managed to mobilise a significant degree of Arab popular opinion on his side;  

• Saddam proposed a possible Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait if Israel withdrew from all  occupied Arab territory;  

• Israel tried to maintain a low profile;  

- defeated Saddam’s efforts to turn an Arab-Arab conflict into an Arab-Israeli one;  

- Soviet Union was unable to play an independent role in dealing with the crisis and the  US was left to make all the running;  

• Iraqi annexation of Kuwait presented the US with a series of challenges;  

• it challenged the old territorial order that Britain and France had imposed on the  region;  

- the US government refused to negotiate, and took the lead in sending troops to the Gulf,  building up a large coalition, passing all the necessary resolutions in the United Nations,  and issuing an ultimatum to Iraq;  

• Operation Desert Storm;  

- eject the Iraqi forces from Kuwait;  

- restore the Kuwaiti government;  

Conclusion  

- bewildering array of political forces operating in the Middle East;  

- relative weight of the three factors varies according to the war;  

- Waltz suggests that level three (systemic factors) is much more important than level two  (domestic factors) or level one (personality factors) in explaining why states go to war;  

• the three levels of analysis, however, intermingle and shade into one another;  41

- because there are so many factors at play, and because these factors are so closely  related to one another, it is difficult to determine the precise causes of each Arab-Israeli  war;  

Chapter 3 — Realism

Introduction: Elements of Realism  

- pessimistic view of human nature;  

- conviction that international relations are necessarily conflictual and that international  conflicts are ultimately resolved by war;  

- high regard for the values of national security and state survival;  

- basic skepticism that there can be progress in international politics which is comparable  to that in domestic political life;  

- humans — preoccupied with their own well-being in their competitive relations with each  other;  

• basically the same everywhere;  

- Hans Morgenthau — leading classical realist thinker of the 20th century;  • “will to power”;  

• power is the immediate goal;  

- the acquisition and possession of power, and the deployment and uses of power, are  central preoccupations of political activity;  

• international relations = power politics;  

- core assumption that the international state system is anarchy —> a system with no  higher, overarching authority; no world government;  

- the state is the preeminent actor in world politics;  

- international relations are primarily relations of states;  

- there is an international hierarchy of power among states;  

• international relations — a struggle between the great powers for domination and  security;  

- normative core of realism — national security and state survival;  

• the state is essential for the good life of its citizens;  

- other countries and governments can never be relied upon or completely trusted;  42

- there are no international obligations in the legal or ethical sense of the word between  independent states;  

- the only fundamental responsibility of states-people is to advance and to defend the  national interest by whatever means;  

- international relations are always the same;

• no progressive change in world politics;  

• realist theory is valid at all times, everywhere;  

- classical realism vs. social science realism:

• classical — one of the traditional IR approaches; normative approach; focuses on the  core political values of national security and state survival;  

• social science:

- strategic and structural realism;  

- a scientific approach;  

Classical Realism  

Thucydides: 

- international relations = the inevitable competition and conflict between ancient Greek  city-states (Hellas) and between Hellas and neighbouring non-Greek empires;  

• substantially unequal;  

- inequality = inevitable and natural;  

- naturalist character of realism;  

- political animals are highly unequal in their powers and capabilities to dominate  others and to defend themselves;  

- all states must adapt to that given reality of unequal power and conduct themselves  accordingly;  

- emphasises the limited choices and the restricted sphere of manoeuvre available to  rulers in the conduct of foreign policy;  

- emphasises that decisions have consequences;  

• emphasising the ethics of caution and prudence in the conduct of foreign policy in an  international world of great inequality, of restricted foreign-policy choices, and of ever present danger as well as opportunity;  

- study of the Peloponnesian War:  

43

• leaders of Athens vs. leaders of Melos;  

• Melians made an appeal to the principle of justice;  

• justice is of a special kind in international relations — it is about recognising your  relative strength or weakness; about knowing your proper place; and about adapting  to the natural reality of unequal power;  

• the standard of justice depends on the equality of power to compel and that in fact the  strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to  accept;  

- international relations = an anarchy of separate states that have no real choice except to  operate accordingly to the principles and practices of power politics in which security  and survival are the primary values and war is the final arbiter;  

Machiavelli: 

- power & deception = the two essential means for the conduct of foreign policy; - supreme political value — national freedom = independence;  

- main responsibility of rulers — to always seek the advantages and to defend the  interests of their state and thus ensure its survival;  

• requires strength;  

• requires cunning and ruthlessness in the pursuit of self-interest;  

- classical realist IR theory = a theory of survival;

- the overriding Machiavellian assumption is that the world is a dangerous place; • it is also an opportune place;  

- the conduct of foreign policy is an instrumental “Machiavellian” activity based on the  intelligent calculation of one’s power and interest as against the power and interests of  rivals and competitors;  

- typical Machiavellian maxims of realist statecraft;  

• the prudent state leader acts to ward off any threat posed by his or her neighbors;  

• realist state leader is alert to opportunities in any political situation, and is prepared  and equipped to exploit them;  

- the responsible state leader must not operate in accordance with the principles of  Christian ethics;  

• moral maxims = the height of political foolishness and irresponsibility;  - if a ruler does not know or respect the maxims of power politics, his or her statecraft will  fail and with it the security and welfare of the citizens who depend absolutely upon it;  

44

- the fundamental overriding values are the security and the survival of the state;  - Machiavelli’s realist writings = manuals on how to thrive in a completely chaotic and  immoral world;  

- rulers have responsibilities not merely to themselves or to their personal regimes, but  also to their country and its citizens;  

• the people’s fate is entangled with the ruler’s fate;  

Hobbes and the Security Dilemma: 

- he thinks we can gain a fundamental insight into political life if we imagine men and  women living in a natural condition prior to the invention and institution of the sovereign  state;  

• “state of nature” — the pre-civil condition;  

- an extremely adverse human circumstance in which there is a permanent “state of  war” of every man against every man;  

- believes there is an escape route from the state of nature into a civilised human  condition —> via the creation and maintenance of a sovereign state;  

• men and women turning their fear of each other into rational joint collaboration with  each other to form a security pact that can guarantee each other’s safety;  

• civilisation by fear of death;  

• mutual fear and insecurity drive them away from their natural condition;  • driven to institute a sovereign state not by their reason but rather by their passion;  - in the civil condition under the protection of state, men and women have an opportunity  to flourish in relative safety;  

• people are free to prosper;  

- problem — a peaceful and civilised life can only be enjoyed within a state and it cannot  extend beyond the state or exist between states;  

• security dilemma — the achievement of personal security and domestic security  through the creation of a state is necessarily accompanied by the condition of national  and international insecurity that is rooted in the anarchy of the state system;  

- international state of nature — a condition of actual or potential war; there can be no  permanent or guaranteed peace between sovereign states;  

• there can be domestic peace;

- human condition is a condition of insecurity and conflict that must be addressed and  dealt with;  

45

- there is a body of political knowledge, or wisdom, to deal with the problem of security;  - there is no final escape from this human condition, which is a permanent feature of  human life;  

