http://www.wwnorton.com/college/polisci/essentials-of-internationalrelations5/ch/03/summary.aspx
ESSENTIALS OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Karen A. Mingst (Author, University of Kentucky), Ivan M. Arreguín-Toft (Author, Boston University)
5th Edition
W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. 2011
Chapter 1
Approaches to International Relations I. Thinking Theoretically
Historically, international activities were the results of actions taken by central governments, but this is changing in the world of today. Increasingly, these activities involve different actors. International relations is the study of the interactions among the various actors that participate in international politics, including states, international organizations, nongovernmental organizations, subnational entities, and individuals. Political scientists develop theories or frameworks, both to understand the causes of events that occur in international relations and to answer the foundational questions in the field. Realism posits that states exist in an anarchic international system. o Each state bases its policies on an interpretation of national interest defined in terms of power. o The structure of the international system is determined by the distribution of power. Liberalism argues that humans form states that generally cooperate and follow international norms and procedures. Radical theory is rooted in economics: actions of individuals are determined by their social class. Constructivists argue that the key structures are intersubjective and social.
II. Developing the Answers
Answers are often found in history.
o
History invites students to acquire detailed knowledge of specific events, but also to use these events to test generalizations. We can also deduce answers from classical and modern philosophy. o The philosopher Plato explored ideas about the perfect state. o Thomas Hobbes imagined a state of nature when men ruled by passions, living in constant uncertainty. o Kant envisioned a federation of states as a means to universal peace. History and philosophy permit us to delve into the foundational questions and to speculate on normative elements in political life. Behavioralism proposes that individuals act in patterned ways and seek to empirically test plausible hypotheses about individual behavior. o The methods of behavioralism are not an end unto themselves, only a means to improve explanation. Some international relations scholars are dissatisfied with these approaches. o Postmodernists seek to deconstruct the basic concepts of the field such as state, nation, rationality, and so on. o Constructivists have used discourse analysis to answer the questions that are posed. No question can be answered with reliance on only one method
III. In Sum: Making Sense of International Relations
International relations is a pluralistic discipline, turning to disciplines such as history, philosophy, behavioral psychology, and so on.
Chapter 2
Historical Context of Contemporary International Relations I. Introduction
The purpose of this historical overview is to trace important trends over time—the emergence of the state and the notion of sovereignty, the development of the international state system, and the changes in the distribution of power among states Contemporary international relations, in both theory and practice, is rooted in the European experience, for better or worse.
II. The Pre-Westphalian World
Many international relations theorists date the contemporary system from 1648, the year of the Treaty of Westphalia, ending the Thirty Years War. This treaty marks the end of rule by religious authority in Europe. The Greek city-state system, the Roman Empire, and the Middle Ages are each key developments leading to the Westphalian order
The Middle Ages: Centralization and Decentralization o When the Roman empire disintegrated in the fifth century A.D., power and authority became decentralized in Europe. o By 1000 A.D. three civilizations had emerged from the rubble of Rome: 1. Arabic civilization: under the religious and political domination of the Islamic caliphate, advanced mathematical and technical accomplishments made it a potent force. 2. Byzantine Empire: located near the core of the old Roman Empire in Constantinople and united by Christianity. 3. The rest of Europe, where languages and cultures proliferated, and the networks of communication developed by the Romans were beginning to disintegrate. Much of Western Europe reverted to feudal principalities, controlled by lords and tied to fiefdoms that had the authority to raise taxes and exert legal authority. Feudalism was the response to the prevailing disorder The preeminent institution in the medieval period was the church; virtually all other institutions were local in origin and practice. Carolus Magnus, or Charlemagne, the leader of the Franks (in what is today France), challenged the church’s monopoly on power in the late eighth century. Similar trends of centralization and decentralization, political integration and disintegration, were also occurring in Ghana, Mali, Latin America, and Japan. The Late Middle Ages: Developing Transnational Networks in Europe and Beyond o After 1000 A.D. secular trends began to undermine both the decentralization of feudalism and the universalization of Christianity in Europe. Commercial activity expanded into larger geographic areas. All forms of communication improved and new technologies made daily life easier. o Economic and technological changes led to fundamental changes in social relations. 1. A transnational business community emerged, whose interests and livelihoods extended beyond its immediate locale 2. Writers and other individuals rediscovered classical literature and history, finding intellectual sustenance in Greek and Roman thought 3. Niccolò Machiavelli, in The Prince, elucidated the qualities that a leader needs to maintain the strength and security of the state. Realizing that the dream of unity in Christianity was unattainable, Machiavelli called on leaders to articulate their own political interests. Leaders must act in the state’s interest, answerable to no moral rules. 4. In the 1500s and 1600s, as European explorers and even settlers moved into the New World, the old Europe remained in flux. Feudalism was being replaced by an increasingly centralized monarchy. 5. The masses, angered by taxes imposed by the newly emerging states, rebelled and rioted.
III. The Emergence of the Westphalian System
The formulation of sovereignty was one of the most important intellectual developments leading to the Westphalian revolution. Much of the development of sovereignty is found in the writings of French philosopher Jean Bodin. To Bodin, sovereignty was the ―absolute and perpetual power vested in a commonwealth.‖ Absolute sovereignty, according to Bodin, is not
without limits. Leaders are limited by natural law, laws of God, the type of regime, and by covenants and treaties. The Thirty Years War (1618-48) devastated Europe. But the treaty that ended the conflict, the Treaty of Westphalia, had a profound impact on the practice of international relations in three ways: o It embraced the notion of sovereignty—that the sovereign enjoyed exclusive rights within a given territory. It also established that states could determine their own domestic policies in their own geographic space. o Leaders sought to establish their own permanent national militaries. The state thus became more powerful since the state had to collect taxes to pay for these militaries and the leaders assumed absolute control over the troops. o It established a core group of states that dominated the world until the beginning of the nineteenth century: Austria, Russia, England, France, and the United Provinces of the Netherlands and Belgium. The most important theorist at the time was Scottish economist Adam Smith. In An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Smith argued that the notion of a market should apply to all social orders o Individuals should be permitted to pursue their own interests and will act rationally to maximize his or her own interests o With groups of individuals pursuing self-interests, economic efficiency is enhanced as well as the wealth of the state and that of the international system. This theory has had a profound effect on states’ economic policies.
IV. Europe in the Nineteenth Century
The American Revolution (1776) and the French Revolution (1789) were the products of Enlightenment thinking as well as social contract theorists. The Aftermath of Revolution: Core Principles o Legitimacy: absolutist rule is subject to limits and imposed by man. In Two Treatises on Government, John Locke attacked absolute power and the divine right of kings. Locke’s main argument is that political power ultimately rests with the people rather than with the leader or the monarch. o Nationalism: the masses identify with their common past, their language, customs, and practices. Individuals who share such characteristics are motivated to participate actively in the political process as a group. The Napoleonic Wars o The political impact of these twin principles was far from benign in Europe. The nineteenth century opened with war in Europe on an unprecedented scale. 1. Technological change allowed larger armies. French weakness and its status as a revolutionary power made it ripe for intervention and the stamping out of the idea of popular consent The same nationalist fervor that brought about the success of Napoleon Bonaparte also led to his downfall. 1. In Spain and Russia, nationalist guerillas fought against French invaders. 2. Napoleon’s invasion of Russia ended in disaster, leading to French defeat at Waterloo three years later. Peace at the Core of the European System o Following the defeat of Napoleon in 1815 and the establishment of peace by the Congress of Vienna, the Concert of Europe—Austria, Britain, France, Prussia, and Russia—ushered in a period of relative peace.
o
The fact that general peace prevailed during this time is surprising, since major economic, technological, and political changes were radically altering the landscape. o At least three factors explain the peace: 1. European elites were united in their fear of revolution from the masses. Elites envisioned grand alliances that would bring European leaders together to fight revolution from below. Leaders ensured that mass revolutions did not love from state to state. 2. Two of the major issues confronting the core European states were internal ones: the unifications of Germany and Italy. Although the unification of both was finally solidified, through small local wars, a general war was averted since Germany and Italy were preoccupied with territorial unification. 3. Imperialism and colonialism Imperialism and Colonialism in the European System before 1870 o The discovery of the ―New‖ World by Europeans in 1492 led to rapidly expanding communication between the Americas and Europe. 1. Explorers sought discovery, riches, and personal glory. 2. Clerics sought to convert the ―savages‖ to Christianity o European powers sought to annex distant territories. The term imperialism came to mean the annexation of distant territory, usually by force, and its inhabitants into an empire. o Colonialism, which often followed imperialism, refers to the settling for people from the home country among indigenous peoples whose territories have been annexed. o This process also led to the establishment of a ―European‖ identity. 1. European, Christian, civilized, and white were contrasted with the ―other‖ peoples of the world. o The industrial revolution provided the European states with the military and economic capacity to engage in territorial expansion. o During the Congress of Berlin (1885), the major powers divided up Africa. o Only Japan and Siam were not under European control in Asia. o The struggle for economic power led to the heedless exploitation of the colonial areas, particularly Africa and Asia. o As the nineteenth century drew to a close the control of the colonial system was being challenged with increasing frequency. o During this period, much of the competition, rivalry, and tension traditionally marking relations among Europe’s states could be acted out far beyond Europe. o By the end of the nineteenth century, the roll of political rivalry and economic competition had become destabilizing. Balance of Power o The period of peace in Europe was managed and preserved for so long because of the concept of balance of power. o The balance of power emerged because the independent European states feared the emergence of any predominant state (hegemon) among them. Thus, they formed alliances to counteract any potentially more powerful faction The Breakdown: Solidification of Alliances
o
o o
o o
o
o
The balance-of-power system weakened during the waning years of the nineteenth century. Whereas previous alliances had been fluid and flexible, now alliances had solidified. Two camps emerged: the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria, and Italy) in 1882 and the Dual Alliance (France and Russia) in 1893. In 1902 Britain broke from the ―balancer‖ role by joining in a naval alliance with Japan to prevent a Russo-Japanese rapprochement in China. For the first time, a European state turned to an Asian one in order to thwart a European ally. 1. Russian defeat in the Russo-Japanese war in 1902 was a sign of the weakening of the balance-of-power system The end of the balance-of-power system came with World War I. Germany had not been satisfied with the solutions meted out at the Congress of Berlin. Being a ―latecomer‖ to the core of European power, Germany did not receive the diplomatic recognition and status its leaders desired. With the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, Germany encouraged Austria to crush Serbia. Under the system of alliances, states honored their commitments to their allies, sinking the whole continent in warfare. Between 1914 and 1918, more than 8.5 million and 1.5 million civilians lost their lives.
V. The Interwar Years and World War II
The end of World War I saw critical changes in international relations: o First, three European empires (Russia, Austro-Hungary, and the Ottoman) were strained and finally broke up during the war. With those empires went the conservative social order of Europe; in its place emerged a proliferation of nationalisms. o Second, Germany emerged out of World War I an even more dissatisfied power. The Treaty of Versailles, which formally ended the war, made Germany pay the cost of the war through reparations. This dissatisfaction provided the climate for the emergence of Adolf Hitler, who was dedicated to right the ―wrongs‖ imposed by the treaty. o Third, enforcement of the Versailles Treaty was given to the ultimately unsuccessful League of Nations, the intergovernmental organization designed to prevent all future wars. The League did not have the political weight to carry out its task because the United States refused to join. o Fourth, a vision of the post-World War I order had clearly been expounded, but it was a vision stillborn from the start. The world economy was in collapse and German fascism wreaked havoc on the plan for post-war peace. World War II o World War II was started by Germany, Italy, and Japan. Japan had attacked China in a series of incidents beginning in 1931 eventually leading to war. Italy attacked Ethiopia in 1935, using yperite (a form of mustard gas banned by the Geneva Protocol). Nazi Germany was the biggest challenge, as it set to right what Hitler saw as the wrongs of the Treaty of Versailles. o The power of fascism—German, Italian, and Japanese versions—led to the uneasy alliance between the communist Soviet Union and the liberal United
o o
o
States, Britain, and France. When World War II broke out, this alliance (the Allies) fought against the Axis powers in unison. The Allies at the end of the war were successful. Both the German Reich and imperial Japan lay in ruins at the end of the war. Two other features of World War II demand attention as well. The German invasion of Poland, the Baltic States, and the Soviet Union was followed by the organized murder of human beings, including Jews, Gypsies, communists, and Germans who showed signs of genetic defects. While Germany surrendered in May 1945, the war did not end until the surrender of Japan in August. In order to avoid a costly invasion, the United States dropped atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The new weapon, combined with the Soviet declaration of war against Japan led to the surrender of Japan to the Allies. The end of World War II resulted in a major redistribution of power and changed political borders.
VI. The Cold War
Origins of the Cold War o The most important outcome of World War II was the emergence of two superpowers—the United States and the Soviet Union—as the primary actors in the international system and the decline of Europe as the epicenter of international politics. o The second outcome of the war was the recognition of fundamental incompatibilities between these two superpowers in both national interests and ideology. 1. Russia used its newfound power to solidify its sphere of influence in the buffer states of Eastern Europe. 2. U.S. interests lay in containing the Soviet Union. The United States put the notion of containment into action in the Truman Doctrine of 1947. After the Soviets blocked western transportation corridors to Berlin, containment became the fundamental doctrine of U.S. foreign policy during the Cold War. 3. The U.S. economic system was based on capitalism, which provided opportunities to individuals to pursue what was economically rational with little or no government interference. 4. The Soviet state embraced Marxist ideology, which holds that under capitalism one class (the bourgeoisie) controls the ownership of production. The solution to the problem of class rule is revolution wherein the exploited proletariat takes control by using the state to seize the means of production. Thus, capitalism is replaced by socialism. 5. Differences between the two superpowers were exacerbated by mutual misperceptions. The Marshall Plan and establishment of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) were taken as a campaign to deprive the Soviet Union of its influence in Germany. Likewise, the Berlin Blockade was interpreted by the West as a hostile offensive action.
o
The third outcome of the end of World War II was the beginning of the end of the colonial system. European colonialists. Beginning with Britain’s granting of independence to India in 1947, Indochina and African states became independent in the 1950s and 1960s o The fourth outcome was the realization that the differences between the two superpowers would be played out indirectly, on third-party stages, rather than through direct confrontation between the two protagonists. The superpowers vied for influence in these states as a way to project power. The Cold War as a Series of Confrontations o The Cold War itself (1945-89) can be characterized as forty-five years of highlevel tension and competition between the superpowers but with no direct military conflict. o More often than not, the allies of each became involved, so the confrontations comprised two blocs of states: those in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Western Europe and the United States, and the Warsaw Pact in Eastern Europe. o One of those high-level, direct confrontations between the superpowers took place in Germany. 1. Germany had been divided after World War II into zones of occupation. In the 1949 Berlin blockade, the Soviet Union blocked land access to Berlin, prompting the United States to airlift supplies for a year. 2. In 1949, the separate states of West and East Germany were declared. 3. East Germany erected the Berlin Wall in 1961 in order to stem the tide of East Germans trying to leave the troubled state. The Cold War in Asia and Latin America o China, Indochina, and especially Korea became symbols of the Cold War in Asia. 1. By 1949 the Kuomintang was defeated in China and its leaders fled to the island of Formosa (not Taiwan). 2. In French Indochina communist forces fought against the French colonial forces leading to the eventual French defeat in 1954. 3. In 1950 North Korea attempted to reunify the Korean peninsula under communist rule, launching at attack against the South. U.S. forces, fighting under the auspices of the United Nations, counterattacked and nearly defeated North Korea. As UN troops approached the Chinese border, the Chinese attacked, driving the UN forces South and leading to an eventual three-year stalemate ending in a armistice in 1953. o The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis was another direct confrontation in yet another part of the world. The Soviet Union’s installation of missiles in Cuba was viewed by the United States as a direct threat to its territory. o In Vietnam, the Cold War played out in an extended civil war, in which communist North Vietnam were pitted against South Vietnam. o U.S. policy makers argued that communist influence must be stopped before it spread like a chain of falling dominoes throughout the rest of Southeast Asia (hence the term domino theory). The ―Cold‖ in ―Cold War‖ o It was not always the case that when once of the superpowers acted the other side responded.
