Only $35.99/year

The Challenges of World Politics in the 21st Century

Terms in this set (16)

American and the Dilemmas of Liberal World Order:
- Liberal International Order has been evolving since Woodrow Wilson
- LIO: Not embodied in a fixed set of principles or practice. Changing aspects of it.
- Three major versions/models of LIO
- 1.0: Ideas of Woodrow Wilson
- 2.0: Cold War liberal internationalism
- 3.0: Post-hegemonic liberal internationalism

Dimensions of Liberal Internationalism:

General liberal ideas:
- Open, rule-based system in which states trade and cooperate to achieve mutual gains.
- Optimist assumption: states can overcome constraints and cooperate to solve security dilemmas, pursue collective action and create an open, stable system
- Trade and exchange: modernising and civilising effect on states which strengthen the international community
- Democracies are willing to operate within an open rule-based international system and to cooperate for mutual gain
- Institutions and rules established between states facilitate and reinforce cooperation

However, five key dimensions of variation:

1. Participatory scope
- Refers to the size of liberal order, whether it is a selective grouping or global in scope
- Open or closed membership
- Only like minded states?
- Universal vs regional/exclusive

2. Sovereign-independence
- Degree to which liberal order entails legal-politial restrictions on state sovereignty/exclusive claims to authority within its territory
- Full Westphalian legal sovereignty with interaction with other states vs agreements or institutions that involve the sharing and abridgement of state sovereignty
- Autonomous vs shared

3. Sovereign equality
- Degree of hierarchy within the liberal order
- Degree of differentiation of rights and authority within the intl. system
- Equality of states vs hierarchy
- Hierarchy: one or several states possess special rights and authority
- Equality: little differentiation of roles/responsibilities
- Equal vs hierarchical

4. Rule of law
- Degree to which agreed upon rules infuse the operation of the order
- Interaction of states may be informed by set of rules and institutions, or by a more ad hoc and bargained relations
- Hierarchical order: mostly rules, but can be ad hoc too
- Legal-binding vs ad hoc

5. Policy domain
- Breadth and depth of policy domains vary
- Can be organised to deal with narrow policy domain, such as only security
- Or can be organised as expansive, protection of various aspects of politics and society within and across states
- Narrow vs expansive

Overall: These dimensions: help us identify and contrast the various historical manifestations of liberal international order

Liberal International Order 1.0:
- Woodrow Wilson and his 14 points
- Vision of the League of Nations characterises LIO 1.0, but in reality it ended up being different and failed
- Failed due to US absence and thin institutional commitments. Lacked power.
- Traits:
- Universal membership, not tied to regime location or character
- Westphalian sovereignty, defined in terms of an international legal order affirming state independence and non-intervention
- Flat political hierarchy
- Rules and norms operate as international law, enforced through moral suasion and global political opinion
- Narrow policy domain, restricted to open trade and collective security system

Liberal International Order 2.0:
- Roosevelt and the US, more realism into its operations by building a more formal role for the great powers
- Intended to be similar, but after the US helped rebuilding Europe, it established a new form of international order
- American-led liberal hegemonic order
- Atlantic Charter
- More institutionalised
- Traits:
- Western-oriented security and economy system
- Modified Westphalian sovereignty, where states comprise legal independence so as gain greater state capacity
- Hierarchical order, with American hegemonic provisioning of public goods, rule-based and patron-client relations, and voice opportunities
- Dense inter-governmental relations, enforcement of rules and institutions through reciprocity and bargaining
- Expanded policy domains, including economic regulation, human rights, etc.

