1- What is a structural theory? Choose one structural theory we have learned in class and using this theory, explain the so-called Coronavirus Vaccine-wars we currently observe.
2- Out of these three theories (realism, liberal institutionalism, constructivism), which one, do you think, best explains the European integration? Why? 

Guys this work needs a lecture background. So that, I am sharing the lectures also below. You may use relevant parts of the lecture as well as resources on the internet. Use examples from internet that supports the idea and give reference. However, be careful on plagiarism. There is a strict policy plagiarism policy.

INTT 463 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Dr. Osman Sabri Kıratlı

Theory Building in IR and the International System

Theory Building in International Relations

Theory: Set of hypotheses postulating relationships between variables; used to describe, explain, and predict; must be falsifiable and stand the test of time

IR theories are general ideas about world affairs
Theories influence policies and politics
Theories help us deal with complexity

Theories:
DESCRIBE
EXPLAIN
PREDICT
Theories reflect historical circumstances, personal views and experiences of those who write them
Theories are continuously being revised in light of changing circumstances
Theory Building in International Relations

Theory Building in International Relations
Scientific Method
Theories begin with assumptions
Theories offer falsifiable hypotheses
Theories offer causal relationships between dependent and independent variables

Theory is “the net which we throw out in order to catch the world – to rationalize, explain, and dominate it.”
Karl Popper. Logik der Forschung, 1935: p.26
(The Logic of Scientific Discovery, London: Routledge Classics 2002, 2003, 2004)
A good theory should fulfil the following functions:
describe, explain and predict
verify and falsify (Popper) – by confronting accumulated knowledge with reality
“No matter how many instances of white swans we may have observed, this does not justify the conclusion that all swans are white”. Karl Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, op. cit
Theory Building in International Relations

Defining International Relations
Ontology: Philosophical study dealing with the nature of being, existence and reality
The kind of judgment over the nature of international politics
Debates along a continuum between anarchy and order:
Realists: Machiavelli: law of the jungle
Liberals: reality of conflict and cooperation
Constructivists: “Anarchy is what states made of it” Alexander Wendt

Defining International Relations
Epistemology: the theory of knowledge, esp. with regard to its methods, validity, and scope. Epistemology is the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion, establishing the criteria of scientific knowledge
Debates between positivism and post-positivism/post-modernism
Positivists (Empiricism, rationalism) (e.g. Realism, Liberalism) accept the possibility to distinguish facts from values, with facts being neutral, objective in their essence, being the object of scientific knowledge. You know what you can see.
Post-positivists (e.g. Constructivism, Feminism) reject neutral scientific theory because there is no neutral reality, reality is a social construction; theory and its language contribute to construct a world and the research should denounce, de-construct its internal structure.

Three Levels of Analysis
International Level (“third image”)
Qualities of the International System
Domestic Level (“second image”) Qualities of the Political and Economic System
Individual Level (“first image”)
Qualities of Individual Leadership
International
Domestic
Individual

Three Images
Kenneth Waltz. 1954. Man, the State, and War. What are the causes of war?
First Image: Human nature
Second Image: The State
Third Image: The International System

Contemporary International System
Key concepts – state, nation, sovereignty, power, international state system, balance of power
Key historical moment – 1648, Treaty of Westphalia, ending Thirty Years War; emergence of modern state system
Secular authority replaced religious authority
Territorial integrity of states as legally equal and sovereign participants in international system

Nation-State
The primary unit of political organization.
Dates from 1648 and the Treaty of Westphalia.
1945 – Sovereign equality of members accepted in United Nations charter
Explosion of new states in the 20th century:
In Middle East after World War I
In Indian subcontinent, Pacific rim & parts of Africa after World War II
In Africa after 1960
In former Soviet Union after 1990

Key Developments Pre-Westphalia
Greek city-states (circa 400 B.C.)
Classic power politics, diplomacy, economic relations, trade, and military conflict; precursor of modern state system
Roman Empire (50 B.C.-400 A.D.)
Larger, centralized political system through imperial expansion; empire united through law and language
Middle Ages (400-1000)
Disintegration of Roman Empire, emergence of feudalism in Europe and rise of Roman Catholic Church
Emergence of three major civilizations: Arabic, Byzantine, remains of Holy Roman Empire
Late Middle Ages (1000-1600)
Secular trends undermine decentralization of feudalism, universalism of Christianity in Europe
Commercial activity expands, communications and technologies improve
Emergence of transnational business community, revival of classicism, and European territorial expansion (principally due to new technologies and economic interests)

Emergence Of Westphalian System
Treaty of Westphalia (1648) ended Thirty Years War (1618-1648) in Europe
Thirty Years War – fought mainly in Germany; initially conflict between Protestants and Catholics (in Holy Roman Empire); grew into larger conflict involving major European powers
European states embraced notion of sovereignty
States established national militaries
Established core group of states that dominated world until the beginning of 19th century

Key Developments Post-Westphalia
Sovereignty
Small states in central Europe attain sovereignty (demise of H.R.E.)
Monarchs inherit religious authority over people (sovereign authority, exclusive rights within given territory)
Territoriality, territorial state legitimized
Right of states to choose religion, determine domestic policies free from external pressure with full jurisdiction; right of noninterference
State leaders establish permanent national militaries and centralize control producing ever-more powerful sovereign states with national armies
Core group of states – Austria, Russia, Prussia, England, France, United Provinces (Neth./Belgium) emerge as dominant players
In the West, capitalism emerges: private enterprise, infrastructure, trade
In the East, feudalism remains, economic change stifled
European politics marked by absolutist regimes, multiple rivalries, and shifting alliances

Sovereignty
The supreme governing power of a state. A powerful force in international relations. Even the smallest nations claim to have sovereignty. It has 2 components:
Power over internal affairs with freedom from external interference.
Political and legal recognition by other nations
Although absolute, not without limits; leaders limited by:
Divine law or natural law (laws of God and nature)
Type of regime, constitutional laws of the realm
Covenants, contracts (with people within commonwealth), and treaties with other states (with no supreme arbiter in relations among states)

19th Century Europe

American and French revolutions against absolutist rule, Enlightenment thinking and social contract theorists
Absolute rule subject to limits imposed by man
Locke: political power rests with people; monarch/leader/government derives legitimacy (moral and legal right to rule) from consent of governed
Nationalism: people share devotion and allegiance to nation based on shared characteristics, common religion, language, historical experience, etc.