- there can be no enduring peace between states;  

Morgenthau and Classical Realism: 

- men and women are by nature political animals —> born to pursue power and to enjoy  the fruits of power;  

- animus dominandi — human lust for power;  

• search not only for relative advantage but also for a secure political space, territory —  the independent state;  

• the human animus dominandi brings men and women into conflict with each other;  - creates the condition of power politics;  

- if the people desire to enjoy a political space free from the intervention or control of  foreigners they will have to organise themselves into a capable and effective state by  means of which they can defend their interests;  

- universal moral principles cannot be applied to the actions of states in their abstract  universal formulation, but they must be filtered through the concrete circumstances of  time and place;  

• there is one morality for the private sphere and another and very different morality for  the public sphere;  

- Wilson’s view of morality — irresponsible;  

• gross intellectual mistake;  

• fails to appreciate the important difference between the public spheres of politics  and the private sphere or domestic life;  

- political leaders bear a very heavy responsibility for the security and welfare of their  country and its people;  

• they are not supposed to expose their people to unnecessary perils or hardships;  - tragic situation — a defining feature of international politics, especially during war;  - Plato — “noble lie”;  

- heart of statecraft:

• the clear-headed knowledge that political ethics and private ethics are not the same,  

• that the former cannot be and should not be reduced to the latter;  46

• the key to effective and responsible statecraft is to recognise this fact of power politics  and to learn to make the best of it;  

- responsible rulers are not merely free, as sovereigns, to act in an expedient way;  

• political ends must sometimes justify morally questionable or morally tainted means  and that leads to a situational ethics and the dictates of political wisdom;  

• inevitability of moral dilemmas in international politics;  

- 6 principles of political realism:

• politics is rooted in a permanent and unchanging human nature which is basically self centred, self-regarding, and self-interested;  

• politics = an autonomous sphere of action; cannot be reduced to morals;  • self-interest is a basic fact of the human condition;  

- international politics is an arena of conflicting state interests;  

- interests are not fixed;  

- realism responds to the changing political reality;  

• the ethics of international relations is a political or situational ethics which is very  different from private morality;  

- the leader is responsible to the people who depend on him or her;  - the leader is responsible for their security and welfare;  

• opposed to the idea that particular nations can impose their ideologies on other  nations;  

• statecraft is a sober and uninspiring activity that involved a profound awareness of  human limitations and human imperfections;  

Schelling and Strategic Realism  

- classical realists: 

• power — a fact of political life but also a matter of political responsibility;  • power and responsibility are inseparable concepts;  

• balance of power — basic value; upholds the basic values of international peace and  security;  

- 1950’s and 1960’s — new realist approaches;  

- hold back from a normative analysis of world politics;

• subjective and unscientific;  

47

- strategic realism — Thomas Schelling;  

- doesn't pay much attention to the normative aspects of realism;  

- focuses centrally on foreign-policy decision making;  

- seeks to provide analytical tools for strategic thought;  

- diplomacy and foreign policy — a rational-instrumental activity that can be more deeply  understood by the application of a form of logical analysis called “game theory”

• diplomacy is bargaining;  

• there must be some common interest;  

- central concept — threat;  

• analysis concerns how states people can deal rationally with the threat and dangers of  nuclear war;  

- strategic realism concerns how to employ power intelligently in order to get our military  adversary to do what we desire and more importantly, to avoid doing what we fear;  - choosing between extremes is foolish and reckless;  

- the activity of foreign policy is a rational, enlightened activity;  

• technically instrumental;  

• free from moral choice;  

- Schelling identifies and dissects with sharp insight various rational choice mechanisms,  stratagems, and moves, which if followed by the principle actors, could generate  collaboration and avoid disaster in a conflict-ridden world of nuclear-armed states;  

- the normative values at stake in foreign policy are largely taken for granted;  - one of the characteristic concerns of strategic realism is the use of armed force in  foreign policy;  

• distinction between brute force and coercion;  

• the actors involved should be acutely aware of the dangers (costs) and opportunities  (benefits) they face;  

• for coercion to be effective, it requires that our interests and our opponent’s interests  are not absolutely opposed;  

- coercion requires finding a bargain;  

• war no longer looks like just a contest of strength;  

• military strategy has become the diplomacy of violence;  

48

- the strategic realism of Schelling merely presupposes basic foreign-policy goals without  comment;  

• the values at stake are largely assumed;  

• strategic realism presupposes values and carries normative implications;  - does not examine or explore them;  

- values are taken as given and treated instrumentally;  

• he provides a strategic analysis but not a normative theory of IR;  

- for Machiavelli, the point was the survival and flourishing of the nation;  • classical realists are concerned about the basic values at stake in world politics;  - realists today limit their analyses to political structures and processes and they  largely ignore political ends;  

Waltz and Neorealism  

- Kenneth Waltz — leading neorealist thinker;  

- “Theory of International Politics” 

• scientific explanation of the international political system;  

- takes some elements of classical realism as a starting point;  

- gives no account of human nature;  

- ignores the ethics of statecraft;  

- influenced by economic models;  

- the best IR theory is one that focuses centrally on the structure of the system, on its  interacting units, and on the continuities and changes of the system;  

- the relative distribution of power is the central analytical focus;  

- structures more or less determine actions — determinist theory;  

- a basic feature of international relations is the decentralised structure of anarchy  between states;  

• states are alike in all basic functional respects;  

• states differ significantly only in regard to their greatly varying capabilities;  - the structure of a system changes with changes in the distribution of capabilities  across the system’s units;  

- success is the ultimate test of policy;  

49

• success = preserving and strengthening the state;  

- the states that are crucially important for determining changes in the structure of the  international system are the great powers;  

- bipolar systems vs. multipolar systems;  

• bipolar systems are more stable and thus provide a better guarantee of peace and  security than do multipolar systems;  

• Cold War = period of international stability and peace;  

- Waltz’s neorealist approach does not provide explicit policy guidance to state leaders as  they confront the practical problems of world politics;  

• they have little or no choice;  

- Schelling operates with a notion of situated choice:

• the rational choice for the situation or circumstances in which the leaders find  themselves;  

- Waltz’s determinist theory — structure dictates policy;  

- there is a recognition of the ethical dimension of international politics;  • normative aspect of the core concepts;  

- concept of state sovereignty;  

- each state is formally the equal of all other states;  

• acknowledged norm;  

- states are worth fighting for;  

• implies values — state security and survival;  

- concept of national interest:

• for classical realists the national interest is the basic guide of responsible foreign  policy;  

• for Waltz, the national interest seems to operate like an automatic signal commanding  state leaders when and where to move;  

- Waltz argues that the great powers manage the international system;

• classical realists argue that they ought to manage the system and that they can be  criticised when they fail to manage it properly;  

- great powers must be Great Rersponsibles;

- Waltz values international order;  

- Waltz wants to present a scientific explanation of international politics;  50

- his entire theory rests on normative foundations of a traditional-realist kind;  • scientific explanations can frequently involve norms and values;  