The Crisis of Liberal Internationalism 2.0:
- In crisis today
- American liberal hegemony: no longer appears to be an adequate framework to support a liberal international order
- What has changed?
- End of the Cold War, altered hegemonic logic. US no longer weakened liberal incentives from Cold War.
- Rise of unipolarity: made the US more controversial and raised level of uncertainty around the world
- Unfolding human rights and 'responsibility to protect', erosion of the postwar norms of Westphalian sovereignty. Focus on human rights and security. Erosion of norms of state sovereignty. New global struggle over the sources of authority in the international community.
- Threat to peace is no longer primarily from great powers engaged in security competition. Shift in ways that violence is manifested. non-state actors are able to acquire weapons of mass destruction
- Growth of the world economy and incorporation of new countries: new stakeholders. Developing countries contribute to half of the global GNP
- Authority crisis in current liberal order. American authority less securely established

Liberal International Order 3.0:
- Traits:
- Universal scope, expanding membership in core governing institutions to rising non-Western states
- Post-Westphalian sovereign, with increasingly intrusive and interdependent economic and security regimes
- Post-hegemonic hierarchy in which various groupings of leading states occupy governing institutions
- Expanded rule-based system, coupled with new realms of network-based cooperation
- Further expansion of policy domains

- Current troubles that beset American-led liberal internationalism are not manifesting in the breakdown of the old order. It is a crisis of authority
- American hegemonic organisation no longer a solid foundation for the maintenance of an open and rule-based liberal order.
- Liberal international order will evolve
-Wright: 'Globalization has been in the cards not just since the invention of the telegraph or the steamship, ..., but since the invention of life'
- Those who see 'an inevitable turn of events' reflects a concerned effort to impose a particular ideological rationale to the passage of history
- Presence of a a project in the new liberals (descendants of the Enlightenment thinkers)
- Ideas of Enlightenment are embraced/the aspirations of a large majority of humanity/states
- Ellias: we are living today just as our so-called primitive ancestors did (in the international sphere)
- Democratic syllogism: three propositions that help to remedy this 'primitive condition'
1. DPT: the more liberal democracies in the world, the more chance of a 'zone of peace'
2. Correlation between democracy and economic development: Democracy: best form of government for promoting economic development, and economic development best form for sustaining democratic government
- Washington consensus: best way to open up a country and promote growth: through complete integration into intl. trade and investment regimes.
- 2 notions:
1. The idea that human history has a purpose (that it is linear toward a certain point
2. The world can be divided and classified into societies of varying shades or degrees of civilization

History and the Idea of Progress:
- Berlin Wall came down: debate about communism vs democracy ended for Fukuyama
- End point of mankind's ideological evolution
- Hegel: evolutionary process culminated in the liberal state. Fukuyama: Hegel got it right rather than Marx
- Wright: Similar proposal, but broader
- Game theory: both organic and human history involve the playing of ever-more-numerous, ever-larger and ever-more-elaborate non-zero-sum-games
- The accumulation of these games over millennia have seen humankind tread a predetermined path of progress that could not help but lead to the globalised world in which we live today
- These are old ideas given life by new perspectives:
- Condorcet: Our hopes for the future condition: abolition of inequality between nations, the progress of equality within each nation, the true perfection of mankind (through reason and science)
- Kant: Law to all others. However, we can change the course of history's progress. He envisaged perpetual peace. ''highest purpose of nature is the attainment of a perfectly just civic constitution
- Hegel: competing theory: Idea of freedom. Universal substantial objects as Right and Law, and the production of a reality that is accordant with them, the state
- Though Fukuyama uses Hegel, it is Kant's vision that is used by liberal peace theorists (Doyle and Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Guizot)
- However: World powers that dominate modern international society are attempting to write such a history (In the Kantian 'idea of world history' line)
- Reasons:
1. Hegel's idea of freedom is at odds with that of most thinkers throughout history
2. Kant's idea of world history is something that can be constructed, and it is a more appropriate lens through which to view contemporary intl society and the nature of its constituent institutions, as envisaged by its most influential architects

Humanity Divided: Savages, Barbarians and the Civilized
- Not long ago, world was seen as civilised and uncivilised (Lewis Henry Morgan)
- Savagery preceded barbarism, and barbarism preceded civilisation
- Argued that this was a necessary sequence of progress
- Marx and Engels impressed by this, similar conclusions
- Montesquieu: broadened idea into law and legal philosophy: savage peoples are small scattered nations that cannot unite. Barbarians are small nations that can unite
- Lorimer: politically, world divided into three. Civilized humanity, barbarous humanity and savage humanity. Savages incapable of municipal organisation