19th Century Europe
Concert of Europe (Napoleon defeated in 1815, Congress of Vienna), establishes period of relative peace
Great powers meet periodically (Britain, Austria, Russia, and Prussia) to reach agreement on problems threatening peace among European states
Initially aimed at containing France, achieve balance of power; maintain territorial arrangements made at Congress of Vienna (1814-1815); kept relative peace for about 40 years
Major economic, technological, and political changes
Populations and commerce grew
Italy and Germany unified; Holland split (Netherlands, Belgium); Greece, Moldavia, Romania achieved independence

Nationalism
Political ideology advocating national self-determination
First developed in 19th Century in Europe, but spread world-wide
Nationalism is one way to legitimate states and/or separatist movements.
Particularly dangerous to empires

19th Century Europe
European solidarity
European elites united by fear of revolution from below
Preoccupied by German and Italian unification
European states engaged in territorial expansion, colonialism; “Gold, God, Glory” (hence, competition exported to Africa and Asia)
Congress of Berlin (1885) divided Africa
European states controlled 4/5 of world (1914)
Balance of power
Out of fear for emergence of hegemon, states with relatively equal power formed alliances to counteract any potentially more powerful faction
Breaks down when alliances solidify, two camps emerge – Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria, Italy) and Dual Alliance (France and Russia) – and conflict between allied states leads to World War I

Contemporary International System
Absence of Strong Political Institutions that Provide a Monopoly on Coercive Force and Legitimacy to the Political Process
Anarchy is the Central Condition of International Politics.
Rising Role of Non-state Actors
Debate about significance
Importance varies by issue area
Nations
International Organizations
Multinational Corporations
Non-governmental Organizations

Realism
Main Assumptions:

States are most important actors
Unitary-Rational Decision-making
International system is anarchic and conflict-prone: often zero-sum situations
All States must pursue power to survive
States balance against threats
Morality has no place in international politics
International politics more important than domestic politics.
Value Relative over Absolute Gains

Realism’s Tenets (1 of 2)
People are selfish and ethically flawed and compete for self-advantage
People have an instinctive lust for power
Eradicating this instinct is not possible
International politics is a “a war of all against all”
The prime obligation of the state is promoting the national interest

Realism’s Tenets (2 of 2)
Anarchical international system requires states to acquire military power
Military power is more important than economics
Do not trust allies
Resist international efforts to control state protection and institute global governance
Seek flexible alliances to maintain a balance of power

The Philosophical Underpinnings of Realism
Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War
(5th Century BC)
“The strong do what they can and the weak suffer
what they must.”
“Of gods we trust and of men we know, it is in their
nature to rule whenever they can.”
“What made war inevitable was the growth of the
Athenian power and the fear that this caused
in Sparta.”
“So far as right and wrong are concerned…there is no
difference between the two…”

The Philosophical Underpinnings of Realism
Machiavelli
1469-1527
The Prince
‘it is much safer to be feared than to be loved, if one must choose’

The Philosophical Underpinnings of Realism
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)
Leviathan (1651)
State of Nature:
Humans live in a perfect state of liberty
Humans live in a perfect state of equality
Humans are essentially self-interested
Humans, therefore, are born into a natural state of war
with one another…..chaos and conflict
In the absence of a sovereign authority, life of the individual is ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short’
The only law of nature is that of survival of the fittest, each
person striving after that which will maximize his/her own
chances at survival
The only real public good that can be conceived of is order….
and so individuals will give their consent to be governed by a force
with ultimate and sovereign power: an absolute monarch

The Philosophical Underpinnings of Realism
Hans Morgenthau (1904-1980)
Politics Among Nations (1948)
Context of US hegemony
Objective: ‘Scientific study of IR’ (apply natural sciences to IR)
Distinction between liberal utopianism & realism (Different conceptions of human nature)

The Philosophical Underpinnings of Realism
Hans Morgenthau (1904-1980)

Six Principles of Political Realism:
Politics is governed by objective laws
Centrality of the concept of interest defined in terms of power (national interest as the guiding principle of international politics)
Nature of power can change, but the concept of interest remains consistent
Universal moral principles do not govern state behaviour, but interest
No universally agreed set of moral principles
Politics is a separate sphere of human activity

Critiques of Political Realism
Understanding of human nature
Reification of the state (regards state as a real thing)
Limited notion of power (military power is primary)
Weak notion of change and transformation in world politics
Disregards ethical principals
Focuses on military might at economic and social expense of states

Critiques of Political Realism
What factors make a state powerful? The three tables above list the top states in three different categories that might be used to assess power.

Variants of Realism
Balance of Power Theory
Hegemonic Stability Theory

The Balance of Power
To deter aggression by others, states balance against each other so no one country becomes too strong.
Realists typically focus on the balance of power, which may be regional or sometimes used to discuss a dyad of two countries.
The Concert of Europe that emerged after the Napoleonic Wars is a good example.
Problem: The balance of power seems bound to fail in the long-run and could be said to only delay war. Some Realists would disagree.
Realists believe that power imbalances lead to war since powerful states, unchecked, will try to acquire more power.
Balancing by forming alliances with other states is the quickest way to check the power of potentially aggressive states.

Rules for an Effective Balancing Process
Identify potential threats and opportunities
Seek allies when you cannot match the armaments of an adversary
Remain flexible in making alliances
Oppose any state that seeks hegemony

Criticisms of Balance of Power Theory
It assumes that policymakers possess accurate, timely information about other states
The tendency of defense planners to engage in worst-case scenario planning can spark an arms race.
It assumes that decision makers are risk averse
It has not been effective

Balance of Power Models
Unipolarity
United States just after World War II
United States now?—Bush doctrine/ Obama doctrine?
Bipolarity
United States/Soviet Union 1949–1989
NATO–Warsaw Pact
Extended deterrence
Multipolarity

Alternatives to Balance of Power
Hegemonic Stability Theory
A concert of great powers
Common sense of duty
Normative consensus is fragile

The Way to War: Colonialism
Virtually all the major powers were engaged in a race of colonization to bolster their economies
The fiercest competition was between Britain and Germany and between France and Germany

The Way to War: Nationalism
The French Revolution had spread nationalism throughout most of Europe
The idea that people with the same ethnic origins, language, and political ideals had the right to form sovereign states through the process of self-determination
Nationalist aspirations of subject minorities threatened to tear apart the multinational empires of the Ottomans, Habsburgs, and Russians
Such a development would affect the regional balance of power

The Way to War: Triple Alliance
Germany and Austria-Hungary signed the Dual Alliance in 1879, committing the two states to mutual assistance in the event of attack by France or Russia.
The Dual Alliance was expanded into the Triple Alliance in 1882 when Italy joined.
Italy proved to be an untrustworthy partner, declaring itself neutral when the war began and ultimately siding with the Allies

The Way to War: Triple Entente
The Triple Alliance was counter-balanced by the Triple Entente of France, Russia, and Britain.
As a result, by 1907 Europe was divided into two armed and rather fearful camps.

The World War I
Serbian Gavrilo Princip shot and killed Franz Ferdinand, Archduke of Austria-Hungary
Austria issued an ultimatum to Serbia demanding that Austrian officials take part in any investigation of people found on Serbian territory connected to the assassination
Serbia refused this demand as a violation of its sovereignty
On July 28, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia
A tangled alliance system then began to realize itself
So…

The World War I
When Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia on July 28, on July 29 Russia began mobilizing to defend its Serbian ally
Then, in consideration of mobilization timetables, Russia also mobilized against Germany
In response, Germany declared war on Russia on Aug 1
France started to mobilize on behalf of its ally Russia
On Aug 3, Germany declared war on France and also began to attack through neutral Belgium to France in accordance with its war plan
Belgium protested to the signatories of the 1839 treaty guaranteeing its neutrality
When Germany refused Britain (one of the treaty signatories) ultimatum on Aug 4, Britain declared war on Germany

The World War I
German Schlieffen plan sent a powerful right wing through Western Belgium, the Netherlands, and northern France in a gigantic wheeling movement
The idea was to destroy France before Russia could mount an effective offensive against the weak German forces in the east and thus avoid fighting a two-front war

The World War I: Trench Warfare

The World War I: The Russian Revolution
Russia was experiencing social and political unrest and growing war-weary
The Bolsheviks seized power through the Russian Revolution and ended Russia’s involvement in World War I by signing the treaty of Brest-Litorsk with Germany on March 3, 1918
In the midst of World War I, Britain, France, Japan, and the US all sent troops and supplies to aid the “Whites” in their struggle against the “Reds” but the Whites were defeated in 1920
1919 Bolshevik poster showing the three White generals as vicious dogs under the control of the US, France, and Britain.  