1. When the Soviet Union invaded Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968, the United States verbally condemned such actions but the actions themselves went unchecked. 2. The Soviets kept quiet when the United States invaded Granada in 1983 and Panama in 1989. o The Middle East was a region of vital importance to both the United States and Soviet Union, and thus the region served as a proxy for many of the events of the Cold War. 1. Following the establishment of Israel in 1948, the region was the scene of a superpower confrontation by proxy: between a U.S.-supported Israel and the Soviet-backed Arab states of Syria, Iraq, and Egypt. Proxy ―hot‖ wars, such as the Six-Day War in 1967, and the Yom Kippur War in 1973 were fought. 2. Confrontation through proxy also occurred in parts of the world of less strategic importance, such as the Congo, Angola, and the Horn of Africa. o The Cold War was also fought and moderated in words, at summits (meetings between the leaders) and in treaties. 1. Some of these summits were successful, such as the 1967 Glassboro Summit that began the loosening of tensions known as détente. 2. Treaties placed self-imposed limitations on nuclear arms. The Cold War as a Long Peace o John Lewis Gaddis has referred to the Cold War as a ―long peace‖ to dramatize the absence of war between the great powers. Why? 1. Nuclear deterrence: Once both the United States and Soviet Union had acquired nuclear weapons, neither was willing to use them. 2. Division of power: the parity of power led to stability in the international system 3. The stability imposed by the hegemonic economic power of the United States: being in a superior economic position for much of the Cold War, the United States willingly paid the price of maintaining stability throughout the world. 4. Economic liberalism: the liberal economic order solidified and became a dominant factor in international relations. Politics became transnational under liberalism—based on interests and coalitions across state boundaries—and thus great powers became obsolete. 5. The long peace was predetermined: it is just one phase in a long historical cycle of peace and war.
VII. The Post-Cold War Era
The fall of the Berlin Wall symbolized the end of the Cold War, but actually its end was gradual. Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev had set in motions two domestic processes—glasnost (political openness) and perestroika (economic restructuring)— as early as the mid-1980s. Gorbachev’s domestic reforms also led to changes in the orientation of Soviet foreign policy. He suggested that members of the UN Security Council become ―guarantors of regional security.‖ The first post-Cold War test of the new so-called new world order came in response to Iraq’s invasion and annexation of Kuwait in 1990.
A few have labeled the end of the Cold War era the age of globalization. This era appears to be marked by U.S. primacy in international affairs to a degree not even matched by the Romans. However, U.S. primacy is still not able to prevent ethnic conflict, civil wars, and human rights abuses from occurring. The 1990s was a decade marked by dual realities (and sometimes converged and diverged), the first being U.S. primacy and the second being civil and ethnic strife. o Yugoslavia’s violent disintegration played itself over the entire decade despite Western attempts to resolve the conflict peacefully. o At the same time, the world witnessed ethnic tension and violence as genocide in Rwanda and Burundi went unchallenged by the international community. On September 11, 2001, the world witnessed deadly, and economically destructive terrorist attacks against two important cities in the United States. These attacks set into motion a U.S.-led global war on terrorism. o The United States fought a war in Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime, which was providing safe haven to Osama bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda organization and a base from which it freely planned and carried out a global terror campaign against the United States. o Following the initially successful war in Afghanistan, the United States, convinced that Iraq maintained weapons of mass destruction and supported terrorist organizations, attempted to build support in the United Nations for authorization to remove Saddam Hussein from power. When the United Nations failed to back the U.S. request, the United State built its own coalition and overthrew the Iraqi government. The fight continues today. o Despite its primacy, the United States does not feel it is secure from attack. The issue of whether U.S. power will be balanced by an emerging power is also far from resolved.
VIII. In Sum: Learning from History
Whether the world develops into a multipolar, unipolar, or bipolar system depends in part on by looking to the trends of the past and how they influence contemporary thinking. Or is the entire concept of polarity an anachronism?
Chapter 3
Contending Perspectives: How to Think about International Relations Theoretically I. Thinking Theoretically
A theory is a set of propositions and concepts that seeks to explain phenomena by specifying the relationships among the concepts; theory’s ultimate purpose is to predict phenomena. Good theory generates groups of testable hypotheses: specific statements positing a particular relationship between two or more variables.
As more and more data are collected, one must be tolerant of ambiguity, concerned about probabilities, and distrustful of absolutes. International relations theories come in a variety of forms, and this chapter will introduce three general theories and one newer perspective.
II. Theory and the Levels of Analysis
In a categorization first used by Kenneth Waltz, three different sources of explanations are offered. o If the individual level is the focus, then the personality, perceptions, choices, and activities of individual decision makers and individual participants provide the explanation. o If the state-level, or domestic, factors are the focus, then the explanation is derived from characteristics of the state: the type of government, the type of economic system, or interest groups. o If the international system level is the focus, then the explanation rests with the anarchic characteristics of that system or with international and regional organizations and their strengths and weaknesses. The purpose of theory is to guide us toward an understanding of which of these various explanations are the necessary and sufficient explanations for the invasion. Good theory should be able to explain phenomena at a particular level of analysis; better theory should also offer explanations across different levels of analysis.
III. Realism and Neorealism Realism is based on a view of the individual as primarily selfish and power seeking. Individuals are organized in states, each of which acts in a unitary way in pursuit of its own national interest, defined in terms of power.
Power is primarily thought of in terms of material resources necessary to physically harm or coerce other states. States exist in an anarchic international system, characterized by the absence of an authoritative hierarchy. States’ most important concern is to manage their insecurity, and they rely primarily on balancing the power of other states and deterrence to keep the international system intact. Four of the essential assumptions of realism are found in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War. 1. The state is the principal actor in war and politics in general. 2. The state is assumed to be a unitary actor: once a decision is made to go to war or capitulate, the state speaks and acts with one voice. 3. Decision makers acting in the name of the state are assumed to be rational actors. Rational decision making leads to the advance of the national interest. 4. A state’s need to protect itself from enemies both foreign and domestic. A state augments its security by building up its economic prowess and forming alliances with other states. St. Augustine (354-430) added an assumption, arguing that humanity is flawed, egoistic, and selfish, although not predetermined to be so. He blames war on this basic characteristic of humanity.
Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527) argued that a leader needs to be ever mindful of threats to his personal security and the security of the state The central tenet accepted by virtually all realists is that states exist in an anarchic international system. Thomas Hobbes originally articulated this tenet, and maintained that each state has the right to preserve themselves. Hans Morgenthau (1904-80), whose textbook, Politics among Nations, became the realist bible following World War II, argued that international politics is a struggle for power that can be explained at three levels of analysis: 1. The flawed individual in the state of nature struggles for self-preservation. 2. The autonomous and unitary state is constantly involved in power struggles, balancing power with power and preserving the national interest. 3. Because the international system is anarchic—there is no higher power to put the competition to an end—the struggle is continuous. Not all realists agree on the correct policy. Defensive realists argue that all states should pursue policies of restraint. Offensive realists argue that under conditions of international anarchy, all states should seek opportunities to improve their relative positions and that states should strive for power. Neorealism, as delineated by Kenneth Waltz’s theory of international politics, gives precedence to the structure of the international system as an explanatory factor, over states. o The most important unit to study is the structure of the international system, and that structure is determined by the ordering principle (the distribution of capabilities among states) o The international structure is a force in itself; it constrains state behavior and states may not be able to control it. This structure determines outcomes. o Like classical realism, balance of power is a core principle of neorealism. However, neorealists believe that the balance of power is largely determined by the structure of the system. o In a neorealist’s balance-of-power world, a state’s survival depends on having more power than other states, thus all power are viewed in relative terms. o Neorealists are also concerned with cheating. The awareness that such possibilities exist, combined with states’ rational desire to protect their own interests, tends to preclude cooperation among states Robert Gilpin offers another interpretation of realism. Gilpin adds the notion of dynamism: history as a series of cycles—cycles of birth, expansion, and demise of dominant powers. 0. Whereas classical realism offers no satisfactory rationale for the decline of powers, Gilpin does, on the basis of the importance of economic power. 1. Hegemons decline because of three processes: The increasingly marginal returns of controlling an empire, a statelevel phenomenon The tendency for economic hegemons to consume over time and invest less, also a state-level phenomenon The diffusion of technology, a system-level phenomenon through which new powers challenge the hegemon. Ann Tickner adds gender to realism. She argues that human nature is not fixed and inalterable, but multidimensional and contextual. 0. Power cannot be equated exclusively with control and domination, but must be reoriented toward a more inclusive notion of power, where power is the ability
to act in concert (not just conflict) or to be in a symbiotic relationship (instead of outright competition).
IV. Liberalism and Neoliberal Institutionalism
Liberalism holds that human nature is basically good and that people can improve their moral and material conditions, making societal progress possible. Bad or evil behavior is the product of inadequate social institutions and misunderstandings among leaders. o One origin of liberal theory is found in Enlightenment optimism: 1. French philosopher Montesquieu argued that it is not human nature that is defective, but problems arise as man enters civil society. War is a product of society. To overcome defects in society, education is imperative. 2. According to Immanuel Kant, international anarchy can be overcome through some kind of collective action—a federation of states in which sovereignties would be left intact. o Another origin, nineteenth-century liberalism, reformulated the Enlightenment by adding a preference for democracy over aristocracy and for free trade over national economic self-sufficiency: 1. This liberalism saw man as capable of satisfying his natural needs and wants in rational ways. 2. Individual freedom and autonomy can best be realized in a democratic states unfettered by excessive governmental restrictions 3. Free markets must be allowed to flourish and governments must permit the free flow of trade and commerce. This will create interdependencies between states, thus raising the cost of war. o Twentieth-century idealism is also termed Wilsonian idealism (its greatest adherent was Woodrow Wilson, author of the League of Nations). 1. War is preventable; more than half of the League covenant’s provisions focused on preventing war. 2. The covenant also included a provision legitimizing the notion of collective security, wherein aggression by one state would be countered by collective action, embodied in a league of nations. 3. Liberals also place faith in international law and legal instruments mediation, arbitration, and international courts. o The basis of liberalism remains firmly embedded in the belief of the rationality of humans and in the unbridled optimism that through learning and education, humans can develop institutions to bring out their best characteristics. o Neoliberal institutionalism asks why states choose to cooperate most of the time even in the anarchic condition of the international system. 1. One answer is the story of the prisoner’s dilemma, developed by Robert Axelrod and Robert Keohane. Two prisoners are interrogated separately for a crime. Each prisoner is faced with a onetime choice. Neither prisoner knows how the other will respond; the cost of not confessing if the other does is high. So both sides will confess. Similarly, states are not faced with a onetime situation; confront each other over and over again. The prisoner’s dilemma provides neoliberal institutionalists with a rationale for mutual cooperation in an environment
2. 3. 4.
5.
where there is no international authority mandating such cooperation. Cooperation emerges because for actors having continuous interactions with each other, it is in the self-interest of each to cooperate. With the end of the Cold War, liberalism has achieved new credibility. Shared democratic norms and culture inhibit aggression and international institutions that bind democracies together act to constrain behavior. Large-scale conflict is less frequent than in earlier eras. Thus, as Francis Fukuyama argues, there is an absence of any viable theoretical alternatives.
V. The Radical Perspective
Radicalism assumes the primacy of economics for explaining virtually all other phenomena. o The writings of Karl Marx (1818-83) are fundamental to all radical thought. According to Marx, private interests control labor and market exchanges. A clash inevitably arises between the controlling, capitalist bourgeois class and the controlled proletariat workers. o During the evolution of the economic production process from feudalism to capitalism, new patterns of social relations were developed. Radicals are concerned with explaining the relationship between the means of production, social relations, and power. o Another group of radical beliefs centers on the structure of the global system. That structure is the by-product of imperialism, or the expansion of certain economic forms into other areas of the world. o John A. Hobson theorized that expansion occurs because of three conditions: 1. Overproduction of goods and services in developed countries 2. Underconsumption by workers and the lower classes in developed nations because of low wages 3. Oversavings by the upper classes and the bourgeoisie in the dominant developed countries To solve these problems, developed states have expanded abroad, and radicals argue that developing countries are increasingly constrained and dependent on the actions of the developed world. Theorists emphasize the techniques of domination and suppression that arises from uneven economic development is inherent in the capitalist system, enabling the dominant states to exploit the underdogs. Contemporary radicals, such as dependency theorists, attribute primary importance to the role of multinational corporations (MNCs) and international banks based in developed countries in exerting fundamental controls over the developing countries. Dependency theorists are pessimistic about the possibility of change. Virtually all radical theorists are uniformly normative in their orientation. They evaluate the hierarchical capitalist structure as ―bad‖ and its methods as exploitive.
Some have discredited radicalism as an international relations theory because it cannot explain the cooperation between capitalist and socialist states at the end of the Cold War, why and how some developing countries have escaped dependency, and did not foresee or predict the demise of the Soviet Union.
VI. Constructivism
The major theoretical proposition that all constructivists subscribe to is that neither individual, state, nor international community interests are predetermined or fixed. Individuals in collectivities forge, shape, and change culture through ideas and practices. State and national interests are the result of the social identities of these actors. Constructivists eschew the concept of material structures. Constructivist theorist Alexander Wendt argues that political structure explains nothing and tells us little about state behavior. Many constructivists emphasize normative structures. What we need to know its identity, and identities change as a result of cooperative behavior and learning. Constructivists see power in discursive terms—the power of ideas, culture, and language. Power exists in every exchange among actors, and the goal of constructivists is to find the sources of power and how it shapes identity. Constructivists claim there is no objective reality, if ―the world is in the eye of the beholder,‖ then there can be no right or wrong answers, only individual perspectives. Thus, they see sovereignty not as an absolute, but as a contested concept.
VII. Theory in Action: Analyzing the 2003 Iraq War The Realist Interpretation 1. Realists would focus on state-level and international-level factors. Realists see the international system as anarchic and few states other than the United States would be able and willing to rid the world of the Iraq threat. 2. Iraq posed a security threat to the United States and the only way to eliminate this threat was to oust the Baathist regime from power. 3. Not all realists agree that the policy the United States pursued was the right one: both John Mearsheimer, an offensive realist, and Stephen Walt, a defensive realist, have jointly argued that the war was not necessary. 4. George W. Bush and other realist theorists believe that Saddam was not being effectively deterred. Bush argued that Saddam’s use of chemical weapons against the Kurds in the past meant that it was probable he would use them to threaten the United States. The Liberal Interpretation
Liberals would utilize all three levels of analysis. 1. Individual: Saddam was clearly an abusive leader and committed atrocities against his own population 2. State: The Iraqi state had an authoritarian nature, and replacement by a democracy would lessen the coercive threat of the state and enhance stability in the Middle East
3. International level: Iraq was not confronting to its obligations under various UN Security Council resolutions; thus, there was an obligation for the international community to take collective action. The international community did not respond as some liberals would have predicted because the UN Security Council did not endorse the action, and there was insufficient evidence for the presence of weapons of mass destruction.
Radical Interpretation
Radicals would focus mainly on the international system structure Political colonialism spawned an imperialist system in which the economic needs of the capitalist states were paramount. In the Middle East, that meant imperialism by the West to secure oil resources. The instability of the oil supply coming from Iraq explains the U.S. invasion. Many radicals believe the United States wants to control Iraq’s oil, pointing to the fact that U.S. troops protected oil fields all over the country. World-system and dependency theorists would not be surprised at all that the core states of the capitalist system—the United States and its allies—responded with force with Iraq threatened their critical interests in oil. A constructivist view of the war would focus on the social construction of the threat. 1. How the threat of Saddam Hussein was portrayed is a key part of the analysis. 2. The concept of legitimacy was also key. The United States recognized the need for legitimacy of its actions, though in the long run, the efforts to gain legitimacy through the United Nations failed.
VIII. In Sum: Seeing the World through Theoretical Lenses
How each of us sees international relations depends on his or her own theoretical lens. These perspectives hold different views about the possibility and desirability of change in the international system.
Chapter 4
The International System I. The Notion of a System
A system is an assemblage of units, objects, or parts united by some form of regular interaction. In the 1950s, the behavioral revolution in the social sciences and growing acceptance of political realism in international relations led scholars to conceptualize international politics as a system, using the language of systems theory.
