Ir Note Final Exam

7/30/2019 Ir Note Final Exam

1/16

1

IR

SECTION A

POWER

What is power? For the general definition

there are three main element of power;

definition:

1) The ability or capacity to do something or

act in a particular way.

2) The capacity or ability to direct or influence

the behaviour of others or the course of

events. For the example;

- political / social authority or control,

especially that exercised by a government.

- authority that is given or delegated to aperson or body.

- * power also include ;

- the military strength of a state

- a person or organization that is strong or

influential within a particular context.

3) Physical strength and force by something or

someone.

In other words: we can say power isthe ability to influence the behaviour

or attitude of people, government,state and international system.

Power in the most general sense,the ability of a political actor to

achieve its goals.

Realist it is assumed that possessionof capabilities will result influence, so

the single word, power is often used

ambiguously to cover both.

Pluralist it is assumed that politicalinteraction can modify the translation

of capabilities into influence and

therefore it is important to distinguish

between the two.

Realist in terms of the importantresources such as size of armed

forces, gross national product and

population that a state possesses

there is the implicit belief that

material resources translate into

influence.

Why state s compete for power? Based on 5

assumptions about the international system;

1) Great power are the main actor & operate

in an anarchic system.

2) State posses some offensive military

capability.

3) States can never be certain about the

intentions of other states.

4) Main goal of state is survival.

5) State are rational actors.

Power is about:

Power is a central concept ininternational relations.

It is the central concept for realists. Difficult to measure

Defining Power

Often defined as the ability to getanother actor to do what it would not

otherwise have done (or vice versa).

If actors get their way a lot, they mustbe powerful.

Power is not influence itself, but theability or potential to influence others.

Based on specific (tangibleand intangible) characteristics

or possessions of states

Sizes, levels ofincome, and armed

forces

Capability: Easier to measurethan influence and less

circular in logic

The single indicator of a states powermay be its total GDP Combines overall size,

technological level, and

wealth

At best, a rough indicator


2/16

2

A states tangible capabilities(including military forces)

represent material power.

Power also depends on nonmaterialelements.

National will, diplomatic skill,popular support forgovernment (legitimacy), and

so forth

Power can only explain so much. Real-world IR depends on many other

elements, including accidents or luck.

Relational concept: Relative power isthe ratio of the power that two states

can bring to bear against each other.

Estimating Power

The logic of power suggests: The more powerful state will

generally prevail.

Estimates of the power of twoantagonists should help

explain the outcome.

U.S. and Iraq Implications of the

outcome -- GDP does

not always predictwho will win the war

Elements of Power

State power is a mix of manyingredients.

Natural resources, industrialcapacity, moral legitimacy,military preparedness, and

popular support of

government

Long-term elements of power Total GDP, population,

territory, geography, and

natural resources

Less tangible long-termelements of power include

political culture, patriotism,

education of the population,and strength of the scientific

and technological base.

Credibility of its commitments(reputation for keeping word)

Ability of one states cultureand values to consistently

shape the thinking of other

states (power of ideas)

Capabilities that allow actors toexercise influence in the short term:

Military forces Military-industrial complex Quality of the states

bureaucracy

Less tangible: Support andlegitimacy that an actor

commands in the short term

from constituents and allies

Loyalty of a nations army andpoliticians to its leader

Trade-offs among possible capabilitiesalways exist.

To the extent that oneelement of power can be

converted into another, it is

fungible. Money is the most

fungible.

Realists tend to see military force asthe most important element of

national power in the short term.

Tanks versus Gold Iraq = tanks / Kuwait = gold In the short term, the tanks

proved more powerful.

Morality States have long clothed their

actions, however aggressive,

in rhetoric about their

peaceful and defensive

intentions.

Geopolitics States increase their power to

the extent that they can use

geography to enhance their

military capabilities.


3/16

3

Two-front problem: Germanyand Russia

Insular: Britain and UnitedStates

Balance of Power

Refers to the general concept of oneor more states power being used to

balance that of another state or group

of states.

Balance of power can refer to: Any ratio of power capabilities

between states or alliances, or

It can mean only a relativelyequal ratio.

Alternatively, it can refer tothe process by whichcounterbalancing coalitions

have repeatedly formed in

history to prevent one state

from conquering an entire

region.