The World War I
Germany resumed unrestricted submarine warfare in early 1917
Sunk several US ships in Feb and Mar
US declared war on April 6, 1917
At the same time Russia was withdrawing from the war, the US was entering
Germany failed to end war before the US entered it

The World War I: Treaty of Versailles (1919)
Woodrow Wilson proposed a generous “Fourteen Points” designed to focus on international cooperation and peace, but the French especially wanted harsh terms imposed on the Germans
Wanted to destroy or permanently weaken Germany as a threat

The World War I: Treaty of Versailles (1919)
The resulting Treaty of Versailles denied the Germans a navy and air force and limited the size of their army to 100,000 troops
Prevented Germany and Austria from entering any sort of political union
Required the payment of war reparations
German protest against the Treaty of Versailles will lead to Hitler’s rise to power and World War II

Before
After

LIBERALISM
Opposition to Realism.
Normative character of Liberalism.
Optimistic view of International Relations?
State power is not the only variable in International Relations.
Peace, Law, Justice, non-state actors, have also a fundamental role in International Relations.
Arguments about the positive effects of international institutions
Strong faith in human reason
In institutional terms- ability to pursue ones interest
Ability to understand moral principles and live according to the law
Belief in possibility of historical progress & reforming international relations

Peace and Security
Peace theory
people have no interest in war.
tyranny must be put to an end
liberal democracy
Michael Doyle – democratic peace theory
The more states are democratic, the more they are peaceful
Zone of peace
Harmony of Interest – between states and people for mutual interests and mutual benefits

State and power
State is not the only actor
State can give some elements to other bodies
NGOs, multinational corporations, IOs
Power is distributed.
People can collectively influence decision-making processes

Institutions and world order
In some cases states have to give up their sovereignty: to UN, EU
Over the past century- new institutions treaties, regimes.
Governance – collective processes of rule-making, monitoring, implementation

Currents of Liberal Thought
I- Republican Liberalism/Liberal Internationalism/ Democratic Peace Theory
I. Kant (1795/ 1983) The Perpetual Peace
II- Neoliberal Institutionalism and Interdependence
R. Keohane and J. Nye (1977) Power and Interdependence

III- Idealism

I-LIBERAL INTERNATIONALISM
Since the end of the Cold War that the idea of a democratic peace thesis has been developed.
Kant defended a federation of liberal republics to guarantee perpetual peace, while neo-liberal internationalists assert that liberal states do not use war to resolve problems between them: Doyle defines it as the “separate peace”.
Fukuyama defended the triumph of liberalism after the end of the Cold War, naming it “The End of History” and defending the exportantion of liberal values.

I- LIBERAL INTERNATIONALISM
These author defend that expansionism of liberalism against authoritanism will provide peace and stability to the international order.
The limits of liberal expansionism offer serious problems, namely concerning principles such as sovereignty and non-intervention.
There is also the difficulty of measuring democracies.

Liberal Internationalism/ Democratic Peace Theory
Stems generally from suggestions in liberal and democratic theory that democracies may be more peaceful and cooperative in international relations
Ordinary citizens tend not to see the state as their personal property, and therefore do not have the urge to expand it for purposes of enhancing personal or family power
More accountability and checks may lead to more rational decisions, which in turn will prevent states from mistakenly entering wars
Commercial nature provides material incentives to keep peace and creates ties among nations
Tend to place more faith in permanent institutions that can be used to resolve differences peacefully

Liberal Internationalism/ Democratic Peace Theory
Kant’s discussion in “Perpetual Peace” of the prospects for a more peaceful world based on the operations of liberal republics
Later empirical work that suggest that democracies tend not to go to war with other democracies
As such, the development of the theory has sometimes split into two several lines research:
Research into relations among and between democracies, in which the peaceful nature of democracies tends to be tested
Research on relations between democracies and non-democracies, in which the evidence suggests that democracies are not necessarily “peaceful” when dealing with other types of regimes
Research into the general nature of relations and actions having to do with democracies.

II- NEOLIBERAL INSTITUTIONALISM
Liberal institutionalists defend the idea that the state is not able to cope with modernatization and, as David Mitrany asserted, transnational co-operation is required in order to solve common problems. He also defended spill-over, the likelihood that co-operation in one sector would lead to other sectors, a fact later confimed in Europe.
After entering into such a process, states will have high costs in withdrawing from it.
The notion of Interdependence: This concept characterized a complex system of interactions – brought by development of capitalism and mass culture – in which actions in one of its parts had more and more consequences to the other part, a fact that fatally undermined state autonomy.

Theory of complex mutual interdependency
The fathers: Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye
On one hand accepting the realistic presupposition of the anarchical international system
On the other hand they claim that the important thing about the international system is not only the division of power, but mutual interdependency and existence of international institutions
The military security ceased to be the priority of the foreign policies and the hierarchy of sources of threats and power ceased to exist as well.
The security is no more the military matter
Security has character of collective security which we can apply on the economical as well as military relations between states
Governance includes both informal and formal organizations at national and international level

III- IDEALISM
Idealism assert that the international order should be constructed and managed by an international organization.
The League of Nations was based upon the idea of collective security.
The failure of the League of Nations and the World War II would bury idealist expectations of international peace.
However, after World War II some of the liberal ideas were implemented, such as the self-determination principle or the respect for human rights.

IDEALISM
Liberal internationalist assumption that interdependence was associated with peace was contradicted by World War I.
Idealists believed that peace is not a natural condition but needs to be constructed.
According to Woodrow Wilson peace could only be secured with the creation of an international institution that regulated international relations.
Balance of power and secret diplomacy was not a guarantee of international security.
Analogy between international order and domestic order.
Wilson’s “Fourteen Points” and the creation of the League of Nations materialized the idealist approach on international relations.

The Interwar Period / 1920-1929
League of Nations was an international organization founded as a result of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919–1920. From 1934-1935, it had 58 members.
League goals included: disarmament, preventing war through collective security, settling disputes between countries through negotiation, diplomacy and improving global quality of life.
The League lacked its own armed force and so depended on the Great Powers to enforce its resolutions, keep to economic sanctions which the League ordered, or provide an army, when needed, for the League to use.

The Interwar Period / 1920-1929
The origins of the League as an organisation created by the Allied Powers as part of the peace settlement at the end of the First World War led to it being viewed as a “League of Victors”. It also tied the League to the Treaty of Versailles so that when the Treaty became discredited and unpopular, this reflected on the League.
The League required a unanimous vote of its fifteen members Council to enact a resolution; conclusive and effective action was difficult, if not impossible.
Member states. Most notably missing was the position that the United States of America was supposed to play in the League, not only in terms of helping to ensure world peace and security but also in financing the League. The League was the cornerstone of Wilson’s Fourteen Points.

The Interwar Period / 1920-1929
Collective security by the League required nations to act against states they considered friends, and sometimes against national interests, to support states in which they had no interest.
Ex. Mussolini and Ethiopia
The League depended on the Great Powers to enforce its resolutions. Britain and France, were reluctant to use sanctions or military action on behalf of the League.