II. The International System According to Realists
All realists characterize the international system as anarchic. No authority exists above the state, which is sovereign. Each state must therefore look out for its own interests above all. Polarity: system polarity refers to the number of blocs of states that exert power in the international system. There are three types of polarity: 1. Multipolarity: if there are a number of influential actors in the international system, a balance-of-power or multipolar system is formed. In a balance-of-power system, the essential norms of the system are clear to each of the state actors. In classical balance of power, the actors are exclusively states and there should be at least five of them. If an actor does not follow these norms, the balance-of-power system may become unstable. When alliances are formed, they are formed for a specific purpose, have a short duration, and shift according to advantage rather than ideology. 2. Bipolarity: in the bipolar system of the Cold War, each of the blocs (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, and the Warsaw Pact) sought to negotiate rather than fight, to fight minor wars rather than major ones, and to fight major wars rather than fail to eliminate the rival bloc. Alliances tend to be long term, based on relatively permanent, not shifting, interests. In a tight bipolar system, international organizations either do not develop or are ineffective. In a looser system, international organizations may develop primarily to mediate between the two blocs. 3. Hegemony: one state that commands influence in the international system. Immediately after the Gulf War in 1991, many states grew concerned that the international system had become unipolar, with no effective counterweight to the power of the United States. System Management and Stability: Realists do not agree among themselves on how polarity matters. o Bipolar systems are very difficult to regulate formally, since neither uncommitted states nor international organizations are able to direct the behavior of either of the two blocs. Informal regulation may be easier. o Kenneth Waltz argues that the bipolar system is the most stable structure in the long run because there is a clear difference in the amount of power held by the two poles as compared to that held by the rest of the state actors. o John Mearsheimer suggests that the world will miss the stability and predictability that the Cold War forged. He argues that more conflict pairs would develop and hence more possibilities for war. o Theoretically, in multipolar systems, the regulation of system stability ought to be easier than in bipolar systems. Under multipolarity, numerous interactions take place among all the various parties, and thus there is less opportunity to dwell on a specific relationship or respond to an arms buildup by just one party in the system. o Advocates of unipolarity, known as hegemonic stability theorists, claim that unipolarity leads to the most stable system. Paul Kennedy argues that it was the hegemony of Britain in the nineteenth century and that of the United States after World War II that led to the greatest stability. When the hegemon loses power and declines, then system stability is jeopardized.
o
The international system of the twenty-first century is confronted by a unique problem: the United States dominates both militarily and economically. What are the implications of such a world? Will it lead to international peace? Realists and International System Change o Changes in either the number of major actors or the relative power relationship among the actors may result in a change in the international system. Wars are usually responsible for changes in power relationships. o An example of a system change occurred at the end of World War II. The war brought the demise of Great Britain and France, and signaled an end to Germany’s and Japan’s imperial aspirations. The United States and Soviet Union emerged into dominant positions; the multipolar world had been replaced by a bipolar one. o Robert Gilpin sees another form of change, where states act to preserve their own interests and thereby change the system. Such changes occur because states respond at different rates to political, economic, and technological developments. o Exogenous changes may also lead to a shift in the system. Advances in technology not only have expanded the boundaries of accessible geographic space, but also brought about changes in the boundaries of the international system. With these changes came an explosion of new actors. o Nuclear warfare has had more of an impact of on the international system more than any other technological change. Although these weapons have not been used since 1945, the weapons remain much feared, and efforts by nonnuclear states to develop such weapons, or threat to do so, has met sharp resistance. The nuclear states do not want a change in the status quo and do not want them in the hands of rogue states. o In the view of realists, international systems can change, yet the inherent bias among realist interpretations is for continuity.
III. The International System According to Liberals
The international system is not central to the view of liberals. Thus, there are three different conceptions of the international system: o Not as a structure but as a process, in which multiple interactions occur among different parties and where various actors learn from the interaction. 1. Actors include, not only states, but also international governmental organizations, nongovernmental organizations, multinational corporations, and substate actors. 2. Each actor has interactions with all of the other ones. Thus, a great many national interests define the system, including economic and social issues and not just security. 3. Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye describe the international system as interdependent. There are multiple channels connecting states, and multiple issues and agendas arise in the interdependent system. o An English tradition of international society: in an international society, the various actors communicate and consent to common rules and institutions and recognize common interests. 1. Actors share a common identity, a sense of ―we-ness‖; without such an identity, a society cannot exist.
2. This conception has normative implications: the international system is an arena and process for positive interactions o An anarchic one in which each individual state acts in its self-interest: This is also called neoliberal institutionalism, a view that comes closer to realist thinking. 1. But, unlike many realists, they see the product of the interaction among actors as a potentially positive one, where institutions created out of self-interest serve to moderate state behavior. Liberals and International System Change o Changes come from several sources: 1. Changes occur as the result of exogenous technological developments—that is, progress occurring independently. Examples are communication and transportation systems. 2. Change may occur because of changes in the relative importance of different issues areas. In the last decades of the twentieth century, economic issues replaced national security issues. Globalizing issues such as human rights may assume primacy in the twenty-first century. 3. Change may occur as new actors, including multinational corporations and nongovernmental organizations, augment or replace state actors.
IV. The International System According to Radicals
Radicals seek to describe and explain the structure of the system in terms of stratification: the uneven division of resources among different groups of states. The system is stratified according to which states have vital resources. From the stratification of power and resources comes the division between the haves, characterized by the North, and have-nots, positioned in the South. Economic disparities are built into the structure and all actions are constrained by this structure. The Implications for Stratification o When the dominant powers are challenged by those states just beneath them in terms of access to resources, the system may become highly unstable. The rising powers seek first-tier status and are willing to fight wars to get it. Top powers may begin a war to quell the threat. o For Marxists, crippling stratification in the system is caused by capitalists. Capitalism dominates international institutions whose rules are structured by capitalist states to facilitate capitalist processes, and MNCs whose headquarters are in capitalist states but whose loci of activity are in dependent states. o Radicals believe that the greatest amount of resentment will be felt in systems where stratification is most extreme. The call for the New International Economic Order (NIEO) in the 1970s was voiced by radicals and liberal reformers in most developing countries. They sought changes such as debt forgiveness, how commodities were priced, and controls on multinational corporations (MNCs).
V. Constructivism and International System Change
Constructivists argue that the whole concept of an international system is a European idea. Nothing can be explained by material structures alone
o
Martha Finnemore suggests that there have been different international orders with changing purposes. Constructivists believe that what does change are social norms. o Social norms change through both actions of the collective and through individuals o Norms may change through coercion, but most likely they will change through international institutions, law, and social movements
VI. Advantages and Disadvantages of the International System as a Level of Analysis Advantages: 1. Allows comparison and contrasts between systems 2. Comprehensiveness: it enables scholars to organize the seemingly disjointed parts into a whole. 3. Systems theory is a holistic approach. Although it cannot provide descriptions of events at the micro level, it does allow plausible explanations at the more general level. For realists, generalizations provide fodder for prediction. For liberals and radicals, these generalizations have normative implications. Disadvantages 1. The emphasis at the international system level means that the ―stuff of politics‖ is often neglected, while the generalizations are broad and obvious. 2. The testing of systems theories is very difficult. Most theorists are constrained by a lack of historical information and thus the ability to test specific hypotheses over a long time period is restricted. 3. The problem of boundaries: does the notion of the international system mean the political system? What factors lie outside the system? What shapes the system? 4. The idea of a single international system is largely a creation of European thought. It may be better to think of multiple international systems over time 1. Imperial China 2. The umma as a community of Muslims
VII. In Sum: From the International System to the State
Of all theoretical approaches, realists and radicals pay the most attention to the international system of analysis. For realists, the defining characteristic is polarity; for radicals, it is stratification. Constructivists emphasize how changes in norms and ideas shape the system, seeing little differentiation between the international and domestic system and eschewing the importance attached to international system structure. Constraints are viewed by realists as positive, by radicals as negative, and by liberals as neutral (as an arena and process for interaction).
Chapter 5
The State
I. The State and the Nation
For an entity to be considered a state, four fundamental conditions must be met (although these legal criteria are not absolute): o A state must have a territorial base. o A stable population must reside within its borders,. o There should be a government to which this population owes allegiance. o A state has to be recognized diplomatically by other states. A nation is a group of people who share a set of characteristics. At the core of the concept of a nation is the notion that people having commonalities owe their allegiance to the nation and to its legal representative, the state. o The recognition of commonalities among people spread with new technologies and education. With improved methods of transportation and invention of the printing press, people could travel, witnessing firsthand similarities and differences among peoples. Some nations, liked Denmark and Italy, formed their own states. This coincidence between state and nation, the nation-state, is the foundation for national self-determination, the idea that peoples sharing nationhood have a right to determine how and under what conditions they should live. Other nations are spread among several states; in these cases, the state and the nation do not coincide. o It may be a state with several nations, like South Africa and India. o In the case of the United States and Canada, the state and nation do not coincide, yet a common identity and nationality is forged over time, even in the absence of religious, ethnic, or cultural similarity. o In the United States, national values reflecting commonly held ideas are expressed in public rituals. Not all ethnonationalists aspire to the same goals. o Some want recognition of unique status o Some seek solutions in federal arrangements o A few prefer irredentism: joining with fellow ethnonationalists in other states to create a new state Disputes over state territories and the desires of nations to form their own states have been major sources of instability and even conflict. o Of these territorial conflicts, none has been more intractable as the conflict between the Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs, who each claim the same territory. o Five interstate wars have been fought and two uprisings by the Palestinian people within the territory occupied by Israel have occurred since the formation of the state of Israel in 1948. o Should Israel and Palestinian territories be divided into two separate, independent states?
II. Contending Conceptualizations of the State
The Realist View of the State o Realists hold a state-centric view: the state is an autonomous actor constrained only by the structural anarchy of the international system.
o
As a sovereign entity, the state has a consistent set of goals—that is, a national interest—defined in terms of power. Once the state acts, it does so as an autonomous, unitary actor. The Liberal View of the State o The state enjoys sovereignty but is not an autonomous actor. The state is a pluralist arena whose function is to maintain the basic rules of the game. o There is no explicit or consistent national interest; there are many. These interests often change and compete against each other within a pluralistic framework. The Radical View of the State o The instrumental Marxist view sees the state as the executing agent of the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie reacts to direct societal pressures, especially to pressures from the capitalist class. o The structural Marxist view sees the state as operating within the structure of the capitalist system. Within that system, the state is driven to expand, because of the imperatives of the capitalist system. o In neither view is there a national interest or real sovereignty, as the state is continually reacting to external capitalist pressures. The Constructivist View of the State o National interests are neither material nor given. They are ideational and continually changing and evolving, both in response to domestic factors and in response to international norms and ideas. o States have multiple identities, including a shared understanding of national identity, which also changes, altering state preferences and hence state behavior. Contrasting the Various Views of the State: The Example of Oil o A realist interpretation posits a uniform national interest that is articulated by the state. Oil is vital for national security; thus, the state desires stability in oil’s availability and price. o Liberals believe that multiple national interests influence state actions: consumer groups, manufacturers, and producers. The state itself has no consistent viewpoint about the oil; its task is to ensure that the playing field is level and the rules are the same for all players. There is also no single or consistent national interest. o In the radical perspective, oil policy reflects the interests of the owner capitalist class aligned with the bourgeoisie and reflects the structure of the international capitalist system. The negotiating process is exploitative for the advancement of capitalist states. o Constructivists may try to tease out how the identities of states are constructed around having a valuable resource.
III. The Nature of State Power
States are critical actors because they have power, which is the ability not only to influence others but to control outcomes so as to produce results that would not have occurred naturally. Power itself is multi-dimensional; there are different kinds of power. Natural Sources of Power
o
Whether power is effective at influencing outcomes depends on the power potential of each party. A state’s power potential depends on its natural sources of power. The three most important natural sources of power are: 1. Geographic size and position: a large geographic expanse gives a state automatic power, although long borders must be defended and may be a weakness. Alfred Mahan (1840-1914) argued that the state that controls the ocean routes controls the world. Sir Halford Mackinder (1861-1947) argued that the state that had the most power was the one that controlled the heartland. o Natural resources: Petroleum-exporting states like Kuwait and Qatar, which are geographically small but have greater power than their sizes would suggest. Having a sought-after resource may prove a liability making states targets for aggressive actions. The absence of natural resources does not mean that a state has no power potential; Japan is not rich in resources but is still an economic powerhouse. Population: sizable populations give power potential and great power status to a state. However, states with small, highly educated, skilled populations such as Switzerland can fill large political and economic niches. Tangible Sources of Power
Industrial development: with advanced industrial capacity (such as air travel), the advantages and disadvantages of geography diminish. With industrialization, the importance of population is modified: large but poorly equipped armies are no match for small armies with advanced equipment. Radicals believe that differences in who has access to the source of tangible power lead to the creation of different classes, some more powerful than others.
Intangible Sources of Power
National image: people within states have images of their state’s power potential— images that translate into an intangible power ingredient. Public support: a state’s power is magnified when there appears to be unprecedented public support. For example, China’s power was magnified under Mao Zedong because there was unprecedented public support for the communist leadership. Leadership: visionaries and charismatic leaders such as Mohandas Gandhi and Franklin Roosevelt were able to augment the power potential of their states by taking bold initiatives. Likewise, poor leaders diminish the state’s power capacity. Joseph S. Nye has labeled intangible power soft power: the ability to attract others because of the legitimacy of the state’s values or policies. Liberals would more than likely place greater importance on these intangible ingredients, since several are characteristics of domestic processes. Constructivists argue that power includes not only the tangible and intangible sources but also the power of ideas and language. It is through the power of ideas and norms that state identities and nationalism are forged and changed.
IV. The Exercise of State Power
The Art of Diplomacy o Traditional diplomacy entails states trying to influence the behavior of other actors by negotiating. o Diplomacy usually begins with bargaining through direct and indirect communication in an attempt to reach agreement on an issue. o For bargaining to be successful, each party needs to be credible. Wellintentioned parties have a higher probability of successful negotiations. Although states seldom enter diplomatic bargaining as equals, each has information and goals of its own. The outcome is almost always mutually beneficial, but the outcome may not please each of the parties equally. o Bargaining and negotiations are complicated by at least two factors: 1. Most states carry out two levels of bargaining simultaneously: bargaining between and among states and the bargaining that must occur between the state’s negotiators and its various domestic constituencies, both to negotiate and to ratify the agreement. Robert Putnam refers to this as a two-level game. Trade negotiations with the World Trade Organization are often conducted as two-level games. 2. Bargaining and negotiating are a culture-bound activity. Approaches to bargaining vary across cultures. Two styles of negotiations have been identified: Deductive style: from general principles to particular applications. The South argued in this style during the New International Economic Order (NIEO) negotiations, Pragmatic style: addressing concrete problems and resolving specific issues before broader principles. The North argued in this style during NIEO negotiations, leading to a stalemate between North and South. The use of public diplomacy is an increasingly popular technique. It involves targeting both foreign publics and elites, attempting to create an overall image that enhances a country’s ability to achieve its objectives. It was used before and during the 2003 Iraq war. Diplomacy may need to include more than negotiations, making other forms of diplomacy necessary. Some states may choose niche diplomacy, concentrating their efforts on in a few areas.
Economic Statecraft
States may use both positive and negative economic sanctions to try to influence other states. Positive sanctions involve offering a carrot, enticing the target state to act in the desired way by rewarding moves made in the desired direction. Negative sanctions may be more the norm: threatening to act or actually taking actions that punish the target state for moves made in the direction not desired. A state’s ability to use these instruments of economic statecraft depends on its power potential. While radicals deny it, liberals argue that developing states do have some leverage in economic statecraft if they control a key resource of which there is limited production. In general, economic sanctions have not been very successful. They appear to work in the short term, but in the long term, it is difficult to maintain international cohesion
because states imposing the sanctions find it more advantageous to bust the sanctions to gain economically. Since the mid-1990s, states have imposed so-called smart sanctions, including freezing assets of governments and/or individuals and imposing commodities sanctions. The international community has tried to affect specific individuals and avoid the high humanitarian costs of general sanctions.