Theory of balance of power Counterbalancing occurs

regularly and maintains

stability of the internationalsystem.

Does not imply peace, butrather a stability maintained

by means of recurring wars

that adjust power relations

Alliances are key Quicker, cheaper, and

more effective than

building ones own

capabilities

States do not always balanceagainst the strongest actor.-bandwagoning

Great Powers and Middle Powers

The most powerful states in thesystem exert most of the influence on

international events and therefore get

the most attention from IR scholars.

Handful of states possess themajority of the worlds powerresources.

Great powers are generallyconsidered the half-dozen or so most

powerful states.

Until the past century, theclub was exclusively

European.

Defined generally as statesthat can be defeated militarilyonly by another great power.

Generally have the worldsstrongest military forces and

the strongest economies

U.S., China, Russia,Japan, Germany,

France, and Britain

U.S. the worlds onlysuperpower

China the worldslargest population,rapid economic

growth and a large

military, with a

credible nuclear

arsenal

Middle powers Rank somewhat below the

great powers

Some are large but not highlyindustrialized Others may be small with

specialized capabilities

Examples: midsized countriessuch as Canada, Italy, Spain,

the Netherlands, Poland,

Ukraine, South Korea, and

Australia, or larger or

influential countries in the

global South such as India,

Indonesia, Brazil, Argentina,Mexico, Nigeria, South Africa,

Israel, Turkey, Iran, and

Pakistan


4/16

4

Power Distribution

The concept of the distribution ofpower among states in the

international system

Can apply to all the states inthe world or to just one region Neorealism, or structural realism

1990s adaptation of realism Explains patterns of

international events in terms

of the system structure

(distribution of power) rather

than the internal makeup of

individual states.

Neoclassical realists Polarity refers to the number of

independent power centers in the

system.

Multipolar system: Has five orsix centers of power, which

are not grouped into alliances.

Tripolar system: With threegreat centers of power

Unipolar system: Has a singlecenter of power around which

all others revolve (hegemony) Power transition theory

Holds that the largest warsresult from challenges to the

top position in the status

hierarchy, when a rising

power is surpassing or

threatening to surpass the

most powerful state.

Hegemony

Is the holding of one state of most ofthe power in the international system

Can dominate the rules andarrangements by which international

political and economic relations are

conducted

This type of state is a hegemon Hegemonic stability theory

Holds that hegemony providessome order similar to a

central government in the

international system:

reducing anarchy, deterring

aggression; promoting free

trade, and providing a hard

currency that can be used as a

world standard.

After WWII U.S. hegemony Hegemons have an inherentinterest in the promotion of

integrated world markets.

U.S. ambivalence Internationalist versus

isolationist moods

Unilateralism versusmultilateralism

The Great-Power System, 1500-2000

Treaty of Westphalia, 1648 Rules of state relations Originated in Europe in the

16th century

Key to this system was theability of one state, or a

coalition, to balance the

power of another state so it

could not gobble up smaller

units and create a universal

empire.

Most powerful states in 16th-centuryEurope were Britain, France, Austria-

Hungary, and Spain.

Ottoman Empire Hapsburgs


5/16

5

Impact of industrialization Napoleonic Wars Congress of Vienna (1815) Concert of Europe UN Security Council WW I WW II and after

EXTRA NOTE

The International System

States interact within a set of long-established rules of the game

governing what is considered a state

and how states treat each other.

Together these rules shape theinternational system.

Anarchy and Sovereignty

Realists believe the internationalsystem exists in a state of anarchy.

Term implies the lack of acentral government that can

enforce rules. World government as a

solution?

Others suggest internationalorganizations and

agreements.

Despite anarchy, the internationalsystem is far from chaotic.

Great majority of stateinteractions closely adhere to

norms of behavior

Sovereignty: A government has theright, in principle, to do whatever it

wants in its own territory.

Lack of a world police to punishstates if they break an agreement

makes enforcement of international

agreements difficult.

In practice, most states have a harderand harder time warding off

interference in their affairs.

Respect for the territorial integrity ofall states, within recognized borders,

is an important principle of IR.

Impact of informationrevolution/information

economies and the territorial

state system

States and norms of diplomacy Security dilemma

A situation in which statesactions taken to ensure theirown security threaten the

security of other states.