Moral Suasion in Punch Magazine 1920

Causes of War: Versailles
The Treaty of Versailles was supposed to ensure peace, satisfy nationalistic desires, and exact revenge on Germany
Unfortunately, the terms of the treaty did not have the intended results

Causes of War: Great Depression
German reparations
Expansion of production capacities and dominance of the United States in the global economy
Britain and France owed huge war debts to the U.S.
Better technologies allowed factories to make more products faster, leading to overproduction
Excessive expansion of credit (people spending money they don’t have)
Stock Market Crash of 1929
Buying stock on margin
A crisis in finance that led the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates
Panic set in when stock prices crashed
Inability of the League of Nations to stop aggression

Causes of War: Great Depression
Affected countries across the globe
Unemployment, bank failures, collapse of credit, collapse of prices in world trade
Government responses
Governments became very involved with running the economy, like in the U.S. with FDR’s New Deal
Political changes in infant democracies (totalitarian leaders promised CHANGE!!)
Communist parties grew
Dictators who offered simple solutions in exchange for power appeared in some countries
Totalitarian and Militaristic Dictatorships take over

Causes of War: Totalitarian Regimes
Totalitarianism (NEW) vs. Older concepts of dictatorship

-Seek to dominate all -Seek limited, typically political
aspects of national life control

-Mobilize and make use -Seek pacified and submissive
of mass political populations
participation

-Seek the complete -Attempt to rule over the
reconstruction of the individual and society
individual and society

Causes of War: Fascism
Fascism- A political movement that promotes an extreme form of nationalism, a denial of individual rights, and a dictatorial one party rule.
Promised to revive the economy, punish those responsible for the hard times, and restore national pride.
Attracted those who felt angered and betrayed by the results of WWI treaties and the Depression
Ultranationalism, belief in struggle (the weak should be conquered, loyalty to the state and obedience to a single, strong leader (uniforms, salutes, etc)
Hateful to Communism
Takes power in Italy, Germany, and Spain

Benito Mussolini
1922
Country: Italy
Type of Government: Fascism+dictatorship
Goals and Ideas:
Centralized all power in himself as leader (total control of social, economic, and political life)
Ambition to restore the glory of Rome and create a vast Italian empire
Invasion of Ethiopia
Alliance with Hitler’s Germany
Il Duce

Joseph Stalin
1924
Country: Soviet Union
Type of Government: Communism (dictatorship)
Goals and Ideas:
Crushed opponents and took control after Lenin’s death
Held absolute authority; suppressed resistance
Brought his country to world power status but imposed upon it one of the most ruthless regimes in history
New Economic Policies (NEP)
Collectivization: exported seized goods and gained enough capital to finance a massive industrialization drive
Rapid industrialization: three 5-year plans
The Great Purges: KGB = secret police killed thousands of army officers and prominent Bolsheviks who opposed Stalin
Feared the growing power of Nazi Germany

Adolf Hitler
1933
Country: Germany
Type of Government: Nazism (dictatorship)
Goals and Ideas:
Inflation and depression weakened the democratic government in Germany and allowed an opportunity for Hitler to rise to power
Believed the western powers had no intention of using force to maintain the Treaty of Versailles
Anti-Semitism: persecution of Jews
Extreme nationalism: National Socialism (aka Nazism)
Aggression: German occupation of nearby countries
Lebensraum: unite all German speaking nations
Anschluss: German union with Austria
Hatred of Communism

Hirohito in Japan
Emperor Hirohito
Prime Minister Tojo
Japan was suffering during Depression
Military takes over
Hirohito has no real power
Leaders felt they could solve problems by conquest
Military General Hideki Tojo controls Japan

Towards the WWII
Late 1924- Hitler released
1930- depression hits economy collapses, Nazis gain power
Nazi party vote increases
1928: 809,000
1930: 6,400,000
1932- Nazis are largest political party in Germany
1932- Hitler runs for President, defeated by Hindenburg
1933- Hitler becomes Chancellor (Try to tame him)
Hitler gained power legally

Towards the WWII
1931 – Japan Invades Manchuria, a mineral rich region in China
Japan needs raw materials to build its war machine and room to grow
The World just watches

Towards the WWII
Mussolini inspired by Japan’s attack on Manchuria b/c LON has no power
1935 Italy invades Ethiopia
LON condemned the attack but does nothing
Britain and France try to keep the peace by appeasing the Italians
The World just watches

Towards the WWII
1935-Hitler announces that Germany will no longer abide by the ToV
He has been building an army
LON condemns Hitler, but does nothing
March 7, 1936- German troops reoccupy the Rhineland, a border area with France that Germany has lost in the ToV
Allies resort to appeasement- policy of giving in to an aggressor to maintain peace
Now Belgium and France are open to attack
Hitler will now speed up his plans for world domination

Towards the WWII
1937- Hitler announces that he wants to add Austria and parts of Czechoslovakia to the German Empire
1938- Hitler “invades” Austria
France and Great Britain do nothing
He then turned to Czechoslovakia
3 million ethnic Germans living in a part of Western Czechoslovakia, called the Sudetenland
Czechoslovakia refuses and asks for help
Sep 29, 1938- Munich Conference- Germany, GB, France, and Italy meet to decide the fate of Czech.
Hitler gets Sudetenland as long as he promises not to ask for anything else. He agrees

Towards the WWII
France and GB look to Russia for help; Russia not interested
Stalin and Hitler sign a non-aggression pact stating that they would never attack each other.
Poland is secretly divided into a buffer zone
Germany invades half of Poland
September 1, 1939: Britain and France declare war on Germany; WWII starts

INT 463 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-Part II
Dr. Osman Sabri Kıratlı

Neo-Realism: A structural theory of IR
Kenneth Waltz: Theory of International Politics, 1979.

Key Assumptions
Waltz shares key assumptions with classical realism: sovereignty, statism and self-help.
Innovation: international politics works like the market. This means that ‘human nature’ based explanations should be dismissed. Also, explanations based on the nature of states should be dismissed.

The International System
The interactions of states generate systemic pressures that states have to contend with. Structural theory.
It is these constraints that explain the behaviour of states.

Structural Realism
International Politics is essentially a struggle for power not because of human nature but due to anarchy
Anarchy is not chaos, but the absence of a political authority
Two different organizing principles : anarchy and hierarchy
Anarchy reflects to the decentralised nature of international politics
Hierarchy is the basis of the domestic order
Units of the international system are functionally similar sovereign states
Distribution of capabilities across units is key to understanding international politics. The position of the state in the system determines external behaviour.

The Security Dilemma
Assume that a particular state seeks only to survive by pursuing a status quo policy (which necessitates the maintenance of power)
This state’s possession of power – no matter how much the state tries to assure others that it is for defensive purposes only – must necessarily result in fear/suspicion on the parts of others
Main reason: The same tools that are used for status quo and prestige policies are used for imperialist policies
Absent any enforceable guarantee against the use of force for expansion – and anarchy precludes the enforcement of any guarantee – the realist worldview stipulates that the global community is driven with arms races and the constant threat of both imperial and preventative war
Thus, war is likely to occur even when political reasons for war are absent

Polarity
Number of Great Powers determines the structure of the international system (Unipolar, Bipolar, Multipolar)
Polarity is important because it can help explain how a peaceful stability can be achieved.
Mechanism for peace: balance of power. Imbalances are dangerous in a competitive environment.

Criticism
There are two categories of criticism: theoretical and political.
Theory-based criticism: anarchy is not a static condition; states are not the only relevant actors in the system; notion of sovereignty is questionable. Also, very weak theory in explaining change.
Politics-based criticism: if the principles of world politics are static, it legitimises inequality and war.