The Use of Force
Force may be used either to get a target state to do something or to undo something it has done—called compellence—or to keep an adversary from doing something— called deterrence. Compellence was used in the prelude to the 1991 Gulf War as the international community tried to get Saddam Hussein to change his actions. During each step of the compellent strategy of escalation, one message was communicated to Iraq: withdraw from Kuwait or more coercive actions will follow. Compellence was also used when the Western alliance sought to get Serbia to stop abusing the human rights of Kosovar Albanians, and before the 2003 Iraq war. With deterrence, states commit themselves to punishing a target state if the target state takes an undesired action. Threats of actual war are used to dissuade a state from pursuing certain courses of action. Deterrence has taken on a special meaning since the advent of nuclear weapons in 1945. States that recognize the destructive capability of nuclear weapons and know that others have a second-strike capability—the ability to retaliate even after an attack has been launched by an opponent—will refrain from taking aggressive action, using its first-strike capability. Deterrence is then successful. For either compellence or deterrence to be effective, states must clearly and openly communicate their objectives and capabilities, be willing to make good on the threats, and have the credibility to follow through with their commitments. Compellence and deterrence can fail. Even if states go to war, they have choices. They choose the type of weaponry, the kind of targets, the geographic locus, and to respond in kind, to escalate, or de-escalate.
Democracy and Foreign Policy
Is the foreign policy behavior of democratic states any different from the behavior of nondemocratic or authoritarian states? In Perpetual Peace (1795), Immanuel Kant argued that the spread of democracy would change international politics by eliminating war. The public would be very cautious in supporting war since they are apt to suffer the most devastating effects. Other explanations have been added to the democratic peace hypothesis. Perhaps some are more satisfied with the status quo or more likely to be allies of each other since they share similar values. Despite a plethora of studies by political scientists, the evidence is not that clear-cut and explanations are partial. Even within a single research program, there may be serious differences in conclusions based on the assumptions made and methods used. Yet the basic finding is that democracies do not engage in militarized disputes against each other. Democracies are not more pacific than nondemocracies; democracies just do not fight each other.
V. Models of Foreign Policy Decision Making
The Rational Model o Foreign policy is conceived of as actions chosen by the national government that maximize its strategic goals and objectives. o In times of crisis, when decision makers are confronted by a threatening event and have only a short time to make a decision about how to respond, then using the rational model as a way to assess the other side’s behavior is an appropriate choice. o Most U.S. assessments of decisions taken by the Soviet Union during the Cold War were based on a rational model. The Bureaucratic/Organizational Model o Organizational politics emphasizes the standard operating procedures and processes of an organization. Decisions depend heavily on precedents; major changes in policy are unlikely. o Bureaucratic politics occurs among members of the bureaucracy representing different interests. Decisions flow from the tug-of-war among these departments and individuals. o Noncrisis situations, such as trade policy, provide a ripe area to see this model of decision making at work. When time is no real constraint, informal groups and departments have time to mobilize. o The decisions arrived at are not always the most rational ones; rather they are the decisions that satisfice—satisfy the most different constituents without ostracizing any. o Liberals especially turn to this model of decision-making behavior in their analyses. The model is relevant in large, democratic countries, where responsibility it divided among a number of different units. The Pluralist Model o The pluralist model attributes decisions to bargaining conducted among domestic sources—the public, interest groups, and multinational corporations (MNCs). o In noncrisis situations, especially economic ones, societal groups may play very important roles. Societal groups have a variety of ways of forcing decisions in their favor or constraining decisions. The movement to ban land mines in the 1990s is an example of a pluralist foreign policy decision.
VI. Challenges to the State
Globalization o Externally, the state is buffeted by globalization, growing integration of the world in terms of politics, economics, communications, and culture. It is a process that undermines traditional state sovereignty. o Politically, the state is confronted by globalizing issues—environmental degradation and disease—which governments cannot manage alone and that which requires cooperative action. o Economically, states and financial markets are tied inextricably together. The internationalization of production and consumption make it ever more difficult for states to regulate their own economic policies.
o
Culturally, new and intrusive technologies—e-mail, fax machines, worldwide TV networks—increasingly undermine the state’s control over information and hence its control over its citizenry. Transnational Crime o Transnational crime has led to the accelerating movement of illegal drugs, counterfeit goods, smuggled weapons, laundered money, and trafficking in poor and exploited people. o It has created new businesses while distorting national and regional economies. States and government are incapable of responding because of rigid bureaucracies and corrupt officials undermine the states’ efforts. Transnational Movements o Transnational movements, particularly religious and ideological movements, are now political forces that have challenged the state. o In Christendom, these movements reject secularism and attempt to turn political, social, and individual loyalties away from the state and toward religious ideas. o Believers in Islamic fundamentalism are united by wanting to change states and societies by basing them on the ideas contained in the texts of Islam. They see a long-standing discrepancy between the political and economic aspirations of states and the actual conditions of corrupt rule and economic inequality. o Not all transnational movements pose a threat to the state; many develop around progressive goals such as the environment, human rights, and development. Ethnonational Movements o Ethnonational movements identify more with a particular culture than with a state. Having experienced discrimination or persecution, many of these groups are now taking collective action in support of national self-determination. o Kashmir is one of the more complex ethnonational movement; Kashmiris are overwhelmingly Muslim but have been ruled by Hindus. It is also tied to the larger conflict between India and Pakistan. o Some ethnonational challenges lead to civil conflict and war, as the Kashmir case illustrates. o Ethnonationalist movements can pose a challenge even to the strongest of states. For example, China has been confronted by Uighur uprisings.
Chapter 6
The Individual I. Foreign-Policy Elites: Individuals Who Matter
Liberals are adamant that leaders do make a difference. Whenever there is a leadership change in a major power, speculation always arises about possible changes in the country’s foreign policy.
o
Ample empirical proof has been offered that individual leadership matters. From Nicolae Ceauescu to Mikhail Gorbachev, leadership made a difference in starting and sustaining foreign policy reforms in their respective countries. Constructivists attribute policy shifts in the Soviet Union only to Gorbachev, but also to the networks of reformists and international affairs specialists who promoted new ideas. For realists, individuals are of little importance. States are not differentiated by their government type or personalities of leaders, but by the relative power they hold in the international system. The Impact of Elites: External Conditions o When political institutions are unstable, young, in crisis, or collapsed, leaders are able to provide powerful influences. o When they have few institutional constraints. In dictatorial regimes, top leaders are free from constraints such as societal inputs and political opposition and thus can change policy unfettered. o The specifics of a situation. Decision makers’ personal characteristics have more influence on outcomes when the issue is peripheral rather than central, when the issue is not routine, or when the situation is ambiguous and information us unclear. The Impact of Elites: The Personality Factor o Political psychologist Margaret Hermann has found a number of personality characteristics that affect foreign-policy behaviors. 1. Leaders with high levels of nationalism, a strong need for power, and a high level of distrust of others, tend to develop an independent orientation to foreign affairs. 2. Leaders with low levels of nationalism, a high need for evaluation, and low levels of distrust of others, tended toward a participatory orientation in foreign affairs. Personality characteristics affect the leadership of dictators more than that of democratic leaders because leaders because of the absence of effective institutional checks. Betty Glad analyzed the personalities of tyrants like Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam Hussein and labeled them as having malignant narcissism syndrome-those who rule without attention to law, capitalize on self-presentations, and utilize cruel tactics.
Individual Decision Making
Individuals are not perfectly rational decision makers. The individual selects, organizes, and evaluates incoming information about the surrounding world. In perceiving and interpreting new and oftentimes contradictory information, individuals rely on existing perceptions. If those perceptions form a relatively integrated set of images, then they are called a belief system. Political scientists have conducted a number of empirical elite mindset studies of those individuals who left behind extensive written records. Since few leaders leave such as record, our ability to reconstruct elite images and perceptions is limited, as is our ability to state their influence on a specific decision.
Information-Processing Mechanisms
Individual elites utilize, usually unconsciously, a number of psychological mechanisms to process the information that forms their general perceptions of the world: 1. Individuals strive to be cognitively consistent, ensuring that images hang together consistently within their belief systems. 2. Elites in power look for those details of a present episode that look like a past one, perhaps ignoring the important differences. This is referred to as the evoked set. 3. Perceptions are often shaped in terms of mirror images: while considering one’s own action good, moral, and just, the enemy is automatically found to be evil, immoral, and unjust. Small groups also have psychologically based dynamics that undermine the rational model. The psychologist Irving Janis called this dynamic groupthink. The dynamics of the group include: 1. The illusion of invulnerability and unanimity 2. Excessive optimism 3. Belief in their own morality and the enemy’s evil 4. Pressure placed on dissenters to change their views Small groups have additional distorting tendencies than individuals, such as the pressure for group conformity and searching for a good-enough solution rather than an optimal one. Top leaders do influence foreign policy, which is made, not just by tyrants, but also by visionaries (like Julius Nyerere and Nelson Mandela) and by political pragmatists (like Vladimir Putin and Margaret Thatcher).
II. Private Individuals
Less bound by the rules of the game or the rules of the game or by institutional norms, private individuals engage in activities in which official representatives are either unable or unwilling to participate. o The donations by Bill and Melinda Gates to global vaccination and AIDS programs are an example. Private individuals increasingly play a role in track-two diplomacy. Track-two diplomacy utilizes individuals outside governments to carry out the task of conflict resolution. o Jimmy Carter, acting through the Carter Center, has negotiated several disputes, such as Eritrea’s independence from Ethiopia and reconciliation between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization. o Track-two diplomatic efforts are not always well received. Jimmy Carter’s eleventh-hour dash to meet North Korea’s Kim Il Sing in 1994 to discuss the latter’s nuclear buildup was met by questions such as: Was the U.S. government being preempted? For whom did Carter speak? o Private individuals have played linkage roles between different countries. Armand Hammer, a U.S. corporate executive, was a successful go-between for the Soviet Union and the United States. o Individuals may be propelled into the international arena by virtue of their actions: Jane Fonda illegally visited North Vietnam during the 1960s, Olympic athletes who defect from their countries, Kenya’s Wangari Maathai, who promoted that country’s Green Belt Movement, and countless Nobel Prizewinners who have significantly influenced international relations.
o
Alternative critical and postmodern approaches are attempting to draw mainstream theorists’ attention to these other stories. Feminist writers have sought to bring attention to the role of private individuals and especially women. A. Q. Khan and Aung San Suu Kyi o A. Q. Khan confessed to selling nuclear technology and components to Libya, Iran, and North Korea; this made the world a less secure place o Aung San Suu Kyi became the face of the opposition movement in Myanmar (Burma). Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991, she is an international symbol of her movement.
III. Mass Publics
Mass publics have the same psychological tendencies as elite individuals and small groups. They think in terms of perceptions and images, they see mirror images, and they use similar information-processing strategies. The influence that mass publics do have on foreign policy can be explained in three ways: 1. Elites and masses act the same because they share common psychological and biological characteristics. 2. The masses have opinions and attitudes about foreign policy and international relations that are different from those of the elites. 3. The masses, uncontrolled by institutions, may occasionally act in ways that have a profound impact on international relations, regardless of anything that the elites do. Elites and Masses: Common Traits o Some scholars argue that there are psychological and biological traits common to every man, woman, and child and that societies reflect those characteristics. Individuals and masses are said to have an innate drive to gain, protect, and defend territory—the territorial imperative. o Both also share the frustration-aggression syndrome: when societies become frustrated, just as with individuals, they become aggressive. 1. The problem with the territorial imperative and the frustrationaggression notion is that even if all individuals and societies share these innate predispositions, not all leaders and all peoples act on these predispositions. Another possibility is that elites and masses share common traits differentiated by
gender. o
Male elites and masses possess characteristics common to each other, while female elites and masses share different traits from the males. o The research is sketchy, however, because it does not answer the question of whether these differences are rooted in biology or learned from culture. The Impact of Public Opinion on Elites o Publics do have general foreign-policy orientations and specific attitudes that can be revealed by public-opinion polls. o More often than not, however, publics do not express one dominant mood; top leaders are usually confronted with an array of public attitudes. o Occasionally, the masses may vote directly on an issue with foreign policy significance. For example, some European states used popular referendums to ratify the 1992 Maastricht Treaty.
o
Evidence from the U.S. suggests that elites do care about the preferences of the public, although they do not always directly incorporate those attitudes into policy decisions. Presidents care about their popularity, but mass attitudes may not always be directly translated into policy. Mass Actions by a Leaderless Public o At times, the masses, essentially leaderless, take collective actions that have significant effects on the course of world politics. Individuals act to improve their own political and economic welfare: 1. It was the individual acts of thousands fleeing East Germany that led to the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961, and it was the exodus of East Germans through Austria led to the tearing down of the wall in 1989. 2. During the people’s putsch (Bulldozer Revolution) of October 2000, people from all walks of Serbian life crippled the economic system, blocked transportation routes, drove tractors into the city, attacked Parliament, and crippled Milosevic radio and TV stations. 3. Georgia’s Rose Revolution in 2003 and Ukraine’s Orange Revolution in 2004 were inspired by the Serbian uprising against Milosevic.
Chapter 7
Intergovernmental Organizations, Nongovernmental Organizations, and International Law I. Intergovernmental Organizations
The Creation of International Organizations (IOs) o Why have states chosen to organize themselves collectively? The response is found in liberalism 1. Within the framework of institutions, cooperation is possible Functionalism o Simple problems, often with technical (not political) solutions are common starting points for IOs o David Mitrany argues that states ―bind together those interests which are common, where they are common, and to the extent to which they are common.‖ o They promote building on and expanding the habits of cooperation nurtured by groups of technical experts. Eventually, those habits will spill over into cooperation in political and military affairs. Collective Goods o Collective goods are available to all members of the group regardless of individual contributions. o The use of collective goods involves activities and choices that are interdependent. Decisions by one states have effects for other states; that is,
states can suffer unanticipated negative consequences as a result of actions by others. o Garrett Hardin, in The Tragedy of the Commons, proposed several possible pollutions to the tragedy of the commons: 1. Use coercion: force nations and peoples to control the collective goods. 2. Restructure the preferences of states through rewards and punishments. 3. Alter the size of the group. The Roles of Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs) o IGOs contribute to habits of cooperation; through IGOs, states become socialized to regular interactions. Such regular interactions occur between states in the United Nations. o Roles: 1. Some establish regularized processes of information gathering, analysis, and surveillance. 2. Some IGOs, such as the World Trade Organization, develop procedures to make rules, settle disputes, and punish those who fail to follow the rules. 3. Other IGOs conduct operational activities that help to resolve major substantive problems 4. IGOs also play key roles in bargaining, serving as arenas for negotiating and developing coalitions. o IGOs often spearhead the creation and maintenance of international rules and principles. They establish expectations about their behavior of other states. These are known as international regimes. o Charters if IGOs incorporate the norms, rules, and decisionmaking processes of regimes. IGOs help to reduce the incentive to cheat and enhance the value of a good reputation. 1. For states, IGOs enlarge the possibilities for foreign policy making and add to the constraints under which states operate and especially implement foreign policy. States join IGOs to use them as instruments of foreign policy. 2. IGOs also constrain states. They set agendas and force governments to make decisions; encourage states to develop processes to facilitate IGO participation, and create norms of behavior with which states must align their policies if they wish to benefit from their membership. 3. IGOs affect individuals by providing opportunities for leadership. As individuals work with or in IGOs, they, like states, may become socialized to cooperate internationally. The United Nations o The UN was founded on three fundamental principles: 1. The UN is based on the notion of the sovereign equality of member states. Each state is legally equivalent of every other state. 2. Only international problems are within the jurisdiction of the UN. Such problems include human rights, global telecommunications, and environmental regulation. 3. The UN is designed primarily to maintain international peace and security. States should refrain from the threat or use of force and settle disputes through peaceful means. Security has broadened from the classical protection of national territory to human security—providing humanitarian relief for refugees or the starving.
Structure 1. Security Council: responsible for ensuring peace and security and deciding enforcement measures. Decisions must be unanimous and each of the five permanent members has a veto. 2. General Assembly: with 192 member states, permits debate on any topic under its purview. Since the end of the Cold War, the GA’s work has been marginalized, and power has shifted back to the Security Council, much to the dismay of the Group of 77, a coalition of developing states, regional groups, and the Group of 20. 3. Secretariat: gathers information, coordinates and conducts activities. The secretary-general is the chief spokesperson and administrative officer. 4. Economic and Social Counsel (ECOSOC): coordinates economic and social welfare programs and coordinates action of specialized agencies. 5. Trusteeship Council: supervision has ended; proposals have been floated to change its function to a forum for NGOs. 6. International Court of Justice: noncompulsory jurisdiction on cases brought by states and international organizations.