Arms race Negative

consequence of

anarchy in the

international system

Alliances

A coalition of states that coordinatetheir actions to accomplish some end Most are formalized in written

treaties

Concern a common threat andrelated issues of international

security

Endure across a range ofissues and a period of time

Purposes of Alliances

Augmenting their members power By pooling capabilities, two or

more states can exert greater

leverage in their bargaining

with other states.


6/16

6

For smaller states, alliancescan be their most important

power element.

But alliances can changequickly and decisively.

Most form in response to aperceived threat. Alliance cohesion

The ease with which themembers hold together an

alliance

Tends to be high whennational interests converge

and when cooperation within

the alliance becomes

institutionalized and habitual.

Burden sharing Who bears the cost of the

alliance

NATO

One of the most important formalalliances

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

Encompasses Western Europeand North America

Founded in 1949 to opposeand deter Soviet power in

Europe

Countered by the WarsawPact (1955); disbanded in

1991

First use of force by NATO wasin Bosnia in 1994 in support of

the UN mission there. European Union formed its own rapid

deployment force, outside NATO.

Biggest issue for NATO is its recentand eastward expansion, beyond the

East-West Cold War dividing line.

Russian oppositionOther Alliances

U.S.-Japanese Security Treaty U.S. maintains nearly 50,000troops in Japan. Japan pays the U.S. several

billion dollars annually to

offset about half the cost of

maintaining these troops.

Created in 1951 against thepotential Soviet threat to

Japan.

Asymmetrical in nature U.S. has alliances with other states:

South Korea and Australia De facto allies of the U.S.: those with

whom we collaborate closely Israel

CIS

Regional Alignments

In the global South, many statesjoined a nonaligned movement during

the Cold War.

Stood apart from the U.S.-Soviet rivalry Led by India and Yugoslavia

Undermined by themembership of Cuba

Organization of African Unity China loosely aligned with Pakistan in

opposition to India (which was aligned

with the Soviet Union).

Relationships with Indiawarmed after the Cold Warended.

Middle East: General anti-Israelalignment of the Arab countries for

decades

Broke down in 1978 as Egyptand Jordan made peace with

Israel

Israel and war with Hezbollahand Hamas

Israel and Turkey formed aclose military alliance

Israel largest recipient of U.S.foreign aid

Egypt Iran


7/16

7

Bush administration:emphasis on spreading

democracy

Strategy: Statecraft

The art of managing state affairs andeffectively maneuvering in a world of

power politics among sovereign

states.

Key aspect of strategy: What kinds ofcapabilities to develop, given limited

resources, in order to maximize

international influence

Example of China Deterrence

Uses a threat to punishanother actor if it takes a

certain negative action.

Compellence Refers to the use of force to

make another actor take

some action (rather than

refrain from taking an action).

Arms race A reciprocal process in which

two (or more) states build upmilitary capabilities in

response to each other.

Rationality

Most realists assume that those whowiled power while engaging in

statecraft behave as rational actors.

Two implications for IR: Implies that states and otherinternational actors can

identify their interests and put

priorities on various interests.

National interest Implies that actors are able to

perform a cost-benefit

analysis calculating the costs

incurred by a possible action

and the benefits it is likely to

bring.

The Prisoners Dilemma

Game theory Zero-sum games

One players gain is bydefinition equal to the

others loss

Non-zero-sum games It is possible for both

players to gain (or

lose) Prisoners Dilemma

Rational players chose movesthat produce an outcome in

which all players are worse off

than under a different set of

moves.

They all could do better, butas individual rational actors

they are unable to achieve

this outcome. Applications to the study of IR

PART 2

IIdealist/ realist / liberalist / ?????

1. REALISM

- Analytical unit: State is the principle actor.- View of actor: State is unitary actor.

- Behavioral Dynamic: State is rational actor

seeking to maximise its own interest or

national objective in foreign policy.

- Issues: National security issues are most

important:

a. The most basic assumptions of realism

reflect and inherent pessimism in the school

of thought.

b. Realist begin with a Prisoners Dilemma.

They assume that international politics is azero sum game and each player has a strong

incentive to betray the other (defect).

c. As indicated above, they also begin with the

assumptions that power is the means by

which a states security is guaranteed, that


8/16

8

power is fungible, that states are unitary and

rational actors, and they are the primary units

of international politics.

d. Realist assume that the international

system is anarchic; hence there is no super-

state authority or central government toenforce rules, norms, or contracts.