The Classical 'Standard of Civilization'
- Schwarzenberger: standard of civilisation in international law
- Gong: standard of civilisation in international society
- Legal mechanism designed to set the benchmark for the ascent of non-European states to the ranks of the 'civilized family' so as to obtain full recognition
- Became redundant after WW2, became undermined by the use of nuclear weapons and the subsequent evolution of the concept of MAD
- Lauterpacht criticised Lorimer: intl law knows of no distinction, for the purposes of recognition, between civilised and uncivilised states
- Wight: unwritten understanding of the Cold War: peace of Europe shall be warily perserved while the struggle is pursued for influence and position throughout the Third World

The Test of Modernity: Updating the Standard
- Notion of hierarchy of states has outlived the Cold War
- It can be summed up as: disparities in capability are reflected, more or less formally, in the membership and decision making of the society of states
- Gong: two standards in contemporary intl society
1. Standard of non-discrimination/human rights
2. Standard of modernity
- The first one: greater acceptance, i.e. Greece into the EU
- The second: Standard of living/quality of life that can be achieved universally via the application of science and technology to issues of health, nutrition and well-being. Can also be a contemporary cosmopolitan culture, reflecting shared values, moral norms and experiences (global village/city)
- H/e: these assumptions made in the Cold War
- End of the Cold War: West triumphant - New World Order
- Universal aspirational norm: individual rights, participation in government, unhindered access to the goods and services available in the marketplace
- Dominance of West: allowed it to set the agenda in terms of defining the standard of civilisation for the 21st century
- Global standard of civilisation: democratic, liberal and economically globalised
- Might equals right (realism): West dominates, so West sets the standard

Human Rights, Liberal Democracy, and Globalisation:
- Donnelly: Human rights: new standard of civilisation
- Rawls: Similar, but hierarchy of five distinct groups within two subsets (well-ordered peoples and the not well ordered)
- Well ordered: Bodin: lawful and rightful government. Reasonable liberal peoples. Decent constitutional hierarchies
- Not well ordered: outlaw states, unfavourable conditions, benevolent absolutisms
- Law of Peoples: a particular political conception of right and justice that applies to the principles and norms of international law and practice. Gives rise to a Society of Peoples (similar to international society)
- Franck: conditions for membership, more exclusive: some form of democratic government, compliance with the norms prohibiting war-making. Every state has the right to be represented but democratic validation needed
- Fidler: standard of liberal, globalised civilisations

When to Be Modern Is to Be Postmodern
- Consequences of standard of civilisation
- Cooper: we live now in a divided world (three components)
1. Premodern world: collapsing states of the premodern world no longer conform to ebers criteria of exercising a monopoly on the legitimate use of force, and what remains of the apparatus of state is ineffective or corrupt
2. Modern world: linked to that great engine of modernisation, the nation state. Classical state system remains intact
3. International system: postmodern element. Modern state collapsing into greater order and interdependence than into disorder (monopoly on force is subject to international constraints)
- Advice: those who have friendly, law abiding neighbours: should not forget that in other parts of the world, the law of the jungle reigns

Conflating Human Rights, Liberal Democracy and Modernity
- Gong's two possible successors to the classical standard of civilisation are a 'standard of human rights' and a 'standard of modernity'
- However, evidence that these will become conflated
- In the march of progress, human rights, democracy and Western-style modernity are so interdependent that they cannot be separated
- Democratic syllogism: conflation of human rights, democracy and modernity