Key Political Issues
The United Nations played a key role in the decolonization of Africa and Asia. The UN Charter endorsed the principle of self-determination for colonial peoples. The emergence of new states transformed the United Nations because of the formation of the Group of 77, pitting the North against the South. This conflict continues to be a central feature of the United Nations.
Peacekeeping
In traditional peacekeeping, multilateral institutions such as the United Nations seek to contain conflicts between two states through third-party military forces. These military units are drawn from small, neutral member states, invited by the disputants, and primarily address interstate conflict. Complex peacekeeping activities respond also to civil war and ethnonationalist conflicts in states that have not requested UN assistance. UN peacekeepers have tried to maintain law and order in failing societies by aiding in civil administration, policing, and rehabilitating infrastructure. This is referred to as peacebuilding. Complex peacekeeping has had successes and failures. Namibia’s transition from war to cease-fire and then to independence is seen as a success; Rwanda’s genocide and need for humanitarian protection is seen as a failure.
Reform: Success and failures
Management: the size of the Secretariat has been reduced by 4,000. In the wake of the Oil for Food scandal, new financial accountability mechanisms have been put in place and internal oversight has been established. Reorganization: The High Commissioner for Human Rights, Counter-Terrorism Committee, and Department of Peacekeeping Operations have been restructured for greater efficiency. In 2006 a Peacebuilding Commission was formed to address postconflict recovery.
Security Council: Most states agree that the council membership should be increased, but many disagree over how it should be done, Europe is overrepresented, and Germany and Japan contribute the most financially. China is the only developing country. Contending proposals have been discussed but no agreement reached.
A Complex Network of Intergovernmental Organizations
There are nineteen specialized agencies formally affiliated with the United Nations. These organizations have separate charters, budgets, memberships, and secretariats. They also focus on different issues. Examples include the World Bank and Food and Agriculture Organization. There are IGOs not affiliated with the United Nations, including the World Trade Organization and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, as well as regional organizations like the African Union.
The European Union—Organizing Regionally
Historical Evolution 1. After World War II, an economically strong Europe (made possible by a reduction of trade barriers and help from the United States) knew it would be better equipped to counter the threat of the Soviet Union if it integrated. 2. The European Coal and Steel Community represented the first step toward realizing the idea. This became so successful that states agreed to expand cooperation. 3. Under the European Economic Community, six states agreed to create a common market—removing restrictions on internal trade, reducing barriers to movement of people, services, and capital, and establishing a common agricultural policy. 4. New areas were gradually brought under the umbrella of the community, including health, safety, and consumer standards. 5. In 1986, the most important step was taken in deepening the integration process—the signing of the Single European Act (SEA), which established the goal of completing a single market by 1992. 6. The Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1992, and the European Community became the European Union (EU). Members committed themselves to a political union, including the establishment of common foreign policies, a single currency, and regional central bank. 7. The 1997 Amsterdam Treaty put more emphasis on the rights of individuals, citizenship, and justice. 8. The increased power of the EU has not been without its opponents. The United Kingdom opted out of the monetary union, and some Europeans fear a diminution of national sovereignty and are reluctant to surrender their democratic rights to nonelected bureaucrats. 9. In 2004, the proposed European Constitution was signed by members of the heads of state, but both the French and Dutch electorate rejected the document. Structure 1. Power initially resided in the Commission, which is designed to represent the interests of the community as a whole. Increasingly, the Council of Ministers, with a weighted voting system, has assumed more power.
2. The increasing power of the European Parliament is one area of change. Since the 1980s it has gained a greater legislative role. 3. The growing power of the European Court of Justice is another change. The court has the responsibility for interpreting and enforcing EU law. Policies and Problems 1. Among the many controversial issues has been the failed effort to develop a common European foreign and security policy. The split between who supported the 2003 Iraq war and those who opposed it is suggestive. 2. Issues surrounding widening are equally as problematic. Should the EU continue to expand its membership by reaching out to Eastern European states and the former Soviet Union? Can Turkey eventually meet the criteria for membership?
Other regions have sought to follow the EU model, while still others have sought a different role for integration The Organization of American States (OAS) has followed a different path from that of the EU.
In 1948 the OAS adopted wide ranging goals: political, economic, social, and military. The OAS not has rules for the protection of democratic government in the form of rules prohibiting members from supporting coups in member states.
The African Union (AU) replaced the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in 2002.
The OAU had been a weak organization as its members were newly independent states and thus deeply concerned about questions of sovereignty The AU is an attempt to give African states an increased ability to respond to the issues of economic globalization and democratization affecting the continent.
II. Nongovernmental Organizations
NGOs are generally private, voluntary organizations whose members are individuals or associations that come together to achieve a common purpose. They are diverse entities, ranging from grassroots organizations to those recognized transnationally. Some are funded solely through private sources, while others rely on partial government funds. Some are open to mass memberships and some are closed member groups. The Growth of NGO Power and Influence o The anti-slavery campaign was one of the earliest NGO-initiated efforts to organize transnationally to ban a morally unacceptable practice. o NGOs organizing on behalf of peace and noncoercive methods of dispute settlement also appeared during the 1800s, as did the Red Cross, which advocated for the treatment for wounded soldiers. o During the 1970s, networks and coalitions were formed among various groups, and by the 1990s these NGOs were able to effectively mobilize the mass pubic and influence international relations. o A number of factors explain the resurgence of NGO activity:
o
o
o
1. The issues seized on have been viewed as interdependent, or globalizing, issues—issues states cannot solve alone and whose solutions require transnational cooperation. 2. Global conferences became a key venue for international activity beginning in the 1970s, each designed to address the environment, population, women, and food. NGOs organized separate but parallel conferences on the same issues. 3. The end of the Cold War and the expansion of democracy have provided political opening for NGOs into parts of the world before untouched by NGO activity. 4. The communications revolution—first fax, then the Web and e-mail— has enabled NGOs to communicate more efficiently. Functions and Roles of NGOs: 1. NGOs act as advocates for specific policies and offer alternative channels of political participation, as Amnesty International has done. 2. They mobilize mass publics, as Greenpeace did in saving the whales. 3. They distribute critical assistance in disaster relief and to refugees, as Oxfam has done. 4. They are the principal monitors of human rights norms and environmental regulations and provide warnings of violations, as Human Rights Watch has done. 5. NGOs are the primary actors at the grassroots level in mobilizing individuals to act. Their impact was felt strongly at the 1992 UN Conference on the Environment and Development (UNCTAD). For the first time, they made statements from the floor during official meetings, drafted information materials, and scrutinized UN documents. 6. At the national level, NGOs have occasionally taken the place of states, either performing services that are inept or corrupt government is not stepping in for a failed state. 7. NGOs seldom work alone. The communications revolution has served to link NGOs with each other, formally and informally. 8. NGOs may also be formed for malevolent purposes, the Mafia, international drug cartels, and even Al Qaeda. The Power of NGOs 1. NGOs rely on soft power, meaning credible information, expertise, and moral authority that attracts the attention and admiration of governments and the public. 2. NGOs have distinct advantages over individuals, states, and intergovernmental organizations. They are usually politically independent, participate at all levels, and can make policy with less risk to national sensitivities. 3. NGOs can increase their power through networking with other NGOs. The International Campaign to Ban Landmines demonstrates the power of the network. The Limits of NGOs 1. Most NGOs have very limited economic resources since they do not collect taxes. The competition for funding is fierce. 2. There is a continuous need to raise money, and some NGOs increasingly rely on governments. If NGOs choose to accept state
assistance, then their neutrality and legitimacy is potentially compromised. 3. Success is hard to measure; there is no single agenda, and NGOs are often working at cross-purposes. 4. Some people question whether certain activities undertaken by NGOs, which have traditionally been viewed as supportive of the common good, may result in prolonging conflicts.
III. International Law
International Law and Functions o International law consists of a body of both rules and norms regulating interactions among states, between states and IGOs, and among IGOs, states, and individuals. o At the state level, law is hierarchical. Established structures exist for both making law and enforcing law, and law binds individuals and groups within the state. There is widespread compliance with the law because it is in the interest of everyone that order be maintained. o In the international system, authoritative structures are absent. Nonetheless, liberals acknowledge that international law exists and has an effect in daily life, such as airspace, trade, and shipping regulations. The Sources of International Law o Custom. But customary law is limited because it develops slowly. Not all states participate in customary law, and its uncodified nature leads to ambiguity in interpretation. o Treaties. Treaties are the dominant source of law today, and are legally binding: only major changes in circumstances give states the right not to follow treaties they have ratified. o Authoritative bodies, such as the UN International Law Commission. o Courts. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been responsible for some significant decisions, but it is a weak institution for several reasons: 1. The court actually hears very few cases. Since 1946, only 112 cases have been brought before it. 2. When cases are heard, they rarely deal with the major controversies of the day because such controversies are outside of the court’s reach. 3. Only states may initiate proceedings; individuals and nongovernmental actors like multinational corporations cannot. National and even local courts. They may hear cases occurring on their territory in which international law is invoked or cases involving their own citizens. 1. Under universal jurisdiction, states may claim jurisdiction if the conduct of a defendant is sufficiently heinous to violate the laws of all states. States claimed jurisdiction as a result of genocide in World War II, and for war crimes in Bosnia, Rwanda, and Kosovo.
Enforcement of International Law
A key trend in the new millennium has been the expansion of the international judiciary, motivated by the idea of individual responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
1. Following the atrocities of Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and East Timor, the UN established two ad hoc criminal tribunals. Because of the need to establish procedures and the difficulty of finding those accused, the trials have been subject to criticism In light of the difficulties with the ad hoc tribunals, in 1998, states concluded the statute for the International Criminal Court (ICC), an innovative court having both compulsory jurisdiction and jurisdiction over individuals. 1. ICC work began in 2003, and pending cases all concern crimes committed in African countries. 2. The ICC is controversial. Supporters see the court as essential for establishing international law and enforcing individual accountability. Others, including the U.S., objects to it on the grounds that the ICC infringes on U.S. sovereignty and may implicate U.S. military or political officials. Why do states obey international law most of the time? 1. The liberal response is that they obey because it is right to do so. Individual states benefit from living in an ordered world where there are general expectations about other states’ behavior. 2. Should states choose not to obey, other members of the international system do have recourse: they can issue diplomatic protests, initiate reprisals, threaten to enforce economic boycotts, or use military force. 3. Self-help mechanisms of enforcement from one state alone are apt to be ineffective. To be most effective, states must use collective action against the violator.
IV. Realist Views of International Organization and Law
They are skeptical about international law o International law creates some order, and states comply because it is in the state’s self-interest to comply. It is in the self-interest of states to have their airspace and territory respected, and to enjoy secure procedures for international trade. They are also skeptical about international organizations, both IGOs and NGOs. o Realists do not put much faith in the United Nations and point to failures of the Security Council to collectively punish aggressors. o Most NGOs exist at the beck and call of states; it is states that grant them legal authority, and it is states that can take away that authority.
V. The Radical View of International Organization and Law
Radicals see contemporary international law as the product of a specific time and historical process, emerging out of eighteenth-century economic liberalism and nineteenth-century political liberalism. o Law primarily comes out of Western capitalist states and is designed to serve the interests of that constituency, and is biased against socialist states, the weak, and the unrepresented. o IGOs, especially the UN and UN agencies, were designed to support the interests of the powerful. Those institutions have succeeded in sustaining the powerful elite against the powerless mass of weaker states. o The lack of representativeness and the lack of accountability of NGOs are key issues. Most radicals see the world of NGOs based in the North as dominated
o
by members of the same elite. NGOs are captive to the dominant interests of that system. Contemporary law and international organizations are not the agents of the political and economic changes that radicals desire,
VI. The Constructivist View of International Organization
They place critical importance on institutions and norms. Both IGOs and NGOs can be norm entrepreneurs that socialize and teach states new norms. These new norms may influence state behavior. Law plays a key role in constructivist thinking because it reflects changing norms. Norms are internalized by states themselves, they change state preferences, and shape behavior.
VII. In Sum: Do IGOs, NGOs, and International Law Make a Difference?
Realists remain skeptical; all are reflections of state power and have no independent identity or role. Radicals view them skeptically as well. They see them as mere reflections of political and economic hegemony. Liberals believe that international law and organizations do not replace states as the primary actors, but they do provide alternative venues for states themselves to engage in collective action and for individuals to join with other like-minded individuals in pursuit of their goals.
Chapter 8
War and Strife I. Introduction This chapter introduces prominent approaches to mitigating the effects of the security dilemma as well as how insecurity can be managed short of war.
War is the oldest, most prevalent, and most salient issue in international relations. Attention to war and security is warranted: security comes first in international relations; all other competing values such as human rights, the environment, and economic development presuppose security. Although 3.5 billion have died in the 14,500 armed struggles throughout history, the number and intensity of war has dropped by one-half since 1991. International relations theorists disagree over the inevitability of war. Classical realists and neorealists argue that war is inevitable. They view states as victims of the prisoners’ dilemma during times of conflict: each state is compelled to harm the other so as to avoid the worst possible outcome.
The inevitability of war also creates a security dilemma: states seeking to increase their defense capabilities end up threatening other states in the system, thereby increasing tensions and the chance of war. Liberals argue that war can be eliminated with sufficient effort and effective institutions that can reduce the chances of conflict. Liberals also argue that the way in which a state is governed domestically can change its attitude toward war. The democratic peace concept demonstrates this by arguing that democracies virtually never fight one another. Radicals argue that war can be eliminated, but only through a revolutionary change in the character of the system. Constructivists argue that war is the result of a process of socialization in which conflict is assumed to exist. If this construction is changed, then war can potentially be eliminated. Historically, states have sought security by balancing realist and liberal policies. When states face more serious threats, they tend to look toward realism.
II. Causes of War The Individual
Both the characteristics of individual leaders and the general attributes of people have been blamed for war.
Realist interpretation: Characteristics of the masses lead to the outbreak of war. Aggressive behavior is adopted by virtually all species to ensure survival. War is the product of biologically innate human characteristics or flawed human nature. Liberal interpretation: Misperceptions by leaders, such as seeing aggressiveness where it may not be intended, or attributing the actions of one person to an entire group, can lead to the outbreak of war.
State and Society
War occurs because of the internal structures of states.
Liberal explanations: Some types of economic systems are more war-prone than others, such as aristocratic states. Democratic regimes are least likely to wage war because democratic norms and culture inhibit the leadership from taking actions leading to war. Radical explanations: Conflict and war are attributed to the internal dynamics of capitalist economic systems: the competition between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat over economic dominance and political leadership. This struggle leads to war. One manifestation of this is diversionary war: war designed to hold off a domestic political crisis by temporarily unifying the populace. o Conflict over what institutions should govern a state can also lead to civil wars as groups attempt to impose their preferred system.
The International System
Realist interpretation: The international system is equivalent to a state of war; it is anarchic and governed only by a weak and overarching rule of law. War breaks out because there is nothing to stop it. States themselves are the final authorities and the ultimate arbiters of disputes; herein resides sovereignty. o A state’s security is ensured only by its accumulating military and economic power. o Groups seeking self-determination cannot appeal to higher authority.
Realist variant: Power transition theory: Represented by the work of Organski, this theory argues that changes in state capabilities lead to war. War occurs when a dissatisfied challenger state begins to attain the same capabilities as the hegemon. Modelski and Thompson find that there are regular cycles of power as old powers decline and new powers rise. Radical interpretation: Dominant capitalist states within the international system need to expand economically, leading to wars with developing regions over control of natural resources and labor markets.
The Case of Iraq’s Invasion of Kuwait
At the individual level: Perhaps Saddam Hussein’s individual characteristics, including his basic insecurity and ruthless techniques, help to explain Iraq’s actions. Hussein may have calculated that his actions would not elicit a military response from the international community. At the state level: Iraq was just acting in its own national interest. Iraq felt that the land (oil fields) annexed had been illegally seized during the British occupation around the time of World War I. The 1980–88 war with Iran had also reduced Iraq’s oil revenues. At the international system level: Several factors indicated that Iraq’s actions would not be resisted: the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Arab League’s reluctance to criticize its members, and the historical failure of the UN Security Council to act decisively.