Mearsheimer, Stability Theory, and Hegemony  

- both strategic realism and neorealism were intimately connected with the Cold War;  

• Schelling tried to show how a notion of strategy based on game theory could shed  light on the nuclear rivalry between the two superpowers;  

• Waltz tried to show how a structural analysis could shed light on the long peace  produced by the bipolar rivalry;  

- John Mearsheimer takes up the neorealist argument of Waltz and applies it to both the  past and the future;

• says that neorealism has continued relevance for explaining international relations;  • neorealism can be employed to predict the course of international history;  - builds on the argument concerning the stability of bipolar systems as compared to  multipolar systems;

• the number of great-power conflicts is fewer, and that reduces the possibilities of  great-power war;  

• it is easier to operate an effective system of deterrence because fewer great powers  are involved;  

• because only two powers dominate the system the chances of miscalculation and  misadventure are lower;  

- if a multipolar system replaces the bipolar system the prospects for major crises and war  in Europe are likely to increase greatly;  

• the distribution and nature of military power are the main sources of war and peace;  

• the long peace between 1945 and 1990 was a result of three fundamentally important  conditions:

- the bipolar system of military power in Europe;  

- the approximate military equality between the US and the Soviet Union;  - the reality that both of the rival superpowers were equipped with an imposing  arsenal of nuclear weapons;  

• the withdrawal of the superpowers from the European heartland would give rise to a  multipolar system consisting of 5 major powers as well as a number of minor powers;  

51

- prone to instability;  

- remove the large nuclear arsenals;  

- the Cold War — transformed a historically violent region into a very peaceful place;  - Mearsheimer regards the behaviour of states as shaped by the anarchical structure of  international relations;  

• defensive realism — Waltz’s theory;

- states must and do seek power in order to be secure and to survive;  

- believe excessive power is counterproductive, because it provokes hostile alliances  by other states;  

• Mearsheimer agrees that anarchy compels states to compete for power;  - states seek hegemony;  

- they are more aggressive;  

- states can only become the hegemon in their region of the world;  

• regional hegemons can see to it that there are no other regional hegemons in any  other part of the world;  

- a peer competitor might try to interfere in a regional hegemon’s sphere of influence  and control;  

• the US has made great efforts to ensure that there is no regional hegemon in either  Europe or East Asia;

• all states want to become regional hegemons;

- offensive realism — great powers are always searching for opportunities to gain power  over their rivals, with hegemony as their final goal;  

- there has always been and there will always be a struggle between nation-states for  power and domination in the international system;  

• it is inevitable;  

- Criticisms:

• fails to explain peaceful change and cooperation between great powers;  • fails to explain the emergence of the European Union;  

• at least one potential regional hegemon has been involved in the process of European  unification — Germany;  

• Russia’s recent aggressive behaviour in relation to Ukraine and Georgia;  - some view it as a return of the Cold War in Eastern Europe;  

52

• ignores the responsibilities of statecraft;  

• leaves the impression that states are conflicting power machines that behave without  any human involvement as to their management or mismanagement;  

• mechanistic model;  

• sees no significant difference in the current and future power relationships between  states in Western Europe as compared with those in East Asia;  

• fails to look at historical experiences that are contrary to his thesis;  - eclecticism — opening one’s approach to the possibility of factors and forces not  predicted by one’s theory;  

Neoclassical Realism  

- IR is basically an anarchical system;  

- acknowledges the significance of the structure of the international state system and the  relative power of states (neorealism);  

- emphasises the importance of leadership and foreign policy (classical realism); - attempts to come up with a realist theory that can respond positively to some of the  arguments associated with liberalism;  

- recent approach;  

- state leadership operates and foreign policy is carried on within the overall constraints or  “broad parameters” of the anarchical structure of international relations;  - the heart of classical realism is the ethics of statecraft;  

- neoclassical realists introduce elements which neorealists have left out of their analysis;  • want to retain the structural argument of neorealism;  

• want to add the instrumental argument of the role of stateleaders, the responsibilities  of power, on which classical realism places its emphasis;  

- argue that anarchy gives states considerable latitude in defining their security interests,  and the relative distribution of power merely sets parameters for grand strategy;  

• international structure constrains states but it does not ultimately specify leadership  policies and actions;  

• there are constraints of relative power but there is also latitude of choice;  - classical realists will want to judge leadership success or failure in relation to ethical  standards;  

53

• neoclassical realists focus on explaining what goes on in terms of the pressures of  international structure on the one hand and the decisions made by state leaders on  the other;  

- introduce internal characteristics of states;  

• this kind of analysis is inspired by liberal approaches to IR, which emphasise the  importance of domestic conditions of countries in seeking to explain international  relations and foreign policy;  

Rethinking the Balance of Power  

- for classical realists, the greatest responsibility of statesmen is the responsibility to  maintain a balance of military power among the great powers;  

• to prevent any great power from getting out of control and attempting to impose its  political and military will on everybody else;  

• in classical realist thinking, the balance of power is a valued political objective that  promotes national security, upholds order among great powers, and makes the  independence of states and their peoples possible;  

• Cold War — balance of terror;  

- the stable Cold War bipolarity was being replaced by unstable post-Cold War  multipolarity;  

- many factors ignored by the theory affect the existence of hegemons (hierarchy) and the  degree of anarchy in the state system;  

- the term balance of power has been employed very variously in IR scholarship;  - the balance of power is understood as an international relationship that is so likely to  occur, and is so widely occurring, that it appears to be virtually a natural phenomenon;  

• degree of predictability;  

- the balance of power assumes equilibrium of power among a small number of major  states, where power is defined narrowly in terms of military capability;  

• a systemic and virtually mechanical condition of international relations which is likely  to occur and recur when there are several military powers interacting;  

- classical power balancing has by no means ended;  

• China, Russia, Iran;  

54

• many realists expected that the dominance of the winning side in the Cold War (the  US) would have been much more profoundly challenged by other great powers than  has actually happened;  

- the European Union has proved remarkably successfully in establishing perpetual peace  between Germany and France;  

- new East-West tensions;  

- hard balance of power vs. soft balance of power;  

• hard — classical realist concept of a balance of military power between major powers;  • soft — a more recent conception of liberal theorists;  

- the military power of states or international organisations is not the main focus;  - emphasises tacit or informal institutional collaboration or ad hoc cooperation among  states for the purpose of joint security against a foreign threat;  

- the concept stretches the notion of the balance of power to the point of making it so  elastic and diverse that its core meaning is lost sight of;  

- category mistake — the error of overlooking or conflating categorical differences in  bracketing phenomena together;  

- conceptually incoherent;  

- balance of power concept encapsulates more of the ways the power is balanced;  

Two Critiques of Realism  

- International Society Critique:

• regards realism as a one-dimensional IR theory that is too narrowly focused;  

• claims that realism fails to capture the extent to which international politics is a  dialogue of different IR voices and perspectives;  

• acknowledge that classical realism provides an important angle of vision on world  politics;  

• International Society scholars incorporate several elements of realism into their own  approach;  