International anarchy leads to a self-help

system in international politics. In a self-help

system, each state is responsible for its own

security. This in turn leads to a security

dilemma. The more one state arms to protect

itself from other states, the more threatened

these states become and the more prone they

are to resort to arming themselves to protect

their own national security interest in other

words resulting in an arms race.

2. Liberalism

- Analytical unit: State and non-state actors

(mostly institutions) are important.

- View of actor: State disaggregated into

components, some of which may operate

transnationally.

- Behavioral Dynamic: Foreign policy making

and transnational processes involve conflict,bargaining, coalition, and compromise not

necessarily resulting in optimal outcomes.

- Issues: Multiple agenda with socio-economic

or welfare issues as, or more, important as

national security questions.

a. Liberalism is not the opposite of realism.

Rather, liberalism is an optimistic version of

realism with fewer assumptions constraining

the implications. Liberals also begin with the

assumptions that states are unitary and

rational actors. However, liberals do not sharethe realist assumptions that power is the only

means by which a states security is

guaranteed.

b. there is an intrinsic optimism in Liberalism.

Liberals feel that security fears are not

constant and can be overcome. Liberalism

makes the positive statement that security

fears are not static, they are a product of

certain conditions, and they are malleable.

c. Liberals say you can change the situations.

They believe security can be guaranteed byother means (beside military power/force)

and they provide for the possibility that non-

state actors (mostly institutions and

corporations) play important role in world

politics.

d. Liberals say that there are no immutable

concerns of states, only what they create. This

is what most clearly distinguishes Liberalism

and Realism. Liberals, like realist, assume that

the international system is anarchic, but do

not assume that a super-national authority isthe only means by which to enforce rules,

norms, or contract.

Extra Note

Realism

Theoretical framework that has held a central

position in the study of IRRealisms foundation is the principle of

dominance.

- School of thought that explains

international relations in terms of power. The

exercise of power by states toward each other

is sometimes called realpolitik, or just power

politics.

Realism developed in reaction to a liberal

tradition that realists called idealism.

- Idealism emphasizes international law,morality, and international organizations,

rather than power alone, as key influences on

international events.

- Belief that human nature is basically good.

- Particularly active between WWI and WWII

stop German, Italian, and Japanese

aggression.

Since WWII, realists have blamed idealists for

looking too much at how the world ought to

be rather than how it really is.


9/16

9

REALISM

REALISM makes several key assumptions. It

assumes that the international system is

anarchic, in the sense that there is no

authority above states capable of regulatingtheir interactions; states must arrive at

relations with other states on their own,

rather than it being dictated to them by some

higher controlling entity (that is, no true

authoritative world government exists). It also

assumes that sovereign states, rather than

international institutions, non-governmental

organizations, or multinational corporations,

are the primary actors in international affairs.

According to realism, each state is a rational

actor that always acts towards its own self-interest, and the primary goal of each state is

to ensure its own security. Realism holds that

in pursuit of that security, states will attempt

to amass resources, and that relations

between states are determined by their

relative level of power. That level of power is

in turn determined by the state's capabilities,

both military and economic. There are two

sub-schools of realism: maximal realism and

minimal realism. The theory of maximal

realism holds that the most desirable positionto be in is that of the hegemon, the most

powerful entity in the world, and that smaller

entities will align themselves with the

hegemon out of political self-interests. Under

maximal realism, the position where there are

simultaneously two equally powerful co-

hegemons (such as was the case during the

Cold War between the United States and the

Soviet Union) is an inherently unstable one

and that situation will inevitably collapse into

a more stable state where one nation is morepowerful and one is less powerful. The theory

of minimal realism holds that non-hegemonic

states will ally against the hegemon in order

to prevent their own interests from being

subsumed by the hegemon's interests. Under

the minimal-realism theory it is possible to

have two equally powerful co-hegemons with

whom a smaller entity may ally in turn

depending on which hegemon better fits with

the smaller entity's policies at the moment

(playing both sides against the middle).Realism in international relations

The term "realism" comes from the German

compound word "Realpolitik", from the words

"real" (meaning "realistic", "practical", or

"actual") and "politik" (meaning "politics"). It

is the balance of power among nation-states.