The Cold War: The Beginning
Many countries became communist immediately after World War 2 including:
Czechoslovakia (1948)
Poland (1947)
Hungary (1947)
China (1949)
Cuba (1959)
North Korea (1945)

The Cold War: The Beginning
Germany, which had been ruled by the Hitler and the Nazis until their defeat in 1945 was split in two.
The western side became West Germany and the eastern side became East Germany.
East Germany became another communist country.

Cold War: Characteristics
The USSR had a lot of influence over many of the new communist countries (especially those in Europe).
The USA was very worried that the USSR’s influence over these countries was making the USSR and communism more powerful.
The USA did not want communism to spread any further – they were worried about the domino effect (one country becomes communist, then another, then another etc)

Cold War: Characteristics
The tension and rivalry between the USA and the USSR was described as the Cold War (1945-1990).
There was never a real war between the two sides between 1945 and 1990, but they were often very close to war Both sides got involved in other conflicts in the world to either stop the spread of communism (USA) or help the spread (USSR) (proxy wars).

Cold War: Characteristics
American objectives after the WW2:
Promote open markets for US goods to prevent another depression
Promote ‘democracy’ throughout the world, especially in Asia and Africa
Stop the spread of communism- “Domino Effect”
Soviet objectives after the WW2:
Create greater security for itself
lost tens of millions of people in WWII and Stalin’s purges
feared a strong Germany
Establish defensible borders
Encourage friendly governments on its borders
Spread communism around the world

Cold War: Instruments
Methods:
Espionage [KGB vs. CIA]
Arms Race [nuclear escalation]
Ideological Competition for the minds and hearts of Third World peoples [Communist govt. & command economy vs. democratic govt. & capitalist economy]  “proxy wars”
Bi-Polarization of Europe [NATO vs. Warsaw Pact]

Cold War: Instruments
Truman Doctrine:
1947: British help Greek government fight communist guerrillas.
They appealed to America for aid, and the response was the Truman
Doctrine.
America promised it would support free countries to help fight
communism.
Greece received large amounts of arms and supplies and by 1949 had
defeated the communists.
The Truman Doctrine was significant because it showed that America, the
most powerful democratic country, was prepared to resist the spread of
communism throughout the world.
Marshall Plan:
In 1947, US Secretary of State Marshall announced the Marshall Plan.
a massive economic aid plan for Europe to help it recover from the damage caused by the war.
There were two motives:
Helping Europe to recover economically would provide markets for American goods, so benefiting American industry.
A prosperous Europe would be better able to resist the spread of communism

Cold War: Instruments
NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization)
In 1949 the western nations formed the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to co-ordinate their defense against USSR.
It originally consisted of:
America Belgium Britain Canada Denmark France Holland Italy Luxembourg Norway Portugal
Since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, some former Soviet republics have applied for membership to NATO.

Warsaw Pact:
Organization of communist states in Central and Eastern Europe.
Established May 14, 1955 in Warsaw, Poland
USSR established in in response to NATO treaty
Founding members: Albania (left in 1961 as a result of the Sino-Soviet split) Bulgaria Czechoslovakia Hungary Poland Romania USSR East Germany (1956)

Cold War: Arms and Space Race
USSR launched Sputnik I, the first artificial satellite into geocentric orbit on October 4, 1957.
The race to control space was on.
April 12, 1961: Yuri Gagarin became first human in space and first to orbit Earth.
US felt a loss of prestige and increased funding for space programs and science education.
On May 25,1961, Kennedy gave a speech challenging America to land a man on the moon and return him safely by the end of the decade.
Apollo 11 landed on the moon on July 16, 1969.
Cold War tensions increased in the US when the USSR exploded its first atomic bomb in 1949. Cold War tensions increased in the USSR when the US exploded its first hydrogen bomb in 1952. It was 1000 times more powerful than the Hiroshima atomic bomb.

Cold War: Berlin Wall
Built on August 13, 1961
The West Germans called it Schandmaur, the “Wall of Shame.” Over the years, it was rebuilt three times. Each version of the wall was more higher, stronger, repressive, and impregnable. Towers and guards with machine guns and dogs stood watch over a barren no man’s land. Forbidden zones, miles wide, were created behind the wall. No one was allowed to enter the zones. Anyone trying to escape was shot on sight.
Early 1960s view of east side of Berlin Wall with barbed wire at top.
A view from the French sector looking over the wall.

Cold War: Cuban Missile Crisis
Closest the world ever came to nuclear war.
In 1962, the USSR lagged far behind the US in the arms race. Soviet missiles were only powerful enough to be launched against Europe but US missiles were capable of striking the entire Soviet Union.
In April 1962, Soviet Premier Khrushchev deployed missiles in Cuba to provide a deterrent to a potential US attack against the USSR.
Meanwhile, Fidel Castro was looking for a way to defend his island nation from an attack by the US. Ever since the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961, Castro felt a second attack was inevitable. Consequently, he approved of Khrushchev’s plan to place missiles on the island. In the summer of 1962 the USSR secretly installed the missiles.
CIA map showing range of Soviet supplied intermediate and medium range missiles if launched from Cuba

Cold War: Cuban Missile Crisis
The crisis began on October 15, 1962 when radars revealed Soviet missiles under construction in Cuba.
After seven days of intense debate, Kennedy imposed a blockade around Cuba to stop the arrival of more Soviet missiles and demanded that the Soviets remove all of their offensive weapons from Cuba.
Tensions finally began to ease on October 28 when Khrushchev announced that he would dismantle the installations and remove the missiles, expressing his trust that the US would not invade Cuba.
Further negotiations were held to implement the October 28 agreement, including a US demand that Soviet bombers be removed from Cuba, and specifying the exact form and conditions of US assurances not to invade Cuba.
Fail Safe- movie recommendation
Castro, Kennedy, Khrushchev

Cold War: Detente
In 1969 Nixon began negotiations with USSR on SALT I, common name for the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty Agreement.
SALT I froze the number of ballistic missile launchers at existing levels
It was the first effort between US/USSR to stop increase nuclear weapons.
SALT II was a second round of US/USSR talks (1972-1979), which sought to reduce manufacture of nuclear weapons. SALT II was the first nuclear treaty seeking real reductions in strategic forces to 2,250 of all categories on both sides.
Nixon and Brezhnev toast the SALT I treaty.
Carter and Brezhnev sign the SALT II treaty.

Cold War: Detente
Detente/Rapproachement was interrupted late 1970s-early 1980s due to two factors:
1- In 1978, the USSR invaded Afghanistan and tried to set up a friendly government.
In 1989 the Soviets finally withdrew. Islamic extremists used the opportunity to take over the country.
The defeat weakened the Soviet’s economy and morale.
2- The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) was a proposal by President Reagan in 1983 to use ground and space-based systems to protect the US from attack by nuclear ballistic missiles. It focused on strategic defense rather than doctrine of mutual assured destruction (MAD). It was quickly nicknamed “Star Wars.”

Cold War: The End
Gorbachev becomes Soviet premier and understands that the Soviet economy cannot compete with the West, partly because of Afghanistan and partly because of the costs of keeping up militarily.
Gorbachev recognizes there is increasing unrest in the country.
1985: Gorbachev initiates the reforms of perestroika (restructuring of economic policies) and glasnost (openness, more freedom and civic rights)
November 1989: Berlin Wall collapses
Boris Yeltsin (far left) stands on a tank to defy the 1991 coup

The Wall Falls, 1989
A wave of rebellion against Soviet influence occurs throughout its European allies.
Poland’s Solidarity movement breaks the Soviet hold on that country
Hungary removed its border restrictions with Austria.
Riots and protests break out in East Germany.
East Germans storm the wall. Border guards do not fight back.
The wall is breached.
Eventually East and West Germany are reunited in 1990.
On December 21, 1991, the presidents of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus signed the Belavezha Accords declaring the USSR dissolved and established the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in its place.
On December 26, the Supreme Soviet, the highest governmental body of the Soviet Union, recognized the collapse of the Soviet Union and dissolved itself.