• do not believe that realism captures all of IR or even its most important aspects;  - realism overlooks the cooperative strain in human nature;  

- ignores the extent to which international relations form an anarchical society and  not merely an anarchical system;  

55

- realism ignores other important actors besides states;  

- plays down the extent to which the relations of states are governed by international  law;  

- plays down the extent to which international politics are progressive;  

• Martin Wight — places a great deal of emphasis on the character of international  politics as a historical dialogue between three important philosophies/ideologies:  

- realism (Machiavelli);  

- rationalism (Grotius);

- revolutionism (Kant);  

• Henry Kissinger explores the long-standing and continuing dialogue in diplomatic  theory and practice between the foreign-policy outlook of pessimistic realism and that  of optimistic liberalism;  

- Roosevelt — sophisticated analyst of the balance of power;  

- Wilson — the originator of the vision of a universal world organization (League of  Nations);  

- Britain — Benjamin Disraeli and William Gladstone;  

- criticism of realism — it is inclined to ignore or at least to downplay the liberal and  democratic voice of world affairs;  

- Kissinger is a classical realist;  

• International Society scholars can be criticised for failing to recognise that while the  liberal voice is important in world politics, the realist voice is always first in importance;  

- it is the best perspective on the core problem of IR — war;  

- liberals tend to operate on the assumption that foreign-policy choices are easier and  less dangerous than they really may be;  

- Emancipatory critique:

• project of global human emancipation;  

• emancipatory theorists argue that IR theories should seek to grasp correctly how men  and women are prisoners of existing international structures;  

- IR theorists should indicate how they can be liberated from the state and from other  structures of contemporary world politics that have the effect of oppressing them  and thus preventing them from flourishing as they would otherwise;  

• central aim of emancipatory theory — the transformation of the realist state-centric  and power-focused structure of international politics;  

56

- goal is human liberation and fulfilment;  

• Ken Booth;

- the security game that states learned to play was power politics;  • in IR this produced an intellectual hegemony of realism;  

- Booth is criticising strategic realism;  

- claims that the realist game of power politics and military strategy is obsolete  because security is now a local problem within disorganised and sometimes failed  states;  

• a problem of individual humans and of the global community of humankind;  - emancipation — the freeing of people from those physical and human constraints  which stop them carrying out what they would freely choose to do;

- Kantian categorical imperative — the moral idea that we should treat people as  ends and not as means;  

• states should be treated as means and not ends;  

• Andrew Linklater — disputes the realist view of IR;  

- world politics can be constructed along the universal solidaristic lines;  • the construction of a global legal and political system — protection for all humans;  • decline of self-interest;  

• rise and spread of human generosity;  

• development of a community of humankind to which all humans owe their primary  loyalty;  

• realist response:  

- people across the world in their almost countless millions continue to cling to the  state as their preferred form of political organization;  

- when states fragment the fragments turn out to be new states;  

- all these major movements towards the sovereign state occurred recently;  - security continues to be based primarily on the state and the state system;  • it is not based on a global political-legal organization;  

- what people want is a developed and democratic state of their own  - what they do not want is a global legal and political system;

- continuing significance of major states;  

57

• great-power relations shape the international relations and influence the foreign  policies of most other states;  

Research Prospects and Programme  

- realism is a theory:  

• first about the security problems of sovereign states in an international anarchy,  • second, about the problem of international order;

- the normative core of realism is state survival and national security;  - Mearsheimer says that neorealism is a general theory that applies to other historical  situations besides that of the Cold War;  

• limitations of neorealist theory;  

• neorealism appears closely tied to the special historical circumstances of the East West conflict:

- a bipolar system based on two rival superpowers each implacably opposed to the  other and prepared to risk nuclear war for the sake of its ideology;  

- development of nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them to any point on  earth;  

- Russia in the 21st century is a belligerent regional power and is no longer a world power  in the way that it once was;  

- nuclear weapons remain in existence but the tight Cold War controls on them may have  loosened;  

• there is now an even greater danger of the spread of nuclear weapons than there was  during the Cold War;  

- 4 key issues of strategic realism and neorealism:  

• the emergence of the US as an unrivalled great power following the demise of the  Soviet Union and the reduced significance of Russia compared with its predecessor  the Soviet union;  

• the threat posed by peripheral rogue states which are prepared to threaten regional  peace and security but are not in a position to threaten the global balance of power;  

• the problems posed by failed states and the issue of great-power responsibility for the  protection of human rights around the world;  

58

• security crisis presented by acts of international terrorism which threaten the personal  security of citizens as much as or even more than either the national security of states  or international peace and security;  

- classical and neoclassical realism are the most promising future research programs;  

Chapter 4 — Liberalism

Introduction: Basic Liberal Assumptions  

- the liberal tradition in IR is closely connected with the emergence of the modern liberal  state;  

- John Locke — liberal philosopher;  

- see great potential for human progress in modern civil society and capitalist economy,  both of which could flourish in states which guaranteed individual liberty;  

- basis for liberal belief in progress — the modern liberal state invokes a political and  economic system that will bring the greatest happiness to the greatest number (Jeremy  Bentham);  

- liberals have a positive view of human nature;  

• great faith in human reason;  

- rational principles can be applied to international affairs;  

- believe that individuals share many interests and can engage in collaborative and  cooperative social action;  

- conflict and war are not inevitable;  

- human reason can triumph over human fear and the lust for power;  • disagree about the magnitude of the obstacles on the way to human progress;  • cooperation based on mutual interest will eventually prevail;  

- belief in progress = core liberal assumption;  

• point of debate among liberals;  

• many early liberals were inclined to be very optimistic;  

• after WWII — liberal optimism became more muted;  

- Robert Keohane;  

• after Cold War — surge of liberal optimism;  

• terrorist attacks — setback for liberal optimism;  

59

- progress is always progress for individuals;  

- core concern = the happiness and contentment of individual human beings;  • John Locke — states exist to underwrite the liberty of their citizens;  • Machtstaat (state = instrument of power) vs. Rechtstaat (state = constitutional entity);  

- Rechtstaat establishes and enforces the rule of law that respects the rights of  citizens to life, liberty, and property;  

- Jeremy Bentham — international law;  

• it was in the rational interests of constitutional states to adhere to international law in  their foreign policies;  

- Immanuel Kant — perpetual peace;  

- liberal thinking is closely connected with the emergence of the modern constitutional  state;  

- the process of modernisation enlarges the scope for cooperation across international  borders;  

- progress means a better life for at least the majority of individuals;  - humans possess reason;  

• when they apply it to international affairs greater cooperation could result;  

Sociological Liberalism  

- IR is not only about state-state relations;  

• it is also about transnational relations;  

• emphasis on society as well as the state — on many different types of actors;  • pluralism;  

- James Rosenau:

• transnationalism = the process whereby international relations conducted by  governments have been supplemented by relations among private individuals, groups,  and societies that can and do have important consequences for the course of events;  

- the notion that relations between people are more cooperative and more supportive of  peace than are relations between national governments;  