Bismarck coined the term after following

Metternich's lead in finding ways to balance

the power of European empires. Balancing

power meant keeping the peace, and carefulRealpolitik practioners tried to avoid arms

races. However, during the early-20th

Century, arms races (and alliances) occurred

anyway, culminating in World War I.

LIBERALISM

Liberalism (also known in American circles as

idealism) is generally considered the second

great body of theory in contemporary

international politics after realism, althoughtechnically it is the first (the first generation of

international relations scholars in England

after WWII were predominantly what we

would now call Liberals). This approach

allegedly dominated the study of international

relations from the end of WWI until the late

1930s. Sometimes referred to as utopianism,

Liberalism came to prominence in reaction to

the carnage of the WWI. The notable Liberal

idealists are Immanuel Kant, Richard Cobden,

John Hobson, Norman Angell, Alfred Zimmernand Woodrow Wilson. Liberals see

opportunities for cooperation. This is

particularly so in their defence of international

law, economic cooperation, and the spread of

democracy as the most important

mechanisms for building world peace.

In general, Liberals have observed that

the least aggressive states tend to be ones

with democratic governments and capitalistic

economies the so called liberal democracies,most of which are industrialised countries.

The controversial claim that no democracy has

ever truly gone to war against another

democracy lies at the heart of the Democratic

Peace Theory. Another insight drawn from


10/16

10

the linking of internal and external affairs is

that non-state actors, like civil society,

multinational corporations, and international

organisations, also play important roles in

world politics.

Reflecting its origins in the post WWI

period, Liberals have argued that the chief

goal of foreign policy should be to promote

world peace (although many accept that wars

can be just if world peace is the ultimate goal).

One mechanism for doing this is to promote

the growth of international organisations and

international laws, which, according to

Liberals, should be generally effective

provided that they reflect existing balances of

power. Important Liberal projects haveincluded the promotion of universal human

rights and conflict prevention in the United

Nations, and market liberalisation through the

World Trade Organisation. Some branches of

Liberal theory insist that domestic and

international reforms must be linked, and that

world peace will require democratisation of

currently authoritarian states.

Liberalist emphasises international

organisation and law, cooperation, and theconstruction of a more perfect world. They

share a belief in progress and are of the view

that the procedure of parliamentary

democracy and deliberation under the rule of

law could be firmly established in

international diplomacy. They believe that

politics should follow the highest moral and

legal principles. For the Liberalist, human

choice plays a crucially important role in

affairs. They believe that politics should

involve the abandonment of force, theencouragement of learning and the

coexistence of societies under the leadership

of adequately enlightened rulers. A central

characteristic of a Liberalist is the belief that

what unites human beings is more important

than what divides them. Liberalists are also

known for their naivety about the role of

power in international relations. They disagree

with the fatalistic orientation that assumes

power politics is a natural phenomenon and is

an unchanging law of nature. For them nopattern is unchangeable and man has the

capacity to learn and change behaviours.

To some, political Liberalist had failed

because it had not been universalised or

because it had not been given a long time to

succeed and to others political idealisms

failure to prevent war was the inevitable

result of what they believed were political

idealisms naivety and erroneous assumptions.

Liberalism has been regarded as an exampleof both policy failure and theoretical naivety

in international relations since the outbreak of

war in 1939.

After fully analysing Liberalism to

conclude utilising a very simplistic definition

with brevity as its core, liberalism is a political

or social philosophy advocating the freedom

of the individual, parliamentary systems of

government, nonviolent modification ofpolitical, social, or economic institutions to

assure unrestricted development in all

spheres of human endeavour, and

governmental guarantees of individual rights

and civil liberties. Now having clearly

established the underpinning components of

Liberalism we will focus our attention on Neo-

Liberalism.

LIBERALIST

LIBERALISM holds that state preferences,

rather than state capabilities, are the primary

determinant of state behavior. Preferences

will vary from state to state, depending on

their culture, economic system, or type of

government. Many different strands of

liberalism have emerged; some include

commercial liberalism, liberal institutionalism,

idealism, and regime theory. Recently, realism

and liberalism have evolved into neo-realism

and neo-liberalism. Other schools, whichcannot (yet) be counted to the established

mainstream in the Study of International

Relations, include postmodern, feminist and

neo-Marxist approaches, and neo-

Gramscianism. These perspectives differ from


11/16

11

both realism and liberalism in their

epistemological and ontological premises and

are post positivistic in nature. Different

schools of thought in international relations

can predict the same events. The theories are

differentiated by the assumptions they makein their reasoning toward predictions. For

example, both realists and liberals claim that

events as disparate as World War I, the Cold

War, and the relatively conflict-free post-Cold

War Europe were predicted by their theories.