International Political Economy
Economic systems answer the questions:
What to produce?
How to produce?
How to distribute?
Politics: pursuit of power/ Economics: pursuit of wealth
Focus: the interplay between politics and economics in the international context

Three classical theories of IPE?
Mercantilism/Nationalism Economic Liberalism Marxism
Relationship b/n economics and politics Politics decisive Economics autonomous Economics decisive
Main actors/ units of analysis States Individuals Classes
The nature of economic relations Conflictual zero-sum game Cooperative positive-sum game Conflictual
Economic goals State power Maximum individual well-being Class interests

Mercantilism/Nationalism: Starting Assumptions
Accepts Capitalism as the optimal economic system
Argues that functioning of markets is not neutral
Market outcomes determine the relative wealth and power of states in international politics
States must focus on the distribution of gains (‘relative gains’) from economic activity (Liberals emphasize ‘absolute gains’)
State must take action to tip market outcomes in their favor!

Mercantilism: What is the purpose of the economy?
Wealth translates into power (economic and military)
Main purpose of national economy is to increase state power
Increase success in relative terms (i.e., US trade deficit with China)

Mercantilism/Nationalism: What is the relationship between politics and economics?
Economics is subordinate to politics
Economics a tool to be used for larger international political struggles
Structures of the international economic system are largely determined by the interests of the major economic powers

Mercantilism: Basic Arguments
(1) International politics about the struggle
for power among states
(2) Economics an inherent part of larger political struggles
POLITICS AND ECONOMICS ARE INSEPARABLE
(3) Key question for IPE is how economics affects state power

Mercantilism: Strategies for Success
Domestic:
■ Emphasis on the structure of the economy
Producing the ‘right stuff’: Need for high value-added industries (e.g.technology)
Created advantage through industrial policies aimed at altering structure rather than size of economy (i.e., production subsidies; R&D aid, etc.)
International
■ Make sure state gains relatively more from international exchange than other states
Trade Balance: Value of exports minus imports
Trade Protections
Autarky (self-sufficiency)
Strategic Trade (selective protection)
How?: Through Tariffs, Import Quotas, Export Subsidies, Voluntary Export Restraints (VERs), Non-Tariff Barriers, and so on
Investment Controls (FDI and portfolio)

■ Examples of Success – Japan and East Asian ‘Tiger Economies’

Mercantilism: Weaknesses
Who Gains?
Defining Key Industries
Failures – Latin America; India, Japan’s long stagnation

Mercantilism: Three Answers
How does the economy work?
■ Capitalist markets that tend to benefit the more powerful
What is the economy for?
■ To promote the power of the state
What is the relationship between power and economics?
■ Politics and economics are inseparable

Liberalism: How does the economy work?
Crucial role of MARKETS in the economy.
Markets use PRICES to connect buyers to sellers
If rely on markets, get higher economic growth (because of more efficient use of resources)
Economic Rationality (homo economicus)
Laws of Supply/Demand Determine Outcomes
Harmony of Interests (“Positive-Sum Game”)

Liberalism: How does the economy work?
Market behavior motivated by individual self-interest
“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from regard to their own interest.” (Adam Smith)
Liberals see the collective interest as being best served by the free exercise of individual self-interest (tempered by competition)
The “Invisible Hand”

Liberalism: What is the economy for?
Improve the economic condition of private actors (individuals, firms, entrepreneurs)
Best achieved by increasing overall growth (Bigger ‘economic pie’)
Less concerned with distribution of wealth
Market justice vs. distributive justice
Poor best served by a strong economy

Liberalism: What is the relationship
between politics and economics?
Market decisions more effective than political decisions (government failure) –
Laissez-faire: “State which governs least governs best”
Government sets ‘rules of the game’ (i.e., competition policy) and serves as a referee (i.e., antitrust enforcement)
Direct intervention only with:
• public goods (indivisible and inexcludable)
• (clear) market failure : when markets fail to bring about socially desirable outcomes (Example: Environmental Protection)

Liberalism: Policy Implications
Domestic:
Limited government role in economy (provide public goods)
Uphold competitive markets (i.e., antitrust laws)
International:
Free Trade
Free Flows of Capital
Open Economies

Liberalism: Three Answers
1. How does the economy work?
MARKETS guided by PRICES increase economic efficiency
2. What is the economy for?
To increase INDIVIDUALS’ economic well-being
3. What is the relationship between politics and economics?
The two realms are/should be seperate
If governments don’t interfere increased economic growth
increases wealth increased personal well-being
Markets allow everyone to win!

Liberalism: Strengths and Weaknesses
Strength:
Logical Connection from individual interest to society
Strong Historical Evidence
Clear Guide to Policy-Makers
Maximizes Personal Freedom
Weaknesses:
Favors Efficiency over Equity (or other values)
Assumes a fair playing field
Free Markets and the Crash

Marxism: Criticism of Market Economies
Market economies often result in unequal societies where there are a few very wealthy individuals and many poor people.
Market economies often encourage free trade that enables large private companies to exploit the laborers or the resources of less-developed nations.
Market economies often result in economic monopolies (when one company controls a business sector) that stop competition and result in higher prices

Marxism: Basic Assumptions
Market economies are social arrangements created by specific historical forces
Private property is a social construct, not something created by nature
Workers produce surplus value
Owners of capital (capitalists) take all or most of it
Accumulation of capital in the hands of capitalists
Power is rooted in ownership and control of capital
Division of society into classes based on their roles in the economy and the state
Struggle between classes for power – for control of the economy and the state
Capitalism will inevitably collapse due to its inherent contradictions

*

Marxism: Basic Assumptions

Marxism: Basic Assumptions
Materialism
Structure and Superstructure
Economics primary over Politics
Historicism
Primitive communism  Ancient Empires  Feudalism 
Capitalism  Socialism  Communism
Historical contradictions of Capitalism
Lenin and Imperialism
Normative Commitment
Egalitarianism over efficiency

Marxism: Three Answers
1- What is the economy for?
Normatively: To help the masses
Empirically: To serve the wealthy by exploiting the masses
2- How does the economy work?
I- Dependency Theory (Terms of Trade and dependent development)
II-World System Theory (Core, Periphery and Semiperiphery)
III- Theory of Imperialism
3- Relationship between Politics and Economics?
Politics derives from economics

Marxism: Strength and Weaknesses
Strength:
Highlights Nature of Inequality in IPE
Relates National Development to International Economy
Weaknesses:
Failure of Communism
Poorly Developed Concepts
Vastly different historical examples

Strands of Marxism: Imperialism
Johan Galtung: “Imperialism is a complete structure encompassing the military, social, political and economic relations”
Modern imperialism is different from the colonial era. Today, control is not direct but mediated though transportation and communication, linking the centers in the core and peripheries to each other. This link is also established by international organizations. The centers make agreements through international organizations whose headquarters are in the core countries. These organizations vary from IGO’s through multinational corporations to the military alliances and treaties.