The Case of South Ossetia
At the individual level: Saakashvili’s efforts to restore “Georgian pride” and resist the Russian “bully” raised tensions. The pressures of ethnic identity both raised tensions and provided a reason for Russian interest in South Ossetia. Saakashvili and Medvedev both wanted to look active and strong. At the state level: Georgia was acting to promote its sovereignty over a breakaway region. Russia was acting to increase its influence in part of the former Soviet territory. At the international system level: There was no impartial arbiter to deal with any of the questions at issue in the conflict. In a state of anarchy, both sides had to rely on their own strengths during the conflict.
III. Categorizing Wars
Interstate wars: wars between two or more states. In the past these were the focus of most research. They are the easiest to study and have caused the most damage. Intrastate wars: wars between groups within a state, with or without international participation. While the number of ongoing intrastate wars has declined, the decline has been less precipitous than the decline in interstate wars. Total war: Wars involving multiple great powers. Total wars include significant destruction and loss of life. Since the end of World War II, total wars have become less frequent; the number of countries participating in total wars has fallen, and they tend to last for shorter lengths of time This has led some to argue that this type of war is obsolete. Limited war: the objective is not surrender and occupation of enemy territory, but rather to attain limited goals. The Korean War, the Gulf War, and conflicts in Sudan and Sierra Leone are examples of limited war.
While interstate wars which can be called total wars have declined significantly, limited wars and particularly civil wars that are limited in nature have increased precipitously. Two-thirds of all conflicts since World War II have been civil wars. Characteristics of limited wars: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
They last a long time, with periods of fighting punctuated by periods of relative calm. Human costs are high: both combatants and civilians are killed and maimed. Food supplies are interrupted. Diseases spread as health systems suffer. Money is diverted from constructive economic development to purchasing armaments. Entire generations may grow up knowing only a state of war.
Limited war has become the most common option for states contemplating violence against other states.
IV. How Wars are Fought Conventional war: war between designated soldiers representing specific sides of a conflict. Conventional war is conducted primarily with conventional weapons. Conventional weapons: weapons technologies whose destructive effects can be limited in space and time to those who are legitimate targets of war. Weapons of mass destruction (WMD): chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons whose destructive effects cannot be limited in space or time to legitimate targets of war. Debate over nuclear proliferation: some scholars argue that slow proliferation by states with nuclear capabilities will deter potential enemies from nuclear action, whereas others argue that proliferation is more apt to breed proliferation and/or initiate accidental war. Unconventional warfare: warfare in which one or more sides refuse to follow the accepted conventions of war. This can be expressed either in the conduct of the war itself or in the refusal to accept traditional outcomes of battle. Asymmetric conflict: warfare conducted between parties of unequal strength. The weaker party seeks to neutralize its opponent’s strengths by exploiting that opponent’s weaknesses. Guerilla warfare: the weaker party may often use a civilian population to provide supplies like food and shelter and to gather intelligence. Fighters rely on hit-and-run tactics until the enemy is worn down. Examples include the Algerians against the French in the 1950s, and the Taliban against coalition forces in Afghanistan. Terrorism: a particular form of asymmetric conflict in which one side attempts to instill fear in the other in order to force concessions. This involves four major elements: 1. premeditation 2. motivation or cause, whether religious, economic, or political
3. noncombatant targets 4. secretiveness, where perpetrators belong to clandestine groups or are secretly sponsored by states
Terrorism has a long history, occurring during Greek and Roman times, the Middle Ages, and the French Revolution; in Nazi Germany; by Basque separatists (ETA); and most recently by Al Qaeda around the world. Since the 1990s, terrorist acts have become more lethal. The infrastructure to support terrorism has become more sophisticated, and groups practicing terrorism are more wide-ranging. Responding to terrorism has become increasingly difficult; perpetrators have networks of supporters in the resident populations. The international community has taken action against terrorism by creating a framework of rules and blocking the flow of financial resources to global networks. Piracy: reflects the dual nature of participants’ motives: economic gain from violent action. Piracy has surged in recent years, most notably as a result of state failure in Somalia.
V. The Just War Tradition Jus ad bellum: the justice of entering into a war. Jus in bello: the justice of how a war is fought. Just war tradition
Just war theory asserts that there are several criteria that can make the decision to go to war a just one: 1. The cause must be just (self defense or massive violation of human rights), with a declaration of intent. 2. Leader needs to have the correct intentions. 3. Leader should desire to end abuses and establish a just peace. 4. Nation should have exhausted all other possibilities for ending the abuse. 5. Forces must be removed rapidly after the abuses have ended.
Just war tradition also addresses conduct in war: 1. Combatants and noncombatants must be differentiated. 2. The violence used needs to be proportionate to the ends to be achieved.
Just war is an evolving practice, changing as broader ideas about war change. The Debate over Humanitarian Intervention
Just war tradition directly contradicts the hallmark of the Westphalian system, the respect for state sovereignty. Since the end of World War II, the notion has emerged that all human beings are in need of protection and that states have an obligation to intervene when human rights are violated. This belief is known as the responsibility to protect. Responsibility to protect: if a state does not provide protection to its own people, then it is the obligation of others to intervene in order to protect human rights.
VI. Approaches to Managing Insecurity Liberal Approaches: Collective Security and Arms Control/Disarmament
The collective-security ideal: although wars can occur, they should be prevented. Wars will not occur if all parties exercise restraint. Collective security does not always work, because the aggressor cannot always be easily identified, and a state may be unwilling to take action against an ally or foe. Arms control and disarmament: fewer weapons means greater security. By regulating arms proliferation and reducing the amount and type of weaponry employed, the costs of the security dilemma are reduced. Complete disarmament schemes are unlikely because cheaters would be rewarded, but incremental disarmament remains a possibility.
Realist Approaches: Balance of Power and Deterrence
Balance of power: an equilibrium between any two sides in a potential conflict. States must evaluate the costs and benefits of particular policies that determine their roles in a balance of power. States seek to ensure that no side can be certain of a victory if there is a war (example: NATO and the Warsaw Pact). A major limitation of the balance-of-power approach is its inability to manage security during periods of fundamental change (because it supports the status quo). Balance of power is also very difficult to manage in times of power transition. Deterrence: war can be prevented by the threat of force. States must build up their arsenals in order to present a credible threat.
Key assumptions: 1. Decision-makers are rational. 2. Nuclear weapons pose an unacceptable threat and decision-makers will not resort to armed aggression against a nuclear state. 3. Alternatives to war are available irrespective of the situation.
These assumptions are troublesome because not all decision- makers are rational. It is unclear how non-state actors can be deterred using traditional methods. The United States is also approaching nuclear primacy, and thus deterrence may not serve to restrain U.S. actions. Collective security: aggressive or illegal use of force by one state shall be met with united action by all (or at least most) states in the system. Aggressors cannot take on the world and will be deterred from using force.
Key assumptions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Wars are prevented by restraint on military action. Aggressors must be stopped. The aggressor is easy to identify. The aggressor is always wrong. Aggressors know the community will act against them.
Collective security is problematic: these assumptions do not always hold. Collective security also requires that the community act decisively in all cases of aggression, even when individual states have no clear interest in acting. Arms control and disarmament: fewer weapons = more security. 1. The Cold War saw many agreements to limit the weapons on both sides. 2. The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty limits the acquisition of nuclear weapons technology. There are many examples of agreements to limit arms, but enforcement can sometimes be problematic. Complete disarmament is unlikely given the risks involved to the disarming states.
VII. A Changing View of International Security
A shift from a focus on territorial integrity and threats from states toward a wider concern about threats from non-state actors A shift toward the privatization of force through private military contractors such as Xe (formerly Blackwater), etc. The extent to which the international community has an obligation to consider the protection of individual humanitarian conditions in decisions about conflict o When can sovereignty be violated to protect individuals? And what do we protect individuals from?
Chapter 9
International Political Economy I. Introduction
Economic globalization describes the international political economy of 2010. o Goods and services are produced and traded globally. o A global ―virtual‖ world ties us together through new technology. New technologies and economic ties also lead to the decreasing territorialization of daily life.
II. The Evolution of the International Economy: Clashing Ideas and Practices
The era from the late Middle Ages to the end of the eighteenth century saw a number of key changes in technology, ideas, and practices. o European explorers opened up new frontiers in the Americas, Asia, and Africa. o The exchange of good and people tied the colonies and the home states together. Adam Smith wrote of the idea that human are rational and self-interested. o To Smith, markets develop through individual, rational action. o Markets need to be free from government action to function properly. Mercantilism (statism) was the common practice of many governments at the time.
Mercantilism’s goal is to build economic wealth to build the power of the state. o Jean-Baptiste Colbert (1617-83) argued that states should accumulate gold and silver as well as build a strong central government. o Alexander Hamilton (1757-1804) made similar arguments in the United States. From the start of the nineteenth century to World War I colonialism expanded greatly. During the same period the states of Europe industrialized. o Industrialization was spurred by technological change o Economic links in global trade were followed by political and cultural domination by the industrial states. Britain acted as a hegemon to promote a more peaceful world order. o The ―Pax Britanica‖ is an example of hegemonic stability theory. o A large, dominant state provides collective goods to the global system. Radicalism emerged in this period as a response to the excesses of the time. o Based in the teaching of Marx and others, radicalism attacked the inequalities of the time. o Radicals argued that society was conflictual. 1. Conflict was focused on competition between groups. 2. Owners of wealth versus workers o Radicals argued that the state would support the owners of wealth. o The holders of capital must expand their markets and the capitalist system until it embraces the entire world. 1. This pressure for expansion creates tensions and creates the seeds of the destruction of the system as a whole. After the end of World War II, we enter the most recent phase of internationalization o The 1930s saw the spread of harmful ―beggar thy neighbor‖ policies that shut off international trade o At the end of World War II, the goal was to create a new system that could prevent the disaster of the 1930s. o The post-World War II system sought to promote the following: 1. Open trade 2. Free flow of capital 3. Stable exchange rates o These three goals are the foundation of globalization in the post-World War II period How can we study these developments? o Rational choice offers one way 1. Individuals are rational actors with known and fixed preferences. 2. In the rational choice approach the study of international political economy is the study of how states make strategic choices. o Social constructivists argue against rational choice. 1. Preferences cannot be assumed. 2. Preferences change with time. o
III. The Basis of the Contemporary International Economy
Key Concepts in the Liberal Economy
o
Liberal economics is based on the recognition that states differ in their resource endowments. Worldwide wealth is maximized if states engage in international trade. o David Ricardo (1772-1823) developed a theory that states should engage in international trade according to their comparative advantage. That is, states should produce and export those products which they can produce most efficiently (specialize), relative to other states. Thus, gains from trade are maximized for all because each state minimizes its opportunity cost. o National currencies should be bought and sold in a free market system. In such a system of floating exchange rates, the market determines the value of one currency as compared with other currencies. Floating exchange rates will lead to market equilibrium. Roles of Multinational Corporations (MNCs) o MNCs play a key role as engines of economic growth. 1. They act as the vanguard of the liberal economic order. 2. They have taken the integration of national economies beyond trade and money to include the internationalization of production o Liberals see MNCs as positive 1. Economic improvement is driven through efficiency and MNCs promote efficiency. o MNCs perform many activities. 1. Direct importing and exporting 2. Making significant investments in a foreign country 3. Buying and selling licenses in foreign markets 4. Engaging in contract manufacturing 5. Opening manufacturing facilities in foreign countries o MNCs choose to operate in international markets for various reasons, all of which are based in economics, but which are affected by the political relations of the host state. 1. Reduce transport costs by moving production closer to customers 2. Tax and license advantages from local governments 3. Find cheaper labor markets 4. Obtain the services of foreign technical personnel o Some liberals go further in discussing the benefits of MNCs 1. The international liberal economy may promote peace. Liberal economics suggests a basic set of policies, all based on the minimal involvement of governments 1. Open markets 2. Free trade 3. Free flow of goods and services
Roles of the International Economic Institutions
Economic liberalism has been supported by the establishment and expansion of the Bretton Woods institutions, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and to a lesser extend the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)—now the World Trade Organization (WTO). The World Bank—Stimulating Economies 1. The World Bank was designed initially to facilitate reconstruction in the postWorld War II Europe.
2. In the 1950s the bank shifted its emphasis from reconstruction to development. It generates capital funds from member-states contributions and from borrowing in financial markets. 3. A high proportion of the World Bank funding has been used for infrastructure development The International Monetary Fund—Stabilizing Economies 1. The task of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was to stabilize exchange rates. 2. Originally the fund established a system of fixed exchange rates 3. In 1972 this system collapsed when the United States announced that it would no longer guarantee the system. 4. In 1976 the fund formalized the system of floating exchange rates currently in use. GATT and the WTO—Managing Trade 1. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) enshrined important liberal principles: Support of trade liberalization Nondiscrimination in trade Exclusive use of tariffs for protecting home markets Preferential access in developed markets to products from the South Support concept of ―nation al treatment‖ of foreign enterprises. 2. The GATT established a continual process of multilateral negotiations among those countries sharing major interests in the issue at hand; the agreements reached were then expanded to all GATT participants. 3. Most of the work was carried out over the course of eight negotiating rounds—each round progressively cutting tariffs and addressing new problems, such as intellectual property rights.
IV. How the Globalized Economy Works Today
International Finance o Capital movements played a key role in the earlier phases of the development of the international political economy and they continue to do so today o Capital moves in two ways: 1. Foreign direct investment (FDI) includes the building of factories and other facilities 2. Portfolio investment (PI) includes investments in the stocks and bonds of a country 3. MNC’s play a major role in the movement of capital, both in the form of FDI and in the form of PI There are currently more than 60,000 MNCs employing 90 million people in the global economy Of the largest 100 MNCs, 90 are based in the United States, Europe, Japan, and a handful of developing states Critics from all perspectives realize that some states have more difficulty attracting private investment than others. 1. Africa receives only 8 percent of private capital 2. The World Bank has expanded its mission to include development lending to these countries.
3. Two separate institutions within the World Bank were created to deal with these issues. The International Finance Corporation (1956) provides loans for the development of private enterprises in developing countries The International Development Association (1960) provides capital to the poorest countries, usually in the form of interest free loans The Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (1988) provides insurance against losses from events like expropriation, civil war, or conflict 4. Even with the expansion of World Bank programs, these efforts continue to decline as a proportion of total capital flows Financial flows accelerated in the 1980’s due to a range of mechanisms 0. Exchange rates were no longer fixed, so traders in currency exchange markets and in MNCs could capitalize on buying and selling currencies 1. The market developed new financial instruments, such as derivatives which could be packaged and sold around the world 2. New economic actors, sovereign wealth funds, formed in capital-surplus countries 3. Economic liberalization has led to the emergence of offshore financial centers with low taxation and little or no regulation The Asian financial crisis of the 1990s illustrates the possible outcomes of the globalization of finance. 0. Beginning in Thailand in 1997, in a relatively short period of time, 2 percent of GDP fled that country. 1. Within weeks the crisis spread to Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and beyond, eventually reaching Russia and Brazil. 2. The IMF responded to the political and social upheaval with large, controversial bailout packages to three of the affected countries (Thailand, Indonesia, and South Korea) that included sets of lengthy conditions that each country was supposed to follow. 3. Governments had to agree to carry out significant structural reforms that would transform their economies from semi-mercantilist to more open ones. Lifting restrictions on the movement of capital Cutting the government budget, particularly in social programs 4. Critics of the IMF response focus on the moral hazard problem: states were rescued from the consequences of their reckless behavior, providing little incentive for them to change that behavior International Trade
The goal of economic liberal thinking was to create a free trade system. For various reasons, leaders may want to protect their home markets. The goal of the post-World War II GATT was to promote international trade by lowering trade barriers. The GATT accomplished this in a series of negotiating rounds dealing with issues such as tariff cuts and favorable treatment for developing countries. The final GATT round, the Uruguay Round, covered new items such as services, intellectual property, and agriculture. In 1995, GATT became a formal institution, renaming itself the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Two important procedures were initiated in WTO: 1. The Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM), which conducts periodic surveillance of trade practices of member states 2. The Dispute Settlement Body, designed as an authoritative panel to hear and settle trade disputes. The WTO can impose sanctions against violators and is more powerful than other economic dispute resolution arrangements. Getting global participation in the WTO has proved a painstaking task. 1. China’s accession to the WTO in 2001 required that it make commitments to move toward a market economy. 2. Vietnam, which acceded in 2007, has made similar commitments Trade liberalization, the major goal of the WTO, remains controversial. The Doha Round, launched in 2001, was announced as a development round to help developing countries correct the inequities of the previous trade agreements. The North and the South remain deadlocked over the issue of agricultural export subsidies. Domestic groups and NGOs in many countries feel that the WTO is usurping the decisions and degrading the welfare of individuals and is undermining labor and environmental standards.