The theories differ in the fundamental

assumptions they make in predicting state

behavior. It is possible that one liberal theorist

will predict war while another liberal theorist

will predict peace; their disagreement arises

from how they interpret events, but theirfundamental assumptions are the same.

Similarly, it is possible that a realist theorist

and a liberal theorist could both predict

peace, but their fundamental assumptions as

to why that occurs would be different.

Realism Liberalism

Human

Nature

-

Pessimistic

- Selfish in

nature

- Optimistic

- Have faith of

human nature

Individual goodbehavior

Most

Important

Factor

- State (

national

Interest)

State

Dominance

and Power

- State are not

unitary actor

-

Interdependence

are key factor

Nature in

International

System

- Anarchy

- Identity

course of

war

- Cooperation

- Community not

believe anarchy

is the course ofwar

Course of

State

Behavior

- Self help

- Self

interest

- Security

can be

obtain on

self help

- National

security

- Emphasis on

economic, social

and political will

being

Power - Military

forces

- To

maintain

- Collective

security

- To achieve

collective

politician

action for

state

survival

goal/interest

- Progress and

modernization

Morale/Ethic

Value

-Self

interestbefore

regional

obligation

- Not

moralize

- Equality

- Cooperation- Democracy

- Basic right

Idealism

Human Nature - Unrealistic belief in

pursuing of perfection.

- Altruistic (welfare of

others)Most Important

Factor

- State and others including

individuals. (state are not

the sole actor on

international organization)

Nature in

International

System

- Community / collective

security

- peace

Course of State

Behavior

- psychological motive of

decision makers

Power - emphasis in cooperation toachieve progress (league of

nation)

Morale/Ethic

Value

Focuses on democratic rights

of citizens.


12/16

12

SECOND QUESTION. CHOOSE FROM 5

1. The Peace of Westphalia

- Peace of Westphalia is a series of agreement,

which ended the thirty years war. Peace ofWestphalia was sign on 24 Oct 1648 between

Emperor Ferdinand III, the German princes,

representative of the Netherlands, France and

Sweeden.

- Westphalian sovereignty is the concept of

the sovereignty of nation-states on their

territory, with no role for external agents in

domestic structures.

- This treaty was a result of two separate

peace treaties. It was from the first moderndiplomatic congress and initiated a new order

in central Europe based on the concept of

state sovereignty. What were the primary

results/outcomes of this event?

a. Sovereignty and the recognition of

international boundaries (including territorial

adjustments for some European nations)

b. Non-intervention. (The principle of

legal equality between states. These principles

are shared by the realist internationalrelations paradigm.

c. Institution of diplomacy.

d. The balance of power.

e. International law via the introduction

of tenets (or rules) between nations.

f. Territorial integrity.

g. group of people united by language

and culture.

h. Peace of Westphalia is important to

modern IR theory.

i. principle of the sovereignty of statesand the fundamental right of political self

determination.

j. It was one of the first European

Agreement that dealt with the issues of

freedom of religion by allowing minority

religions the right to retain and practice their

faith.

k. In many ways it laid the foundations

for the modern concept of state by

establishing for the first time such as concepts

as sovereignty.l. The term peace of Westphalia,

referring to the two peace treaties of

Osnabruck and Munster.

Westphalian principle:

1. the principle of the sovereignty of

nation-state and the fundamental right of self-

determination.

2. the principle of legal equality among

nation-states.3. Principle binding international

agreement among countries, thus binding

contract.

4. Principle of non-intervention of one

state in another states internal affairs.

Significance

- Peace of Westphalia marked the beginning

of the modern nation-state which began as

modern diplomacy.- recognized as sovereignty of each state.

- War is not only about religion, but about the

state.

- Protestants and catholic became allies in

own countries.

- Division to be unite into a single nation-state.

Modern views

- humanity and democracy were two principle

that were not relevance to the originalwestphalian order. That Westphalia system

has limit. Principle of sovereignty , which is

basis and produced a base for rivalry instead

of union of states, exclusion instead of

integration.