Uniform, Not Universal
- For a state to become member of intl society: must commit itself to human rights and the rule of law, democracy in governance, free market economics and efficacy of science and technology. If a state conforms to these principles: arrived at Western modernity
- New staandard of civilisation is defended normatively as the means to promote the advancement of the backward
- Possibility of universal civilisation: misguided, arrogant, false and dangerous
- Rather: uniform civilisation
- Still the case that membership of the global community demands the acceptance of a set of values which those who hold them assume them to be the expression of a universal human condition
- Stealthy homogenization of culture to the point at which Western liberal values represent the global culture
- No need for an arbitrary distinction between civilised and uncivilised societies. Human rights, decent standard of living and a just system of government are achievable in societies that are something other than replicas of the West
Introduction: the idea of international society
- Ways of envisaging global politics
- Struggle for survival vs world government
- In the middle: International society: empires, international systems, sovereignty and international hierarchical orders that are governed by some degree of common rules and practices
- However, envisaged as the emergence of the European state system (sovereignty and non-intervention)
- Within this society: civilised peoples, governed by sovereign equality, non-intervention and intl. law.
- Outside of this society: uncivilised, could be subject to various means of control or domination
- Emergent from the English School of thought
- Hedley Bull: as states accept no higher power than themselves, they exist in a condition of international anarchy. Order in this anarchical world: international society with common culture, mutual understanding, common rules and institutions
- Criticised for reinforcing colonialism/approving dominance over other cultures not within this society
- Intl society: short-hand way of depicting the overall structure constituted by such norms, rules and institutions.
- Bull: An intl society exists when a group of states, conscious of certain common interests and values, forms a society in the sense that they conceive themselves to be bound by a common set of rules in their relations with one another, and share in the working of common institutions

Ancient worlds
- No early intl society resembles the current model because none puts emphasis on sovereign equality
- Though, still characterised as intl. society as they were characterised by rules and shared values
- Growing economic complexity: rise to increasing trade relations with other communities, need for mutual understanding and rules
- Moving towards less violent means of consolidation and legitimising their positions
- Primitive religious beliefs evolved into comprehensive ideologies embracing notions of right and wrong
- Evidence of this in Middle East
- As economic circumstances improved: communities became less vulnerable to marauding nomadic tribes, intl. systems began to appear (China, India, Greece, Rome)
- In Greece: common religion: shows values and understandings between the city-states
- Greek intl. society: underpinned by shared moral understandings about rightful international conduct, derived from religious norms (diplomacy, sanctity of treaties, entry into war, treatment of enemy dead, sanctions)
- Ancient India: numerous religious norms that applied to intl. relations: justifications for war
- China: war and peace norms. Cultural Confucianism
- Rome: rival powers on a basis of equality: treaties and diplomacy. Religious rituals. Set of norms: law of nations
- Overall: elements of intl society may be found from the time of the first organised human communities
-Early forms of diplomacy and treaties existed in the ancient Middle East
- Relations among the city-states of ancient Greece were characterized by more developed societal characteristics such as arbitration
- Ancient China, India and Rome all had their own distinctive international societies

The Christian and Islamic orders
- Fall of Rome
- Byzantine Christianity : made up for its relative military weakness by building a network and using policies of divide and rule among its enemies
- Pope and church: unifying element. Significant for intl. relations: not dealing with non-believers
- Elaborate legal order: sanctions, arbitration, formal legal hearings and numerous specific rules that included rules on the safe conduct of diplomats and aspects of treaties, including consequences of their violation. Threat of excommunication. Structure maintained by the priesthood.
- Islam: expansion into Africa, Asia and Europe created a dynamic new force that found itself at odds with both Roman and Byzantine Christianity
- Conceived as creating a single unifying social identity for all Muslims (community of believers)
- In early islamic theory, world divided into the abode of war and the abode of Islam, and there was permanent war between the two abodes
- Muslims: obliged to wage jihad until the others embraced Islam, except Christians and Jews, but had to pay poll tax
- Shaped Islamic international relations
- Islam eventually accepted peaceful coexistence with unbelievers
Overall: Medieval Europe's intl society was a complex mixture of supranational, transnational, national and subnational structures
- Catholic Church played a key role in elaborating the normative basis of medieval intl. society
- Islam developed its own distinctive understanding of intl. society.