Strands of Marxism: Dependency Theory
Andre Gunder Frank, Fernando Henrique Cardoso
Capitalism operates systematically to underdevelop and exploit the economies of less developed countries (LDCs)
Poverty is a process in which the LDCs are caught and cannot escape because of the inherent relationship between developed and underdeveloped nations. Economic exploitation is an integral part of the capitalist system and is required to keep it functioning.

Strands of Marxism: World System Theory
Immanuel Wallerstein
Against modernization theory
Structural Theory: the structure is capitalism
System is divided to core, periphery, semi-periphery countries
Transnational division of labour
Yet, room for changes: transition from periphery to semi-periphery etc. is possible
Not exactly exploitation of periphery by the core, instead a dynamic process where core capitalists exploit workers in all zones of the capitalist world-economy

Three Paradigms
Left Right

marxism nationalism liberalism

dependency
Imperialism

World Systems
Right vs. left: amount of government intervention

*

Global Transformations
Technological advances
Expansion of international commerce (exports and imports)
Rising importance of private capital flows (stock markets and multinational corporations)
Increasing travel and migration (international tourism and domestic diversity)
Increased communication and interaction between peoples (through all sorts of media)
New global networks, a global culture, a global society?

Global Transformations
Globalization made possible by:
Technology
Communication networks
Internet access
Growth of economic cooperation – trading blocs (EU, NAFTA, etc.)
Collapse of ‘communism’
Movement to free trade
Decline in barriers to the free flow of goods, services, and capital since the end of World War II

Global Transformations: Rising Actors
Macro-regions: like the EU, or NAFTA, these regions coordinate capital flows within a locational unit but also provide access to the globalization process.
Micro-regions: global cities offering new opportunities esp. in low wage jobs and information occupations.
Civil societies: growth of network organizations

Economic Globalization
The increasing reliance of economies on each other
The opportunities to be able to buy and sell in any country in the world
The opportunities for labour and capital to locate anywhere in the world
The growth of global markets in finance

Technological Globalization
“World Wide Web” has exploded in last 10 years
Computers can move money around world = “finance capital”
Silicon Valley is 9th largest economy in world!
Africa
More computers in Manhattan than all of Africa!
Post-colonial infrastructures don’t support technology

Cultural Globalization
Cultural Imperialism: Dominance of one culture over others
Hollywood movies, McDonald’s, Apple, Starbucks
Dominance of the English language and invasion of other languages
Do people all over the world have the same taste?
A new impetus to cultural homogenization in the form of a consumer culture
Africa
“Culture Industry”: opportunities for Africans to sell their culture in the “global market” that values traditional culture

Global Transformations: Different Perspectives
Strong Globalization thesis: a range of qualitative and quantitative changes introduce a new stage in human history
Weak Globalization thesis: despite technological shifts and increasing internationalization of trade, finance, social patterns and human mobility, nothing much has really changed

Global Transformations: Different Perspectives
Hyperglobalists:
Thomas Friedman, Susan Strange, Kenichi Ohmae, etc.
A neoliberal position which expect convergence in institutional and social configurations
Denationalization of economies, radical transformation of society, global diffusion of cultures, weakening state power

Global Transformations: Different Perspectives
Skeptics:
Is it really new?
20th vs. 19th C: The world economy is no more than internationalized and integrated by the start of the 21st C. than in pre-WWI era
In the 19th C. world trade grew eleven times more quickly than world production, more than it grew after WWII era.
Looking at the trade to GDP ratio and other forms of capital flow, financial markets were more open in pre WWI era than today.
Africa, Asia and South America were all within the trading system
In terms of labour mobility, people have less opportunities to move largely due to restricted migration policies adopted by first world countries.
Many of the features of financial integration today have some counterparts in the 19th C. such as gold standard for dollar dominance, London for New York, etc.

Global Transformations: Different Perspectives
Still some differences from earlier eras:
Today, there is more generalized and institutionalized free trade through the WTO, foreign investment is different in its form and destination, the scale of short term financial flows is greater, the international monetary system is quite different, and the labour mobility is much more restricted.

Global Transformations: Critiques
Globalization as a tool for Western dominance? Exploitation of bourgeoisie? Hypocricy of the West?
New types of strafication, hierarchy, winners and losers
Winners: advanced economies, transnational industry and finance, skilled labour
Losers: periphery countries, unskilled labour, immigrants

Constructivism
Skeptical of realist and liberal assumptions
Try to identify roots of state interests and see how people use language to socially construct the world
Norms dictate the conception of interests
Social norms are the behaviors and cues within a society or group. Could be defined as “the rules that a group uses for appropriate and inappropriate values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors”.
States derive interest and identity through interaction in international culture

Constructivism

Wendt abandons rationalist assumption – assumption that states’ identities are given (exogenous; fixed) either by,
human nature (classical realism)
or international system (neorealism)
State identities and interests are not given (exogenously), rather they are constructed socially (social interaction)… hence social constructivism..
Self-regarding identities  other-regarding identities
 
IR liberalist/neoliberal institutionalists  institutions affect behavior of states, but they do not change states’ identities or interests… they only constrain behaviour in strategic sense, but they do not constitute it!
Constructivists – institutions not only constrain behaviour but also constitute it. They can change identities and preferences

Constructivism
Two important claims of Constructivists
(1) interests and identities do change… and they are socially constructed! They are not givens! They are not exogenous
 
Ideational structure of International Relations
(2) Anarchy (as defined by Neorealists) is not the most important structural characteristic of international system. Neorealist conception of structures is too limited! They only focus on material forces.
 
The key structures of the international system are intersubjective or social (rather than material). The way we interact (and think) constitute an important structure as well!
Thus, our interests derive from the identities we construct for ourselves
 

Constructivism
Structure is a malleable entity… agents can shape the structure!
Self-help and Security Dilemma and Power Politics are not essential feature of anarchy
They are the result of our interaction based on self-help and power politics! Our practices made that way
(Physical) structure has no causal power apart from processes and interaction
Self-help and power politics are the result of our interaction (or practices) based on power politics and self help!
 
If states’ practices change, then so will the structure, so will our understanding of structure…!!!
Therefore “Anarchy (as structure) is what states make of it!”

Feminism
Gender Matters- rather than sex
History- His story
1- written by males 2- wars- males 3- for males
Current paradigms (esp. realism) are flawed because the universal truths they propose apply only to males
Males have normally hold top positions; factors only important because of masculine views
Historically prevalent gender stereotypes and cultural indoctrination are bases upon which understanding in IR is CONSTRUCTED; this construction is inherently flawed

1) Difference Feminism
Differences between men and women stem not only from social construction / indoctrination, but also biology and nurturing
Identity formation differs due to physiology and factors in upbringing (males – individuality and control competition; females – group well-being, conflict resolution)
Leads to competition and aggressiveness in male dominated international system

2) Liberal Feminism: Equal rights & access to the “public sphere”=Advocacy of international human rights
Equality in terms of capacity; focus on allowing women to realize their social and civic rights including equal participation
Don’t believe system would be different if women were more involved; wthere would be still conflicts (Examples of past female leaders)
Women are as skilled in the art of soldiery as men; They have just been banned from combat
3) Postmodern Feminism: See modernist constructions themselves as a source of power and oppression – need for relativism
Feminist Theories: Various approaches

Feminist Theories:

All share:
i) Commitment to redressing gender exclusions in IR practice and theory
ii) Commitment to foregrounding issues relegated to “domestic politics” by other theories = Common cause with some liberal and historical structuralist analysis . . . ?
iii) Commitment to reducing economic injustice
Various approaches – shared “commitments,” different methods
1) Liberal Feminism: Focus on removing legal and political manifestations of gendered constructs
I.e. Equal rights & access to the “public sphere”
=Advocacy of international human rights Remnants of “old orders” impeding liberal expansion of individual rights to women
Optimistic about liberalism’s focus on individuals for correcting gendered inequalities
Out of date – feminists have moved far beyond this narrow set of battles.
Evidence of backward discipline – Liberal feminism still just making inroads in this discipline

2) Radical Feminism: “Patriarchy” seen as source of oppression
Supported by legal, political and cultural practices Legalistic liberal feminism ignores sociological origins of those legal systems and rights
Gendered constructions seen as particular problem – Women’s attributes constructed as “of little value”
Supersedes Marxist concerns about capitalism – Capitalism simply latest phase of patriarchy

3) Socialist Feminism (Maria Meiss)
Women’s oppression driven by both:
Relations of Production (Marxism)
Relations of Reproduction (Radical Feminism) Synthesis of patriarchy and capitalism as the source of inequality
See a “hierarchy of oppressions” Methodologically committed to the real world observations of the oppressed

4) Postmodern Feminism (Cynthia Enloe) See modernist constructions themselves as a source of power and oppression
I.e. “justice” or “women” as universal concepts
Reject other feminists’ use of modernism’s concepts to justify their agendas
Suspicion these ideas will not be “emancipatory” = Relativism – Fears that feminism ran a risk of carrying with it a westernized cultural imperialism
i.e. Those who insisted on universal rights of women
In practice, very influential internal critique of IR Feminism in the 1990s

Postmodernism
Central Tenet: No single objective reality; instead host of experiences and perspectives
Statehood is not an objective reality, but a human construct for understanding, as are all explanations based on it
Realism is biased because it has omitted a necessary emphasis on other important contributors to the IR process

Postmodernism
Positivists vs. Post-Positivists (Or Rationalists vs. Reflectivists)
Positivists
Search for positive theories
Scientific (positivisitic) epistemology
Objective truth about social life
Find explanations and causal mechanisms
Post-Positivists
Denounce positivistic epistemology
No objective truth about social life.
All the social theories are value-laden  Normative theories
Post-modernism, Post-modern Feminism, Critical theory
Social constructivism as a bridge between positivism and post-positivism?

Several Trends Today
Trend 1: World Financial Crisis
Trend 2: Climate Change
Trend 3: Rearmament and Fragile Statehood
Trend 4: Migration
Trend 5: Religion as a Factor
Trend 6: Urbanisation
Trend 7: Inequality of “life chances”
Trend 8: Internationalisation of Science/Technology
Trend 9: New Governance Mechanisms
* Source: Development and Peace Foundation/Institute for Development and Peace (eds.) (2010): Global Trends 2010. Peace – Development – Environment

The world financial crisis is a major setback to socioeconomic progress in large parts of the world, demonstrating conclusively that neoliberal paradigms are not effective.
The economic consequences are being felt not only by the wealthy economies but also, and especially, by developing countries that are heavily dependent on foreign trade (especially commodities) and foreign capital inflows.
The economic progress achieved in recent years, especially in Africa, is at risk of being reversed.
Many emerging economies will be weakened for a transitional period, although their significance as new drivers of the world economy will increase overall.

Trend 1: World Financial Crisis

Climate change has become the main driver of global environmental change, with far-reaching implications for societies, economies and the international system.
In vulnerable regions of the world, it is likely to trigger new conflicts as a consequence of food crises, a decrease in freshwater availability, storm and flood disasters, and crisis-induced migration.
Our demand for natural resources is exceeding supply.
If all of the world’s people consumed resources and produced waste at this rate, we would require 4.3 Earths to maintain our current lifestyle.
Trend 2: Climate Change

Security, as a policy field, is characterised by shifting and sometimes inconsistent trends:
Armed conflicts have been in decline since 1993.
But numerous countries continue to experience sporadic outbreaks of violence and are affected by fragile statehood; this applies especially to sub-Saharan Africa.
In parallel, a decade of rearmament has been observed since the end of the 1990s.
Multilateral arms control is in crisis, and a further proliferation of nuclear weapons is likely.
[New threats for peace > Conflict prevention – human security]
Trend 3: Rearmament and Fragile Statehood

World Conflict and the Flow of Refugees

World Conflict and the Flow of Refugees
Massive destruction
Kill, injure and displace thousands of people each year
Refugees globally

The number of international migrants has increased more than threefold since 1960.
Although the proportion of migrants in the world population is fairly stable, the relative importance of migrants in the “ageing” industrial societies is increasing.
As the dark side of globalisation, human trafficking has become a multi-billion-dollar industry, and interal security became bigger concern for developed states.
Trend 4: Migration

Contagious Diseases

HIV/AIDS leading cause of death worldwide
UN predicts 70 million will die from AIDS over the next 20 years.
In 2013 over 35 million people were living with HIV/AIDS
95% infected live in low or middle income countries.

The West has long underestimated the significance of religion as a factor in international and transnational relations.
In the academic discipline of “international relations” in particular, exercise of power and willingness to cooperate have generally been analysed in terms of the rational calculations of a “homo economicus”.
By contrast, the assumption of power by Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran back in 1979 and the ending of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan by mujahideen fighters were some of the first signs that global politics is crucially influenced by politico-religious identities and ideologies as well.
Trend 5: Religion as a Factor

Trend 6: Urbanization
The urbanisation process is steadily continuing.
As of 2018, more of the world’s people live in cities than rural regions, with most urban growth taking place in the emerging economies and developing countries.
The rise of megacities, most of which are located in the developing countries, poses a major development challenge.

Trend 6: Urbanization

There continues to be extreme inequality of “life chances” between and within world regions and societies, with the gap continuing to widen in some cases.
Sub-Saharan Africa in particular and South Asia in particular are lagging further and further behind; life expectancy decreasing.
In contrast, East Asia is a “winner region” – albeit accompanied by growing social polarisation.
Trend 7: Inequality of “life chances”

The World of Inequality
In 2013, over 3 billion people lived on less than $2.50USD a day.
Denial of basic human rights
At least 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day
The poorest 40 percent of the world’s population accounts for 5 percent of global income. The richest 20 percent accounts for three-quarters of world income.
Nearly a billion people entered the 21st century unable to read a book or sign their names.
Some 1.1 billion people in developing countries have inadequate access to water, and 2.6 billion lack basic sanitation.
HDI – Human Development Index – is used to measure the quality of life. (life expectancy, adult literacy and years spent at school and the GDP In 2013 Norway was first and Niger was last.

World map indicating the category of Human Development Index by country

The World of Inequality

Scientific and technological progress is becoming increasingly “internationalised”.
This is an outcome of greater market openness and spread of Internet, but it is also a response to global problems.
The ongoing conflicts of interest over rules to protect intellectual property rights remain difficult.
Trend 8: Internationalisation of Science/Technology

The Communications Divide
Internet users by region
  2005 2010 2013
Africa       2%             10%             16%      
Americas 36% 49% 61%
Arab States 8% 26% 38%
Asia and Pacific 9% 23% 32%
Commonwealth of
Independent States  
10%  
34%  
52%
Europe 46% 67% 75%

The Communications Divide

The hierarchical approach to global governance is increasingly being supplemented by new horizontal governance mechanisms.
These may be exclusive or inclusive in terms of the participation of various actors.
They often facilitate solutions to problems where hierarchical processes have been ineffective and hegemonic approaches are likely to fail.
Trend 9: New Governance Mechanisms