- The key concept of Europe after 1945 was

still is a rejection of the principle of balance

power and hegemonic ambitions of individual

states, which emerged after the Peace of

Westphalia. This refusal took shape mixing

vital interest and the transfer of sovereignrights of nation-state on super-national

European Institutions.

Treaty of Westphalia, 1648

Rules of state relations


13/16

13

Originated in Europe in the 16th

century

Key to this system was the ability of

one state, or a coalition, to balance the power

of another state so it could not gobble up

smaller units and create a universal empire.

Most powerful states in 16th-century

Europe were Britain, France, Austria-Hungary,

and Spain.

Ottoman Empire

Hapsburgs

Impact of industrialization

Napoleonic Wars

Congress of Vienna (1815)

Concert of Europe

They all could do better, butas individual rational actors

they are unable to achieve

this outcome.

Applications to the study of IRExtra info

Westphalia is often used as shorthand for a

system of equal and sovereign states; and the

peace treaties of Westphalia, concluded in

1648 at Munster and Osnabruck and endingthe Thirty Years War, are sometimes said to

have established the modern concept of

sovereign statehood.

Thedistinguishedinternationalrelationsscholar

StephenKrasner,whilecomment- ing that this

model had virtually nothing to do with the

Peace of Westphalia, nonetheless defines as

Westphalian an institutional arrangement

for organizing political life that is based on

two principles: territoriality and the exclusion

of external actors from domestic authoritystructures. According to Krasner,

Westphalian sovereignty is violated when ex-

ternal actors influence or determine domestic

authority structures. Krasner explains that he

chooses to use this terminology because the

Westphalian model has so much entered into

common usage, even if it is historically

inaccurate.

presenting it as a model of how to

deal successfully with deep religious

disagreements on a constitutional plane.However, both my historical claims and

consequently their normative upshots will be

quite different from Hills, as I will explain

below. Moreover, although my main concern

in this paper will be the constitutional,

domestic aspects of the peace treaties, the

hybrid nature of the treaties, which contained

constitutional norms for the Holy Roman

Empire as well as international legal norms for

Europe, have inevitable implications for the

international legal aspects of Westphalia.

2. Relation between State

1. In international law, a state is an entity that

is recognised to exist when a government is in

control of population residing within a defined

territory. Recognised by other states in the

international system.

2. In the study of international politics, each

state is a country. It is a community of people

who interact in the same political system.

3. State consists of government, in its

broadest sense, covering the executive, the

legislature, the administration, the armed

forces and the police the essential domestic

features of a state was a monopoly over

legitimate use of force.

4. Great power are the main actor & operate

in an anarchic system.

5. State posses some offensive military

capability.

6. States can never be certain about the

intentions of other states.

7. Main goal of state is survival.

8. State are rational actors.

9. Sovereignty is define as the principle that

within its territorial boundaries the state is the

supreme political authority and that outsidethose boundaries the state recognise no

higher political authority.

10. State sovereignty define as a principle for

organizing political space where there is one


14/16

14

sovereign authority which governs a given

territory.

- IR theories hold different views of whether

state sovereignty has been transformed. IR

theories also disagree as to the whether state

sovereignty is a good way of organizingpolitical community that is state sovereigntys

normative states.

11. Country consist of :

-government, population, have their own

language and culture.

State: cover all the element of country but

state must be recognized. Recognition by IOs,

UN, and follow International law.

12. Anarchy:

implies not the complete chaos or

absence of structure or rules,

but rather than lack of a central government

that can enforce rules.

13. The starting point of thinking about

international relations.

A crucial but highly contentious concept in

international relations.

Manifest a feature of the international systemand

Defines the socio/political framework in which

international relations occur.

Descriptive rather than prescriptive, a general

condition rather than a distinct structure

Implies the absence of any authoritative

institutions, rules or norms above the

sovereign state.

The lack of a common government or

universal authority is thus what distinguishes

the international from the domestic realm ofpolitics and law.

In mainstream Anglo-American international

theory anarchy remains the fundamental

assumption of international politics and as

such it poses the key research questions in the

discipline.

14. States are the main actors existing in a

self-help environment in which the security

dilemma is always pressing.

States are presumed to act rationally in termsof perceptions of the national interest, but

they are not entirely unconcerned with rules

and norms. So, conflict and cooperation can

and do co-exist within the same social milieu.