• Richard Cobden;  

- Karl Deutsch:

60

• argues that a high degree of transnational ties between societies leads to peaceful  relations that amount to more than the mere absence of war;  

• it leads to a security community — a group of people which has become integrated;  • integration — a sense of community has been achieved;  

• conditions for security community:

- increased social communication;  

- greater mobility of persons;  

- stronger economic ties;  

- wider range of mutual human transactions;  

- transnational relations between people from different countries help create new forms of  human society which exist alongside or even in competition with the nation-state;  

• John Burton — cobweb model;  

- if we map the patterns of communication and transactions between various groups,  we will get a more accurate picture of the world because it would represent actual  patterns of human behaviour rather than artificial boundaries of states;  

- points to a world driven more by mutually beneficial cooperation than by  antagonistic conflict;  

- overlapping memberships minimise the risk of serious conflict between any two  groups;  

- James Rosenau:

• individuals have greatly extended their activities owing to better education and access  to electronic means of communication as well as foreign travel;  

• states’ capacity for control and regulation is decreasing in an ever more complex  world;  

• consequence = a world of better informed and more mobile individuals who are far  less tied than before to their states;  

• an increasingly pluralist world will be more peaceful;  

- Moises Naim — diffusion of power towards the micro-level;  

• the rise of micro powers is due to 3 revolutions;  

- the More revolution = many more people are living longer and healthier lives and  that makes them more difficult to regiment and control;  

- Mobility revolution = people are able to move around a lot more than earlier;  61

- Mentality revolution = aspiration of the rapidly growing middle classes all around the  world;  

- Phil Cerny:

• underlines the many ways in which the distinction between domestic and international  is being challenged —> leading to a transformation of the state;  

- overlapping interdependent relations between people are bound to be more cooperative  than relations between states because states are exclusive and their interests do not  overlap and cross-cut;  

Interdependence Liberalism  

- interdependence = mutual dependence;  

- a higher level of transnational relations between countries means a higher level of  interdependence;  

- reflects the process of modernization;  

• for highly industrialised countries, economic development and foreign trade are more  adequate and less costly means of achieving prominence and prosperity;  

- the costs of using force have increased and the benefits have declined;  

• Rosecrance — the changing character and basis of economic production (linked to  modernization);

- the most economically successful countries in the post-war period are the trading states;  • intensified international division of labor and increased interdependence;  • many small countries are also trading states;  

- these liberals argue that a high division of labor in the international economy increases  interdependence between states, and that discourages and reduces violent conflict  between states;  

- Rosecrance — at lower levels of economic development land continues to be the  dominant factor of production, and modernisation and interdependence are far weaker;  

- David Mitrany — functionalist theory of integration;  

• greater interdependence in the form of transnational ties between countries could lead  to peace;  

• cooperation should be arranged by technical experts not by politicians;  

• technical and economic collaboration would expand when the participants discovered  the mutual benefits that could be obtained from it;  

62

- people would transfer their loyalty from the state to international organizations;  - Ernst Haas — neofunctionalist theory of international integration

• rejects the notion that technical matters can be separated from politics;  • integration involves getting self-interested political elites to intensify their cooperation;  

• notion of spillover — when increased cooperation in one area leads to increased  cooperation in other areas;  

• from the mid-1960s, West European cooperation entered a long phase of stagnation  and even backsliding;  

- theory of regional integration ought to be subordinated to a general theory of  interdependence;  

- complex interdependence:

• Robert Keohane & Joseph Nye;  

• late 1970s;  

• qualitatively different from earlier and simpler kinds of interdependence;  - high politics vs. low politics;  

- relations between states nowadays are not only or even primarily relations between  stateleaders;  

- there is a host of transnational relations between individuals and groups outside of  the state;  

- military force is a less useful instrument of policy;  

• international relations are becoming more like domestic politics;  

• power resources other than military ones are of increasing importance;  

• states become more preoccupied with the low politics of welfare and less concerned  with the high politics of national security;  

• implies a far more friendly and cooperative relationship between states;  • consequences:

- states will pursue different goals simultaneously and transnational actors will pursue  their own separate goals free from state control;  

- power resources will most often be specific to issue areas;  

- the importance of international organisations will increase;  

• connected with social modernisation = long-term development of the welfare state;  

• most evident in the industrialized, pluralist countries;  

63

• the relevance of complex interdependence grows as modernisation unfolds;  - even among industrialised countries of the West an issue could still become a matter of  life and death;  

- interdependence liberals are more balanced in their approach than some other liberals;  - modernisation increases the level and scope of interdependence between states;  - under complex interdependence, transnational actors are increasingly important, military  

force is a less useful instrument, and welfare is becoming the primary goal and concern  of states;  

- —> a world of more cooperative international relations;  

Institutional Liberalism  

- less optimistic;  

• agree that international institutions can make cooperation easier and far more likely;  

• they do not claim that such institutions can by themselves guarantee a qualitative  transformation of international relations;  

- international institutions are of independent importance;  

• they can promote cooperation between states;  

- international institution:  

• an international organization  

• a set of rules which governs state action in particular areas — regime; • the two often go together;  

• there may also be regimes without formal organizations;  

• institutions can be universal with global membership, or they can be regional;  

• there is an additional type of international institution which is of a more fundamental  kind;  

- international institutions help promote cooperation between states;  - the extent of institutionalisation can be measured on two dimensions: • scope — concerns the number of issue areas in which there are institutions;  • depth:

- commonality;  

64

- specificity;  

- autonomy;  

• there will always be some rules of coordination;  

- the difficulty is to determine the exact level of institutionalization;  

- EU countries cooperate so intensively that they share some functions of government;  • EU Europe is a good test case for examining the importance of institutions;  - neorealists argue that the end of the Cold War is most likely to bring the return to  instability to Western Europe which could lead to major war;  

• root — anarchic structure of the international system;  

- Institutional liberals — high level of institutionalisation significantly reduces the  destabilising effects of multipolar anarchy identified by Mearsheimer;  

• institutions make up for lack of trust between states;  

- they provide a flow of information;  

- reduce member states’ fear of each other;  

- provide a forum for negotiation between states;  

- institutions provide continuity and a sense of stability;  

- they foster cooperation between states for their mutual advantage;  - challenges in an increasingly globalised world:

• there is a growing need for the regulation and management that the institutions  provide;  

• they are lacking in both power and legitimacy necessary for taking on heavy  responsibilities;  

• liberal intergovernmentalism — crucial role of state interests;  

• neofunctional theory — international cooperation driven by functional challenges;  - international institutions help promote cooperation between states and thereby help  alleviate the lack of trust between states and states’ fear of each other which are  considered to be the traditional problems associated with international anarchy;  

- questioned by realists;  

Republican Liberalism  

- liberal democracies are more peaceful and law-abiding than are other political systems;  65

- the argument is not that democracies never go to war;  

• democracies do not fight each other — the basis of the present optimism among  many liberal scholars and policy-makers concerning the prospects of long-term world  peace;  

- Kant  

- Dean Babst;  