International Development
The Doha Round has bought out some of the differences between the developed North and the developing South. 1. The North is relatively wealthy. 2. Parts of the South lie mired in poverty, struggling to meet basic needs. Proponents of economic liberalism point to the progress made in closing the development gap. Detractors of economic liberalism point to a different set of indicators, arguing that the gap between rich and poor is actually increasing. In liberal economic theory, trade liberalization is based on comparative advantage and is a key engine of economic growth. 1. It is unclear whether aggregate growth leads to the economic improvement of the lives of individuals. The World Bank has changed its orientation over time without undermining its commitment to liberal economics. In the 1990s, sustainable development, an approach to economic development that incorporates concern for renewable resources and the environment, became part of the bank’s repertoire. The bank’s support of private-sector participation has become known as the Washington Consensus, a version of liberal economic ideology. Its adherents hold that only with liberalization of trade and privatization will development occur. While the IMF was not originally charged with development, it realized that many countries seemingly temporary balance of payments problems were actually longterm structural problems. 1. During the 1980s the IMF began to provide longer-term loans if states adopted structural adjustment programs consistent with the Washington Consensus. 2. In the 1990s it became apparent that some countries could not get out from under the weight of debt even with structural adjustment programs. 3. The Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative began an effort to eliminate or reduce the debt of the poorest states. By 2008 fourteen states had all of their debts canceled
Until the 1990s the Soviet Union and its allies were not members of the Bretton Woods organizations. The demise of the Soviet Union gave the IMF an active role in helping former Soviet and Soviet satellite countries make the transition to capitalist economies As the IMF has implemented these programs the line between the IMF and the World Bank has become blurred. A broad consensus has come to exist regarding the viability of the market-oriented policies and political pluralism as the foundation for economic development. 1. This has included a greater emphasis on human development—education and health NGOs play a critical role in this new approach, organized at the grassroots level to carry out locally based projects. 1. A particular effort has been the work of the Grameen Bank. It now has more than two thousand branches. Yet the important question is, with economic globalization, are benefits being distributed fairly? 1. The UN has undertaken the task of setting the goals of sustainable development and monitoring progress, setting forth eight Millennium Development Goals designed to reduce poverty and promote sustainable human development.
V. Critics of International Economic Liberalism
The triumph of economic liberalism is not without its critics, both tradition critics of the theory of liberalism and the critics of particular policies. Old-style mercantilists argue that economic policy should be subservient to the state and its interests. o This mercantilist explanation dominated explanations of the economic success of Japan in the 1960s and 1970s. Radical theorists argue development has not occurred. o Dependency theorists argue that MNCs are to blame through the exploitation of the poor. o Radicals see the interdependencies MNCs create as instruments of dependency and exploitation. Radicals argue that international regulation was necessary to limit the power of MNC’s. The New International Economic Order (NIEO) and the Group of 77 represent examples of these ideas, attempts to make the international economy more favorable to least developed countries (LDCs). Reformers outside and within international financial institutions question both governance and specific policies of the IMF and World Bank. o The voting rules of these organizations favor the donor states. o The development dollars distributed by the bank bring economic returns only to the North. The WTO has also become a lightning rod for domestic groups from many countries. They feel that the WTO is usurping local decisions and degrading the welfare of individuals.
VI. The Key Role of Petroleum Markets
No international issue or single commodity is more connected to economic globalization than petroleum. o The fundamental interdependency between consumers and producers has changed over time. o Demand for oil is growing fastest in emerging markets. o In 1960 the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was born. 1. Oil exporting countries won significant concessions from the oil MNCs. o OPEC’s twelve members produce 40 percent of the world’s oil. o In 1974 the Arab members of OPEC began an embargo of states that supported Israel, leading to a significant increase in the oil price o Inspired by OPEC’s success other developing states formed cartels in primary products, although these largely failed. o A second shock came with the Iranian Revolution in 1979. o The most recent shocks have come from demand for oil in the developing world. These changes in the international petroleum market have had political implications. o Oil-dependent states vying for contracts have changed or modified political allegiances. o Oil producing states have enjoyed a massive increase in oil revenue. 1. Some states can use oil as a strategic weapon 2. Even international institutions have found it harder to exercise their influence in getting the oil-producing states to comply with international agreements. 3. As oil has become more valuable, it has become a target for groups trying to disrupt established governments. o With globalization an integrated market has emerged, linking key producer and consumer states not only with MNCs, but also with international investors and financial markets
VII. Economic Globalization and Regionalism
Since the 1990s, more regional economic arrangements have been negotiated and those already operational been strengthened. European Economic Integration o Integration was predicated on the notion that the larger market with the free movement of goods and services would permit economies of scale, opportunities for investment, and growth. o The overall results have been positive, with the growth of all types of economic transactions across state borders. There is broad consensus that European integration has resulted in greater trade creation and positive welfare. o During the discussions for the single market, the outlines of a monetary union were negotiated. States that have agreed to the single currency, the euro, no longer can use exchange rates and interest rates as economic policy. o The European Union (EU) recognized that agriculture was different. The EU adopted the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), where the EU purchases surplus crops and pays guaranteed prices to farmers.
o
Aside from the CAP, most economists agree that the openness of the European markers has not only benefited Europeans but has become compatible with the goals of the multilateral global system. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) o The free trade agreement negotiated by the United States, Canada, and Mexico differs substantially from the EU: 1. It comprises one dominant economy and two dependent ones. 2. The driving force in NAFTA is not political elites but MNCs that seek larger market shares. 3. The social, political, and security dimensions in the EU are absent from NAFTA. Cooperation in trade is not intended to lead to free movement of labor. 4. NAFTA supports the phased elimination over ten years of tariff and nontariff barriers. NAFTA protects the property rights of those companies making investments in the three countries. o The economic controversies generated by NAFTA continue to be profound: 1. U.S. labor unions claim that hundreds of thousands of workers have lost their jobs to Mexico. 2. Environmental groups in the United States fear free trade with Mexico comes at the expense of the environment, as U.S. firms relocate to Mexico to skirt domestic environmental regulations. o Agricultural markets are better integrated, tariffs on manufactured goods have been almost entirely eliminated, and trade between the three countries has increased substantially.
VIII. Emerging Challenges to Economic Globalization
Economic globalization resulting from the triumph of economic liberalism has been confronted with several challenges. o Individuals who feel that economic decisions were beyond their control have resulted in antiglobalization movements at WTO, World Bank, and IMF meetings around the world, as well as the guerilla movements in Mexico opposed to NAFTA. o The Asian financial crisis in the late 1990s highlighted the problem of too much capital flowing out of the region. Many countries were unable to adjust to this rapid withdrawal, and thus exchange rates plummeted, individuals lost their jobs as companies went bankrupt, and stock markets fell. o Antiglobalizers have also been stimulated by other repercussions resulting from the openness of economic markets. Two trends have become vexing: 1. The movement of labor: The EU adopted the goal, but it has not occurred. This has resulted in a flood of illegal aliens seeking better paying jobs in EU countries. This has led to a new market in illicit labor, trafficking in people, including women and children. 2. The rise of illicit markets: this can include the illegal movement of arms, money, drugs, human organs, endangered species, and protected intellectual property. The Global Economic Crisis o International crises have been a recurrent feature of the global economic system.
o o o o o o
1. Liberal theory argues that the economy will regain its equilibrium and that booms and busts will not bring down the global system. 2. What began as a crisis in the United States rapidly became a global economic crisis. Initial responses to the crisis were mostly unilateral. International institutions provided loans and credit to developed states. The crisis has led to calls for reform of the system, including reform of the intergovernmental regulatory arrangements. The G20 has emerged as a major player in the crisis, but the G20 may prove too large for macroeconomic coordination. The crisis has also weakened the power of MNCs in the international system. What remains to be seen is how the crisis will affect economic globalization.
Chapter 10
Transnational Issues I. Introduction
The standardized shipping container is an example of how simple changes can have complex consequences In the twenty-first century, more different kinds of actors than ever participate in international politics The growing importance of non-state actors signifies a significant power shift. These new actors address a great variety of issues. Two of the core issues, security and international political economy, have evolved in new ways: o State security is increasingly conceptualized as human security. o Economic decisions made by multinational corporations (MNCs) affect national balances of payments and ability of workers to make a living wage. o Global communications and the technology revolution undermines the primacy of territorial states.
II. Health and Communicable Disease—Protecting Life in the Commons
Public health and disease are old issues that have never respected national boundaries. Eradication of diseases has always been a global challenge. The international community was caught unawares by the new realities spawned by globalization. Ebola, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Avian bird flu, and HIV/AIDS outbreaks have been acerbated by increased global mobility. HIV/AIDS as a Transnational Issue o AIDS has rapidly become a major health and humanitarian problem with over 3.1 million deaths annually and between 33 and 46 million people living with the disease: 1. AIDS is an economic issue, disproportionately affecting those in their primary productive years, between 15 and 45.
2. AIDS is a social issue, as families are torn apart and children are orphaned. These children are often forced to turn to prostitution or join the military in order to survive. 3. AIDS is a human rights and ethical issue as well as a security issue. In 2000 the UN Security Council identified AIDS as a threat to global security, the first time that health has been so recognized. Many different actors have responded to the AIDS problem, but individual states are key: 1. Uganda, Botswana, and Brazil took initiatives very early on, and each has seen rates of infection decline. 2. South Africa, China, and India have been slow to acknowledging the problem. IGOs took the leadership role at the early stages: 0. The World Health Organization (WHO) took steps to help states create national AIDS programs beginning in 1986. 1. In 1996, the Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) was created, which coordinates cooperative projects among numerous UN agencies. 2. The United Nations initiated the practice of convening global AIDS conferences every two years to raise awareness and mobilize responses.
Many NGOs have been actively involved. Some work at the grassroots level while others train health-care workers in AIDS care. With the development of antiretrovirals to extend the life of people living with AIDS, the multinational pharmaceutical companies have become a major actor, albeit a controversial one:
Indian drug companies began manufacturing generics reducing the cost of treatment, which a controversial practice. Brazil took its case to UN human rights bodies, arguing that patients have a human right to treatment.
Transnational communities of experts, or epistemic communities, are composed of experts from IGOs, NGOs, and states and substate agencies. Beyond AIDS
Health issues also involve regulations to insure quality and control unhealthy behaviors. Health is also recognized as a development issue.
A Theoretical Tale
Health is an example of a quintessential functionalist issue, as health was one of the first areas of international cooperation.
Where liberals, realists, and radicals may disagree is on the correct approach to addressing health issues. 1. Liberals are more apt to focus on international responsibility for dealing with health issues. 2. Realists are more apt to stress individual state responsibility and to acknowledge the importance of health when state security is threatened.
3. Radicals see health as an issue that illustrates the economic differential between the wealthy developed world and the poor developing world.
III. The Environment—Protecting the Global Commons
Conceptual Perspectives o The notion of collective goods: Collective goods help conceptualize how to achieve shared benefits that depend on overcoming conflicting interests. o Sustainability: Employing the criterion of sustainability forces individuals to think about policies to promote change that neither damage the environment nor use up finite resources so that future generations will benefit. o Over time, principles and norms have evolved in customary international law: 1. No-significant harm principle: states cannot initiate policies that cause significant environmental damages to another state. 2. Good-neighbor principle: cooperation between states. 3. “Soft law principles”: expressed in conferences, declarations, declarations, or resolutions. They are nonbinding but informally describe acceptable norms of behavior. These include: Polluter-pays principle Precautionary principle Preventive-action principle
Population Issues
In 1798, Thomas Malthus posited that population increases will outstrip food production. This is referred to as the Malthusian dilemma. An independent report, The Limits to Growth, issued by the Club of Rome in 1972, concluded that the Earth would reach natural limits to growth within a relatively short period of time. Malthus did not predict the demographic transition—that population growth rates would not proceed unchecked. Population growth rates have increased dramatically, though not unchecked. Three key observations make these populations growth rates disturbing: 1. The population increase is not uniformly distributed. The developing world has much higher population growth rates than the developed world. 2. Both rapid rates of overall population growth and high levels of economic development mean increased demands for natural resources. For certain countries like China and India with large populations already, the problem is severe. 3. High population growth rates lead to numerous ethical dilemmas for policy makers: how can population growth rates be curbed without infringing on individual rights to procreate? Population becomes a collective good problem: what is economically rational for a family is not environmentally sustainable. What actions can be taken with respect to population to alleviate or mitigate the dilemmas just discussed? 1. Prohibiting procreation is politically untenable and pragmatically difficult. 2. Relying on group pressure to forces changes in behavior will not work in the populous states.
3. Some individuals desire smaller families but family planning methods may be unavailable to them. What is clear about the problem is that it is an international one, affecting states, IGOs, and NGOs. Natural Resource Issues
The belief in the infinite supply of natural resources was a logical one throughout much of human history. Trading for natural resources became a necessary activity as it was recognized that those resources never uniformly distributed. Freshwater is a key natural resource for all forms of life. Agriculture accounts for two-thirds of the use of water; industry, about one-quarter; and human consumption, about one tenth. 1. It is estimated that by 2025, two-thirds of the world’s people will live in countries facing moderate or severe water shortage. 2. International controversies regarding water have occurred in the United States with irrigation of the Colorado River, Israel’s control of scarce water on the West Bank, and China’s rechanneling of the Yangtze River to northern cities.
Pollution
In the 1950s and 1960s, several events dramatically publicized the deteriorating condition of the commons. The natural world was being degrade by human activity associated with agricultural and industrial practices. Economic development both in agriculture and industry has negative externalities— costly unintended consequences—for everyone, as well as positive effects: 1. Environmental damage 2. Ozone depletion 3. Climate change
The Kyoto Protocol of 1997 provided for stabilizing the concentration of greenhouse gases and delineated goals for reducing emissions by 2010. Developed countries are to reduce their overall emissions, and provide flexibility mechanisms designed to make reaching the emission targets more cost-efficient.
Trading of international emission shares is permitted. Credits can be earned from ―carbon sinks.‖ States can offset their emissions by gaining credits for planting forests. Joint implementation permits countries to participate in projects for emission reductions and allows each to receive part of the credit.
In the United States, the George W. Bush administration refused to agree to any binding commitment on emissions, objecting on several grounds:
The economic costs of moving away from a fossil-fuel based economy are too high and an unacceptable number of jobs would be lost. The administration believes that markets will bring about the necessary changes, and opposes international regulations imposed by an unrepresentative and unaccountable body.
Both European states and Japan have signed the protocol and are making efforts to reduce emissions.
In 2009 President Barak Obama attended a follow-up conference in Copenhagen, Denmark. The Copenhagen Accord provided little in the way of specific commitments. Environmental NGOs in Action
NGOs perform a number of key functions in environmental affairs: 1. They serve as generalized critics, often using media to publicize their dissatisfaction and to get environmental issues on the agenda. 2. NGOs may function through IGOs, working to change the organization itself. 3. NGOs can aid in monitoring and enforcing environmental regulations, either by pointing out problems or by actually carrying out on-site inspections. 4. NGOs may function as part of transnational communities of experts, serving with counterparts in IGOs and state agencies to try to change practices and procedures of an issue. 5. NGOs can attempt to influence state environmental policy directly, providing information about policy options and lobbying directly through a state’s legislature or bureaucracy.