This is the common terrain occupied (though,

of course, disputed) by the heirs of the realist

and idealist traditions.

Anarchy, in fact, is what states make of it

(Wendt, 1992) .

In sum, the tendency to view anarchy as the

basic condition of international relationsunderestimates its inherent ambiguity and

overestimates its explanatory powers.

15. state:

an organized political entity that occupies a

definite territory, has a permanent

population, and enjoys stable government,

independence and sovereignty

sovereignty: means a government has theright, at least in principle, to do whatever it

links in its own territory.

16. Sometimes called the nation-state, this is

the main actor in international relations.

It has a legal personality and as such in

international law possesses certain rights and

duties.

According to the Montevideo Convention on

Rights and Duties of States (1933):

which is widely regarded as the classic legaldefinition, states must possess the following

qualifications:

a permanent population,

a defined territory and a government

capable of

maintaining effective control over its

territory and of

conducting international relations

with other states.

In respect of the last qualification the role of

recognition by other states can often becrucial since it implies acceptance into the

international community.


15/16

15

Extra Note

17. These qualifications are not absolute and

permit variations. For example there is no

necessity in international law for settled

boundaries or frontiers.

Many international conflicts take the form of

boundary disputes but their existence does

not rob the disputants of legal personality.

Israel, for example, is generally accepted as a

state even though the precise demarcation of

its boundaries has never been settled.

Although there is a general requirement that

a state has some form of government or

means of exercising control, a state does not

cease to exist when this control is in dispute

or when it is `temporarily;' deprived ofeffective control as in wartime, civil wars, or

revolutions.

18. Indeed, the attribute of sovereignty itself,

which is widely regarded as the defining

characteristic of statehood, is by no means

absolute. Some states, such as these in post-

war Eastern Europe, were regarded as

'penetrated' or satellite' states, since the

control they exercise over their internal and

external environments was circumscribed by

a powerful neighbour or hegemon.

In the real world, as opposed to the world of

political or legal theory, sovereignty can

differ in degree and intensity among states

without deprivation of international

personality status.

Regarding secessionary movements or

national liberation organization, recognition

is generally withheld until victory over the

mother state (or occupying power) issecured.

Yet even in these cases, recognition as a

gesture of support can be given though the

legal status may be in abeyance or dispute.

In sum, although the state has legal

personality and essential defining

characteristics, these are not static or

absolute. Not only is the state the main agent

in international law, politically too it is

dominant and has been for over four

hundred years. With the exception ofAntarctica no significant territorial area is

exempt from state control (terra nullis).

19. To date, there are nearly two hundred

states in the international system, an

increasing number of them being categorized

as microstates. Despite their number and

despite the fact that many liberation

movements are still actively seeking

statehood; some commentators have argued

that the state is declining as the primaryactor in world politics. Not only is it

functionally obsolete (because of its military

and economic penetrability) but it is no

longer capable of adequately handling global

problems.

The challenge of interdependence and the

proliferation of non-state actors states; have

questioned the traditional assumptions

concerning the dynamics of world politics.

Yet, on the evidence presented so far, it is

difficult to escape the conclusion of its deathhave been greatly exaggerated.) Failed

states; quasi-states.

3. Sovereignty

- In status, means that government has the

right, in principle, to do whatever it wants in

its own territory. States are separate and

autonomous answer to no higher authority. In

principle, all states are equal in us, if not inpower.

- Sovereignty also means that states are not

supposed to interfere in the internal affairs of

other state.

- Although states do try to influence each

other (exert power) on matter of trade,

alliances, war and so on, they are not

supposed to meddle in the internal politics

and decision processes of other states. More

controversially, some states claim that

sovereignty gives them the right to treat theirown people in any fashion, including bahavior

that other states call genocide.

- Sovereignty is define as the principle that

within its territorial boundaries the state is the


16/16

16

supreme political authority and that outside

those boundaries the state recognise no

higher political authority.

- State sovereignty define as a principle for

organizing political space where there is onesovereign authority which governs a given

territory.

- IR theories hold different views of whether

state sovereignty has been transformed. IR

theories also disagree as to the whether state

sovereignty is a good way of organizing

political community that is state sovereigntys

normative states.

Ir Note Final Exam

Documents

Transcript of Ir Note Final Exam