- Michael Doyle:

• three elements behind the claim that democracy leads to peace with other  democracies;  

- the existence of domestic political cultures based on peaceful conflict resolution;  - democracies hold common moral values which lead to the formation of what Kant  called a pacific union;  

• a zone of peace based on the common moral foundations of all democracies;  - peace between democracies is strengthened through economic cooperation and  interdependence;  

• the spirit of commerce — mutual and reciprocal gain for those involved in  international economic cooperation and exchange;  

- republican liberalism is the one with the strongest normative element;  - optimistic that peace and cooperation will eventually prevail in international relations,  based on progress towards a more democratic world;  

- see it as their responsibility to promote democracy worldwide — normative;  - the end of the Cold War launched a new wave of democratisation;  • led to growing liberal optimism as regards the future of democracy;  • most liberals are aware of the fragility of democratic progress;  

- democratic norms must be ingrained before the domestic basis of the democratic  peace will be secure;  

- such development of the political culture usually takes a long time;  - there will be setbacks;  

- today, there can still be divisions and mistrust between old and new democracies;  - the complex negotiations about EU enlargement demonstrate the considerable  difficulties involved in close economic cooperation between countries at highly different  levels of development;  

66

- the emergence of a global pacific union embracing all the new and old democracies is  not guaranteed;  

• most republican liberals are less optimistic than was Francis Fukuyama (end of history  as such);  

• most liberals argue that there is a democratic zone of peace among the consolidated  liberal democracies;  

- the expanding of that zone is far from assured;  

- democratic peace is a dynamic process rather than a fixed condition;  • peace is built on all three foundation stones only after a long period of time;  - republican liberals need to specify the exact ways in which democracy leads to peace,  and they need to sort out in more precise terms when there is a democratic peace  between a group of democracies and why;  

- established liberal democracies have gone to war rather frequently in the last decade;  

• reminder of the readiness of established democracies to go to war against non democracies for a number of different reasons;  

- Democracies do not go to war against each other owing to their domestic culture of  peaceful conflict resolution, their common moral values, and their mutually beneficial ties  of economic cooperation and interdependence;  

Neorealist Critiques of Liberalism  

- liberalism’s main contender is neorealism;  

- weak liberals — moved closer to the realist camp;  

- strong liberals — continue to support a more distinctively liberal view of world politics;  - debate over “human nature”;  

• liberals — positive view;  

• realists — negative view;  

- Hans Morgenthau’s realist critique of liberals;  

- human nature is no longer a major point of debate;  

• it was increasingly realised among neorealist as well as liberals that human nature is  highly complex;  

• there was the influence from the behavioural movement in political science;  - scholars focus on overt evidence of patterns of human behavior;  

- classical realists have a non-progressive view of history;  

67

• anarchy leads to self-help;  

- for liberals history is at least potentially progressive;  

• neorealists note that such liberal conditions have existed for a long time without being  able to prevent violent conflict between states;  

• economic interdependence is nothing new, and in the past it has done little to prevent  wars between states;  

- critical of international institutions:

• while states cooperate through institutions, they still do it solely on the basis of their  own decisions and self-interest;  

• institutions are not important in their own right;  

- neorealists are critical of republican liberalism;  

• there is always the possibility that a liberal or democratic state will revert to  authoritarianism or another form of non-democracy;  

- the persistence and permanence of anarchy and the insecurity that that involves;  • anarchy cannot be eclipsed;  

• there is no escape from self-help and the security dilemma;  

- The Retreat to Weak Liberalism: 

• weak liberals — defensive, accepting several realist claims including the essential  point about the persistence of anarchy;  

• strong liberals — claim that the world is changing in some fundamental ways which  are in line with liberal expectations;  

• Robert Keohane:  

- important distinction between a state-centric paradigm and a world politics  paradigm (intensive interactions vs. transnational interactions);  

- world politics is changing dramatically from a state system to a transnational  political system;  

• sociological liberal view was popular in early 1960s;  

• the flutter of international relations could only develop smoothly within a framework  created by dominant American power;  

- if sociological realism only worked within a realist framework of power, progress had  hardly gone very far;  

• Keohane turned his attention away from transnational relations and back towards  states;  

68

- result — theory of complex interdependence;  

- the primary importance of states was acknowledged;  

- Keohane focused his analysis on international institutions;  

- starting point — states are the major actors, the international system is anarchical,  and the power of states is highly significant;  

• international institutions can facilitate cooperation;  

• realists claim that Keohane overlook the concept of relative gains;  - gains = benefits that acre to participants that cooperate;  

- liberals view international institutions as transparent;  

- for realists, the main problem is relative gains;  

• Keohane — conditions for cooperation between states:

- the existence of common interests between states;  

• institutions can help advance cooperation;  

• helps us understand why there can be cooperation under anarchy;  • leads liberalism closer and closer to realism;  

- close familiarity between institutional theory and neorealism;  

- Counter-attack of Strong Liberalism: 

• neorealist attack — spare and parsimonious theory;  

- so many things are not taken into consideration;  

• strong liberals — qualitative change has taken place;  

• there is a group of consolidated liberal democracies for whom reversion to  authoritarianism is next to unthinkable because all major groups in society support  democracy;  

• strong liberals — Rosenau, Slaughter, Ikenberry, and Cerny;  

• neorealists — the change has not led to the disappearance of anarchy;  - the self-help system of states remains in place;  

- huge difference between domestic and international politics;  

• strong liberals argue that anarchy is a far more complex international relationship than  is recognised by neorealists;

- they question the conclusion that neorealist draw from the existence of anarchy;  

• anarchy = there is no single, overarching government;  

69

- doesn't mean that there is no government at all;  

- the distinction between domestic and international politics is not as clear;  

- anarchy does not necessarily mean complete absence of legitimate and effective  authority in international politics;  

• International politics need not be a raw anarchy with fear and insecurity all around;  - there can be significant elements of legitimate and effective international authority;  - Karl Deutsch — security communities;  

• underline the need for a more nuanced view of peace and war;  

- peace is not just the absence of war;  

• there are different kinds or degrees of peace;  

- warm peace vs. cold peace;  

- war has changed dramatically in the course of history;  

• more destructive;  

• nuclear war is possible;  

• these developments increase the incentives for states to cooperate;  

• large-scale war has moved toward terminal disrepute because of its perceived  repulsiveness and futility;  

• war does not appear to be one of life’s necessities;  

• in important parts of the world anarchy does not produce the insecurity that realists  claim;  

- peace is fairly secure in many important places;  

- types of peace:

• among the heavily armed powers where total war threatens self-destruction;  - rests primarily on the balance of power created by military power;  - least secure;  

• among the consolidated democracies of OECD;  

- liberal peace;  

- more secure;  

• genuine progress is possible and it is taking place in important parts of the world;  

• many realists always see more of the same in international relations — anarchy and  power politics;  

70

• most liberals have a notion of modernisation and progress built into their theoretical  foundation which makes them more receptive to the study of social, economic,  institutional, and political change;  