A Theoretical Tale
What has made many environmental issues so politically controversial at the international level is that states have tended to divide along the developeddeveloping—North-South—economic axis. The challenge in addressing globalizing issues is to negotiate a middle ground that reflects the fact that both sides are correct. Realists, liberals, and radicals do not have the same degree of concern for environmental issues. 1. Realists’ emphasis has been on state security 2. Radicals are apt to see the costs borne disproportionately by those in the South and by the poorer groups in the developed North. 3. Liberals see the environmental issue as appropriate to the international agenda. 4. Constructivists are interested in how political and scientific elites define the problem and how that definition changes over time and new ideas become rooted in their belief sets.
IV. Human Rights—Protecting Human Dignity
Conceptualizing Human Rights and the Development of a Regime o Three different kinds of rights have been articulated: 1. First-generation human rights: Rights possessed by an individual that the state cannot usurp. Political and civil rights dominate first generation rights: the right to free speech, free press, and freedom of religion. These rights are within the liberal tradition and by realists. 2. Second-generation human rights: developed under the principles of Marx. This view emphasizes minimum material rights that the state must provide to individuals, such as education, health care, housing, and social security. These are referred to as positive rights.
3. Third-generation human rights: specify rights for groups, such as ethnic or indigenous minorities within a polity or designated special groups such as women or children. Some have even added individual human rights. o The UN General Assembly approved the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 o These wide ranging human rights standard have led many scholars to conclude that there is an international regime of human rights-agreed upon rules, norms, and procedures that emerge from high levels of cooperation. o Two main questions emerge from the debate over human rights have proven to have enduring resonance: 1. Can human rights principles survive threats to national security? 2. Is there a set of rights that should be universal rights? o Pundits from different regions of the world have argued for cultural relativism, that is, rights are culturally determined. The Human Rights Regime in Action o States traditionally have argued that human rights is primarily the sovereign prerogative of the state. o A contending position emerged during the twentieth century: how a government treats its own citizens can affect the larger global community. o What can the international community actually do? The UN’s activities and the activities of other IGOs have been confined to several areas: 1. The United Nations has been involved in the setting of the international human rights standards articulated in the many treaties. 2. The United Nations and the European Commission on Human Rights have worked to monitor state behavior, establishing procedures for complaints, compiling reports from observers, and monitoring civil rights. 3. The United Nations has taken measures to promote human rights by assuring fair elections and providing a focal point for human rights activity. 4. States and the international community are the primary enforcers of international human rights. 5. UN enforcement is also an option. o The international community’s approaches to human rights enforcement are fraught with difficulties. 1. A state’s signature on a treaty is no guarantee of its willingness or ability to follow the treaty’s provisions. 2. Monitoring state compliance through self-reporting systems presumes a willingness to comply and to be transparent. 3. Taking direct action by imposing economic embargoes may not achieve the announced objective, and may actually be harmful to those very individuals whom the embargoes are trying to help. While the enforcement of human rights standards by the international community is clearly the exception rather than the norm, important precedents were established in the late twentieth century. o Some kind of international action is acceptable, though such actions are not always taken. But the international community may be closer now to saying it has a responsibility.
o
Most policy makers and theorists would agree that genocide should elicit a concerted international response. o In the aftermath of the Holocaust, the Convention against Genocide was negotiated. It elucidated clear principles that systematic killing of a group based on race, gender, or ethnicity is prohibited under international law and norms. o However, since then, using the word genocide implies an obligation to act. If states do not want to act, they can deny that genocide is occurring, as the United States did in Rwanda in 1994. Advocates of each of the three theoretical perspectives might argue different responses on the part of states. o Realists would generally focus on a state’s national interest in the situation. If genocide committed in one state jeopardizes another state’s national interests, then it should act. o Liberals’ emphasis on individual welfare and on the malleability of the state makes such intrusions into the actions of other states less offensive to them. o Radicals have few qualms about states’ taking actions. For them, the real culprit is the nemesis of an unfair economic system and so the target in their view is much more diffuse. Other Human Rights Actors o NGOs have been vocal and sometimes very effective in the area of human rights. Of the 250 organizations, there is a core group that has been the most vocal. It includes Amnesty International, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and Human Rights Watch. o The work of NGOs has become more effective with the use of the Internet and the World Wide Web. Individuals and groups are able to voice their grievances swiftly and to a worldwide audience, and can disseminate information quickly. Women’s Rights as Human Rights: The Globalization of Women’s Rights o Evolving Political and Economic Rights 1. Women first took up the call for political participation within national jurisdiction, demanding their political and civil rights in the form of women’s suffrage. 2. Conventions on the Political Rights of Women in 1952 3. The 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) 4. Women in Development (WID) Movement o From Political and Economic Rights to Human Rights 1. By the 1990s, the discussion of women’s rights was clearly viewed as human rights. This shift was solidified at the 1993 Vienna Conference on human rights. 2. Included in the Vienna Conference was not only human rights protection in the public sphere but protection against human rights abuses in the in the private sphere, notably gender-based violence against women. 3. Three examples illustrate the widespread and controversial problem of violence against women: The usurpation of women’s rights in Taliban-run Afghanistan. Rape, including rape by soldiers in war. Trafficking in women and children.
o
Different feminist groups have placed different priorities on the various types of human rights protection. Liberal feminists have found solace in granting political and civil human rights while social feminists point to the economic forces.
V. Transnational Crime
Trafficking in women and children is illegal under international law. Criminal networks engage in sex trafficking, which has become more serious and widespread since the collapse of the USSR. Narcotrafficking—the transportation of large quantities of narcotics—has always been a problem, but has become a focus since the end of the Cold War o Narcotrafficking has survived as demand for drugs has been relatively stable over time while transport costs have fallen.
VI. The Impact of Transnational Issues
Transnational issues have shifted from tertiary and moral issues to primary and vital issues since the end of World War II. Transnational issues have effects on four major areas of international relations theory and practice. o The interconnectedness of the plethora of subissues within health, environmental, and human rights issues affect international bargaining. o These globalizing themselves may be the source of conflict. Issues of resource depletion and degradation, usually attenuated by population increase and pressure on resources, are apt to result in conflicts when some groups try to capture use of the scarce resource. o The norm of noninterference in the domestic affairs of other states was embedded in the UN Charter. Yet the rise of nonstate actors and the forces of globalization undermine Westphalian notions of state sovereignty. o Transnationsl issues pose critical problems for international relations scholars and for the theoretical frameworks introduced in the text. 1. For realists, the very core propositions are made problematic by globalizing issues. Realists have adopted a more nuanced argument— they contend that state primacy is not in jeopardy. 2. For liberals, the globalizing issues can be more easily integrated into their theoretical picture. 3. Radicals have never been comfortable with the primacy of the state and the international system that the dominant coalition of states created 4. Constructivists have alerted others to the nuances of the changing discourse embedded in discussion of health, the environment, and human rights.
VI. Will Transnational Issues Lead to Global Governance?
The processes of interaction among the various actors in international politics are now more frequent and intense, ranging from conventional ad hoc cooperation and formal organization collaboration to NGO and network collaboration.
o
o
These changes have led some to think of there being pieces of global governance. Global governance implies that through various structures and processes, actors can coordinate interests and needs although there is no unifying political authority. Skeptics of global governance do not believe that anything approaching it is possible or desirable.
VII. In Sum: Changing You
A citizenry able to articulate these arguments is a citizenry better able to explain the whys and hows of events that affect our lives. A citizen who can understand these events is better able to make informed policy choices. In the globalizing era of the twenty-first century, as economic, political, social, and environmental forces both above and within the state assume greater saliency, the role of individuals becomes all the more demanding.
=================--=============================== A Brief Introduction to Theories on International Relations and Foreign Policy POLI 468 Bill Newmann
The selections we will be reading have one main focus. They seek to answer the big question in international relations and foreign policy: Why do states behave the way they do in the international system? Some people argue that this is a question of international relations theory and others say it is a question of foreign policy theory. For our purposes, we can consider them the same issue. Why do states behave the way they do is the question that theories of international relations and theories of foreign policy are trying to answer. The fact that these are treated as separate bodies of theory says more about political scientists than it does about the nature of state behavior. Since political science is concerned with theory building, each of these books focuses on theories. As stated in the syllabus, the search for theory is a search for rules to explain social science phenomenon (in this case foreign policy behavior). Each author is developing a theory to explain the behavior of all states, not just one state. That is the trick here. Can you find universal patterns of activity, universal rules that can used to explain how any state behaves? Each author is developing a theory (a rule about state behavior) and then testing it with case studies. You are assessing those theories and the evidence that supports them. So think in those terms. Don’t be confused by scientific jargon. Just remember that theories are statements about cause and effect. When I heat up a liquid, it will boil. That’s cause and effect. To become a scientist, you start to experiment – you heat up different liquids to see if they all boil at the same temperature, then you try to make rules about the different types of liquids you heat up, say types of juices vs. types of oil. That’s science. Now, since this is social science and we’re dealing with nations, we can’t run experiments. You can’t invade
several nations to see what their different reactions to invasion might be. So you use historical data to test your theories. That’s what you’re examining in your papers. An author has developed a theory or tested two theories. How well does the author’s argument hold up when tested against the historical data? The authors might use terms that you are unfamiliar with. I am going to provide a brief introduction to some of the key ideas in international relations that will give you a starting point and a quick reference for dealing with the theoretical issues. The authors are very good at illustrating their theories, but this might help just in case. Also, these are starting points for the authors. They take some of these basic notions and redevelop them. So their views of each of these theories might be slightly different from the way I describe them. Theories evolve and below I’ve given you the basic starting points for each theory.
Levels of Analysis One of the key questions in international relations and foreign policy is the question of how you examine state behavior. This is the level of analysis problem. Scholars see several levels of analysis through which state behavior can be examined. System level analysis examines state behavior by looking at the international system. In this level of analysis, the international system is the cause and state behavior is the effect. Characteristics of the international system cause states to behave the way they do. Change in the international system will cause change in state behavior. The key variable in the international system is the power of a state within the system. Some states are powerful; others are weak. So for example, the cold war had two powerful states. Therefore the central cause of all state behavior in the cold war was the fact that the US and USSR were the two powerful states in a bipolar system. Today, there is unipolar system – one superpower (or hyperpower) -- and that defines the behavior of all other states in the system. (See neo-realism below). So this level of analysis might explain the US intervention in Iraq as a matter of the US, the one and only powerful state, flexing its muscles to police the world against states that threaten it. The US wants to preserve its dominance and therefore crushes all challengers. State level analysis examines the foreign policy behavior of states in terms of state characteristics. For example, some scholars say that all democracies behave a certain way; they don’t fight with other democracies. Some scholars might look at the different behaviors of weak or strong states; states that live in rough neighborhoods (Germany or France) vs. states that live in more benign surroundings (the US). Some scholars might say that the foreign policy behavior of every state is a cultural characteristic, defined by the historical legacy of the state, the religious or social traditions, or the economic and geographic nature of the state itself (see constructivism below). State level of analysis might explain the US intervention in Iraq as a function of the missionary quality of US foreign policy. The US has always had an idealist streak in its foreign policy (some disagree with this) and sees ―bad guys‖ out there in the international system. The US is compelled by the nature of its political system and its belief that some day all states will be like the US. It has a drive to remake the world in its own image. The job of US foreign policy is not done until all states are democratic and all nations have free market economies. Organizational level analysis examines the way in which organizations within a state function to influence foreign policy behavior. States don’t make decisions. Organizations bargain with each other to create a foreign policy that is a compromise between competing organizations. This level of analysis for example, might look at the Iraq war and try to explain it by examining the interests of the US military, the department of defense, the state department, and central intelligence agency. How did these organizations create US foreign policy would be the key question at this level of analysis. Individual level analysis focuses on people. People make decisions within nation states and therefore people make foreign policy. Scholars might look at the roles of different leaders. This level of analysis might explain World War II by examining the role of Hitler. It might look at the end of the cold war by studying Gorbachev. It might suggest that the economic reforms in China are a result of the transition from Mao Zedong’s leadership to Deng Xiaoping’s rule. This level of analysis also includes cognitive theories --- theories that explain foreign policy by looking at the way leaders
perceive the world. Larson’s book is an example of this. This is a focus on perception, misperception, and communication. Individual level analysis might ask questions such as these: Are there aspects of George W. Bush’s character and belief systems that have defined the US response to the 9/11 attacks? Would Al Gore or John Kerry have behaved any differently in a similar situation? How do Bush and his senior decision makers perceive the world and their role in it? The books that we have for this class, examine foreign policy behavior from several different levels.
Theories of State Behavior The following list illustrates some of the theories that you’ll be reading about. Each one is a specific theory that tries to explain the way states behave. You’ll get plenty of ideas within the books, so I’ll give you the brief outline. Remember though that the authors will take these basic ideas and modify them. Again, these are starting points for theory and the authors are modifying them to build better theory. Classical realism is a state level theory that argues that all states seek power. That is the first and last principle of state behavior. States seek to increase their power; they seek to decrease the power of their enemies; and everything they do is in the name of amassing power. States see other powerful states as rivals because power, when it is not in your hands, is threatening. People are greedy, insecure, and aggressive, so the states they govern will have those same characteristics. This doesn’t mean war, however. There can be peace, but a durable peace is based upon a stable balance of power – the big players in the international systems are roughly equal in power resources, so therefore no one thinks they can win a war. If you don’t think you can win a war, you generally don’t start one. The US and USSR were rivals in the cold war because they were the two most powerful states after WW II. They were both wary of each other’s power and became enemies. But they did not go to war because they were roughly equal in power. Neo-realism is a system level theory that is an offshoot of classical realism. It argues all of what classical realism does. However, it sees the cause of all the power struggles and rivalries not as a function of the nature of states, but as a function of the nature of the international system. States are out there alone. There is no world government, no one looking out for states, no rules that can’t be easily broken. The world is anarchy and states do what they can get away with to gain power and they do what they must to protect themselves. Power creates rivalry because it is threatening by its nature. If some other state is more powerful than your state, you have no way to protect yourself but to defend yourself or attack your rival first. A neorealist might say the cold war was caused by the fact that there were only two powerful states that survived WW II. Sine there was no world government or rules of behavior to restrain the rivalry it became the cold war. This theory dominates scholarly thinking today and will be discussed in a lot of the books. Neo-classical realism is a sort of revival of classical realism. It accepts all of the above about power rivalries, but it suggests that state characteristics (state level variables) play a large role in the behavior of states. States don’t just seek power and they don’t just fear other powerful states, there are reasons that states seek power and there are reasons that states fear other states. It’s a sort of combination of classical and neo-realism that factors in both system level and state level variables. For example, a neo-classical realist might look at the cold war and say that the differences in ideology between the US and USSR was a factor in the US-USSR rivalry that exacerbated the tendency for two powerful states to form rivalries. Liberalism adds values into the equation. It is often called idealism. It is a state level theory which argues that there is a lot of cooperation in the world, not just rivalry. States don’t just compete or worry about power. States try to build a more just world order. They often do so because they have learned that in many instances cooperation is a better strategy that conflict. States try to create enforceable international law. States are progressive forces for social justice. Liberalism might look at
the cold war and examine the different values of the US and USSR and point out the repressive and murderous nature of the Soviet state as the key to the US and USSR animosity. It also might look at the decades-worth of US-USSR cooperation in the midst of the cold war (arms control, the lack of direct conflict). Neo-liberalism is an offshoot of liberalism. It is a system level version of liberalism and focuses on the way in which institutions can influence the behavior of states by spreading values or creating rulebased behavior. Neo-liberals might focus on the role of the United Nations or World Trade Organization in shaping the foreign policy behavior of states. Neo-liberals might look at the cold war and suggest ways to fix the UN to make it more effective. Cognitive Theories are those mentioned above which examine the role of psychological processes – perception, misperception, belief systems – on the foreign policy behavior of states. It can be state, organization, or individual level of analysis depending on whether the research is focusing on the psychological dynamics of a state decision maker or the shared perceptions of an organization, or the shared belief systems of a nation. Cognitive theorists might look at the shared images of the US and USSR political leaders had of each other and explain the cold war as the product of these negative images and the inability of either state to reshape the perceptions of the other. Constructivism is a theory that examines state behavior in the context of state characteristics. All states are unique and have a set of defining political, cultural, economic, social, or religious characteristics that influence its foreign policy. States have identities and those identities define their behavior in the international system. The US has a foreign policy character. Russia has a foreign policy character. The cold war is a product of the clash of those identities. The end of the cold war may be a function of changes in the Russian identity.