• the world seems to be moving in a more liberal direction;  

• liberals are less prepared for lack of progress or retrogress;  

- fundamentally based on a conception of irreversible modernization;  • liberals are not as precise in their claims as realists;  

- liberals try to theorise historical change;  

• Andrew Moravcsik — reformulation of liberal theory that attempts to be non ideological and non-utopian;  

- the fundamental actors in international politics are rational individuals and private  groups;  

- government policy reflects the preferences of different combinations of groups and  individuals in domestic society;  

- in the international system, each state seeks to realise its preferences under the  constraints imposed by the preferences of other states;  

- contains both a domestic and an international (systemic) component;  - core element — the set of preferences pursued by states;  

- there are three major variants of liberal theory:  

• ideational;  

• commercial;  

• republican;  

Liberalism and World Order  

- Daniel Deudney & John Ikenberry — structural liberalism;  

• characterise the major features of Western order;  

- security co-binding = the liberal practice of states locking one another into mutually  constraining institutions;  

- penetrated reciprocal hegemony = the special way in which the US leads Western  order;  

- semi-sovereign and partial great powers = the special status of Germany and  Japan;  

• imposed constraints on themselves as great powers;  

71

- economic openness:  

• in a world of advanced industrial capitalism, the benefits from absolute gains  derived from economic openness are so great that liberal states try to cooperate  so as to avoid the incentive to pursue relative gains;  

- civic identity = common Western support for the values of political and civil liberties,  market economics, and ethnic toleration;  

• the liberal order rests on a liberal foundation, not on a particular balance of power or a  certain external threat;  

- Kagan— Europeans and American live in different worlds in the sense that they have  very different views of world order;  

• there is no prospect whatsoever that the transatlantic disagreements will lead to  violent conflict;  

• the disagreement is sooner about the best ways of confronting terrorist threat;  - there are tensions in the liberal world order;  

- liberals will seek freedom;  

• freedom is no uniform entity;  

• Isaiah Berlin — negative vs. positive liberty;  

- negative — an individual sphere of autonomy, of non-interference of state  authorities of any kind;  

• property rights;  

- positive — liberty of being one’s own master;  

• certain conditions need to be met;  

- individuals are not states and domestic conditions are not like the conditions in the  international system;  

• presence of negative and positive liberty in liberal internationalism;  - Liberalism of Restraint:

• non-intervention is a core element in the classical institution of sovereignty  • international institution-building and international law;  

• wants to let live, to quietly sort out differences via negotiation and collaboration,  to persuade via the argument rather than via the sword;  

- Liberalism of Imposition — going out and radically changing the world in order to  provide the universal basis for the good life;  

72

• wants to go out and forcefully change the world in a liberal direction, using force  when necessary;  

- with liberal values preponderant in the present world order, the contradictions of  liberalism cannot fail to be further exposed and sharpened;  

Liberalism: The Current Research Agenda  

- it is now important to know precisely how democracy leads to peace, and to understand  the exact extent to which new democracies need to be consolidated in order to secure a  democratic peace;  

- the concept of security community proposed by Karl Deutsch needs further  development;  

- a similar urgency for more solid knowledge pertains to international institutions;  - sociological and interdependence liberals have emphasised the importance of the  development of transnational relations;  

• it appears that this process is continuing with increasing intensity at least among  some countries;  

• continued successful integration is not a certain progress;  

- mass murder terrorism is obviously a very ominous threat to the physical security of  citizens of Western liberal democracies, especially in the US;  

• the new security threat demands greater police and intelligence surveillance within  countries;  

• could infringe some of the civil liberties associated with liberal democracy;  

• demands greater security at international borders and any other entry points to  countries;  

- could interfere with the open borders;  

• such events may oblige theorists to rethink their theories, and that includes liberalists  and liberalism;  

- liberal theory is challenged by the comprehensive financial crisis;  

• free markets do not merely bring benefits — they also involve large risks;  73

Twenty Years of Institutional Liberalism

- Institutional liberalism = the dominance of the view that cooperation in world politics can  be enhanced through the construction and support of multilateral institutions based on  liberal principles;  

- Carr was skeptical of liberalism;  

- trends since 1990s:

• increasing legalization;  

• more legalism and moralism;  

• decline in the coherence of some international regimes;  

- institutions depend on structures of power and interests;  

- Institutional liberalism provides one basis for political authority, conceived as a fusion of  power and legitimate social purpose;  

- it holds that institutions and rules can facilitate mutually beneficial cooperation — within  and among states;  

- the social purpose of institutional liberalism is to promote beneficial effects on human  security, human welfare, and human liberty as a result of a more peaceful, prosperous  and free world;  

- justifies the use of power in constructing institutions;  

- Carr — 19th century liberalism believed in a harmony of interests based on a synthesis  of morality and reason;  

• separated power from economics;  

- Reggie — embedded liberalism compromise;  

• result of the Depression and WWII;  

• seeks to foster pluralism in economics and politics;  

• promotes international cooperation;  

• multilateral in character and predicated upon domestic interventionism;  

• recognises the dependence of economics on politics and does not believe in a  harmony of interests;  

- embedded liberalism has taken some hard blows in the last 30 years;  - Institutional liberalism does not depend on the international economic arrangements  being embedded in domestic interventionism;  

74

• a more general doctrine that provides a justification not for the welfare state but for  the international institutions as foundations of social progress;  

- the roots of institutional liberalism lay less in specific views of capitalism and the state  than in pluralist conceptions of power and interests that are well expressed in the works  of James Madison;  

• James Madison — republican;

• the people should rule but they have to rule through institutions;  

- Doyle — liberalism as a family portrait of principles and institutions, focused on the  essential principle of freedom of the individual and associated with negative freedom,  positive freedom, and democratic participation or representation;  

• institutions are essential for exercising these rights;  

- institutional liberals believe that power should be used in the interests of liberal values  but with caution and restraint;  

• institutions serve a crucial social purpose because they are essential for sustained  cooperation that enhances the interests of most if not all people;

- sophisticated liberalism believes in improvement of the human condition and provides a  rationale for building cooperative institutions that can facilitate better lives for human  beings;  

Questioning Institutional Liberalism  

- before 1991, institution-building by the US and its allies had a significant security  justification — to create economic prosperity and patterns of cooperation that would  reinforce the position of the West in the struggle with the Soviet Union;  

• American hegemony was crucial;  

• relative gains were important between the West and the Soviet bloc;  - the international institutions that operated during this period facilitated mutually  beneficial cooperation on issues ranging from security to monetary cooperation to trade;  

- most of the institutions were not highly legalised;

• sovereign was a bargaining resource that states could negotiate away in order to  obtain other benefits;  

• cooperation occurred on the basis of mutual self-interest and reciprocity, without much  legalization;  

- patterns of cooperation led to robust international regimes;  

75

• regime — set of principles, norms, and rules governing the relations among well defined sets of actors;  

- early 1980s — anticipated a continuation and gradual strengthening of international  institutions grounded in domestic politics and achieving substantial cooperation on the  basis largely of specific reciprocity;  

- 3 developments since the early 1990s:

• increase in legalisation;  

• increasing legalism and moralism expressed by people leading civil society efforts to  create and modify international institutions;  

• decline in the coherence of some international regimes along with a failure to increase  the coherence of others;  

- legalisation:

• property of institutions;  

• the rules of legalised institutions are precise and obligatory;  

• they provide arrangements for third party adjudication;  

• in a legalised system, third-party adjudication provides a focal point of agreement,  reducing the likelihood of protracted bargaining-induces conflict over relatively minor  issues, and reducing uncertainty about both the rules and their enforcement;  

• soft law — helps reduce uncertainty and facilitate rule-implementation;  - coherence:

• property of institution;  

• refers more to the relationship among institutions than to the properties of institutions;  

• coherent institutions have clear lines of authority linking them, so that for any given  situation it is clear which rules apply, or at least which adjudicatory institutions are  authorised to determine which rules apply;  

• to denote an institution as an international regime is to indicate a fairly high degree of  coherence;  

• the coherence of international regimes seems to be declining;  

- regime complexes;  

- there seems to have been a rise in legalism and moralism in the discourse of  international relations;  

• not properties of institutions but of the human mind;  

76

• legalism = belief that moral and political progress can be made through the extension  of law;  

• moralism = the belief that moral principles provide valuable guides to how political  actors should behave, and that actions by those in power can properly be judged on  the basis of their conformity to general moral principles developed chiefly to govern  the actions of individuals;  

- law and its efficacy always rest on structures of power (Carr);  

• legalism can serve as a veil, hiding the exercise of power;  

- Carr was critical of utopian thinking, which is often moralistic;  

• also critical of legalism;  

Idealism and interests: the revival of moralism in world politics  

- the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 made the US and liberal democratic states  elsewhere believe that they could construct a new world order more consistent with the  values and practices of liberal domestic politics;  

- the language of moralism was now detached from great power struggles;  • conclusion of a number of major human rights treaties;  

• efforts by democratic governments and civil society to promote democracy in Eastern  Europe after the Cold War and around the world;  

• the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine — calls on states to protect their populations  and provides for UN Security Council action to protect populations if the state with  formal jurisdiction fails to do so;  

• NATO’s use of military force to prevent the domination of neighbouring peoples by  Serbia and last year to overthrow the Qaddafi regime in Libya;  

- Carr criticises both the utopian equation of individual and state morality and the Realist  denial that ethical standards are applicable to relations between states;  

• there is a world community for the reason that people talk, and within certain limits  behave as if there were a world community;  

• this world community is thin because people do not accept the principle of individual  equality on a global scale and therefore do not put the interests of the global  community above those of their own nations;  

• in the international order, the role of power is greater and that of morality less; • any international moral order must rest on some hegemony of power;  • does not mean that morality is irrelevant;  

77

- moralism is endemic to liberalism and reflects one of its strengths;  

• its creation of an environment in which social movements built around values rather  than material interests can thrive;  

• moralism makes hegemony legitimate;  

- the Realist view of moralism as misleading and pernicious only holds in a particular  context — when moralism leads publics and governments to act in ways that threaten  more fundamental values;  

- when threats recede, moralism should reemerge;  

• it is good for democracies to try to implement their values by appropriate means  where it is feasible to do so at low cost;  

• little material self-interest;  

• without moral guidance, the exercise of power even by democracies is likely to  become pernicious and illegitimate;  

- for Realists the ideals on which moralism rests are inevitably corrupted, in practice by  power;  

• power corrupts in at least three ways:

- it generates arrogance;  

- leads actors to distort analysis to fit the demands of the powerful;  

- can serve as a rationale for actions with other motivations;  

• distortion of analysis often follows;  

• it is essential to establish criteria other than those of power and material interests to  guide leaders of states and by which to hold them accountable;  

- moral principles;  

• a concern for morality is dangerous because in the hands of fools or demagogues it  can become a pernicious form of moralism;  

- two cheers for moralism:

• moralism provides an impetus to social movements that provide incentives for  democratic politicians to promote liberal democratic values abroad;  

• moralism can enhance the legitimacy of hegemonic states and the orders they seek to  maintain;  

• power corrupts though;

78

Topic 5 — International Society

Summary

- an approach to world politics that focuses on international history, ideas, structures,  institutions, and values;  

- basic assumptions: 

• at the heart of the subject are people and basic values such as independence,  security, order, and justice;  

• IR scholars are called upon to interpret the thoughts and actions of the people  involved with international relations;  

• international anarchy is an important concept but not an exclusive premise;  - anarchical society with distinctive rules, norms, and institutions that statespeopple  are involved with in their conduct of foreign policy;  

• states = human organizations;  

• pluralist society of multiple sovereign states & solidarist world society of the human  population on the planet;  

Basic International Society Approach  

- international politics is a realm of human experience with its own distinctive  characteristics, problems, and language;  

- international relations ought to be understood as a society of mutually recognising states  and not merely as a system of competing and conflicting powers;  

- sovereign states have primary but not exclusive membership;  

- Hadley Bull:

• traditional IS derives from philosophy, history, and law and it is characterised above all  by explicit reliance upon the exercise of judgement;  

• foreign policy sometimes presents difficult moral choices to the states people  involved;  

- the traditional IS approach seeks to avoid the stark choice between state egoism and  conflict and human good will and cooperation presented by the debate between  liberalism and realism;  

- it occupies a position between classical realism and classical liberalism and develops  that into a separate and distinctive IR approach;  

79

- regards international relations as a society of states — the principle actors are states  people who are specialised in the practice of statecraft;  

- statecraft is a very important human activity;  

- international relations consist of the foreign-oriented policies, decisions, and activities of  states people who act on behalf of territory-based political systems that are independent  of each other and subject to no higher authorities than themselves — sovereign states;  

- there are other important human organisations that are also involved in international  relations;  

• they are subordinate to sovereign states;  

• sovereign states are the foundation of world politics;  

- international politics is understood to be the special branch of politics that is lacking in  hierarchical authority — there is not world government that is above sovereign states;  

- there are still common interests, rules, institutions, and organisations that are created  and shared by states and which help to shape the relations of states;  

• anarchical society — a worldwide social order of independent states;  - international system vs. international society:

• the more international relations constitute a society and the less international relations  merely compose a system is an indication of the extent to which world politics forms a  distinctive human civilisation with its own norms and values;  

• Soviet Union vs. Russia;  

- three different ways of looking at the relations of states:

• realism;  

- states = power agencies that pursue their own interests;  

- international relations = instrumental relations devoid of morality or law;  - Machiavelli;  

• rationalism;  

- states = legal organisations that operate in accordance with international law and  diplomatic practice;  

- international relations = rule-governed activities based on the mutually recognised  authority of sovereign states;  

- Grotius;  

• revolutionism;  

- downplays the importance of states and places an emphasis on human beings;  80

Page Expired
5off
It looks like your free minutes have expired! Lucky for you we have all the content you need, just sign up here