The emergence of the modern international society
- Contemporary intl. society: conception of the state as an independent actor that enjoys legal supremacy over all non-state actors
- Legal equality of all states, non-intervention,
- Formal communication between states carried on by diplomats
- Rules given the status of international law could not be binding on states without their consent
- Balance of power: fundamental institution and even as part of international law
- These were brought about by: the emergence of the modern state, professional diplomatic service, an ability to manipulate the balance of power, and the evolution of treaties from essentially interpersonal contracts between monarchs, sanctioned by religion, to agreements between states that had the status of 'law'
- Peace of Westphalia: regarded by many as the key event ushering in the contemporary international system. Established the right of the German States that constituted the Holy Roman Empire to conduct their own diplomatic relations
- Napoleonic Wars were followed by a shift to a more managed, hierarchical intl. society inEurope and an imperial structure in Europe's relations with much of the rest of the world
- LoN attempt to place international society on a more secure organisational foundation

The globalization of international society
- UN intended to be a much improved LoN, but the cold war prevented it from functioning as such
- Decolonisation led to the worldwide spread of the European model of intl. society
- The collapse of the Soviet Union completed this process

Conclusion: problems of global intl. society
1. Globalisation is serving to dissolve traditional social identities as countless 'virtual communities' emerge and as the global financial markets limit states' freedom to control their own economic policies
2. Post Cold War order has produced several failed states. If sovereign equality implies an ability to maintain government within the state: Lack of participation
3. Unipolarity: American dominance, but that is decreasing. Reluctant hegemon?
4. Democracy and human rights interpreted differently by different cultures
5. Environment and severe poverty
Introduction: sovereignty, anarchy and global governance
- Anarchy is basic to state-centric IR because sovereignty is basic to state-centric IR
- Sovereignty emerged as a double headed notion:
1. Rulers were sovereign as they accepted no internal, domestic equals
2. They were sovereign in so far as they accepted no external, international superiors
- Gained normative acceptance after Westphalia
- Sovereignty: organised hypocrisy? Rulers have always intervened in each others affairs
- Distinction between sovereignty as a juridical status and a political concept
1. Legally sovereign
2. Possesses certain sorts of capacities
- Sovereignty as status vs as a bundle of powers and capacities
- Distinction not significant initially: powers were limited in scope and range
- However: as powers recognised the necessity to pool sovereignty in order to achieve certain goals, the power/capacities of a state became more important. To be truly sovereign it may be necessary to surrender part of one's sovereignty
- Another example: economies of scale could be achieved via production for a wider market: range and scope of economic activity expanded
- Now institutions in place for regulation of world economy
- Basic external capacity of the state: capacity to make war is also regulated
- In short, what these reflections suggest is that although the world lacks government, their attempts to rule effectively and exercise their political sovereignty have created extensive networks of global governance

- Attempt to understand the growth of international institutions and to plot the trajectory of this growth into the future, and to come to terms with its normative implications
- Most important approach to international institutions to have emerged in the twentieth century
- Offers an explanation for the past growth and future prospects of international institutions
- Though, its primary intention: an account of the conditions of peace
- Emerged in 1940's as a reaction to state-centric approaches to peace
- Collective security leaves untouched the sovereign power of states to determine whether or not to respond to its imperatives
- Legally, states may be bound to act in certain ways but they retain the power to disregard legality when it suits them
- Instead, Mitrany argued that a working peace system could only be constructed from the bottom up, by encouraging forms of co-operation that bypassed the issue of formal sovereignty but instead gradually reduced the capacity of states to actually act as sovereigns
- Two formulas: Form follows function, and peace in parts
- 'Form follows function': Co-operation will only work if it is focused on particular and specific activities currently performed by states but would be performed more effectively in some wider context. Also, the form that such co-operation takes is determined by the nature of the function in question (institution vs organisation, etc)
- 'Peace in parts': describes the hoped-for collective outcome of these individual cases of functional co-operation. Functionalist model of sovereignty stresses the primacy of the political dimension of sovereignty. Sovereignty is a bundle of powers: as these powers are gradually shifted from the state to functional organisations, gradually the capacity of the state to act as a sovereign will diminish
- Result of functional co-operation is not to create a new, larger state
- Instead, the territorial basis of the system will, itself, be undermined by the precept that form follows function
- Gradually the territorial state will come to exercise fewer and fewer functions
- However, problems with functionalism?
- Westphalia System remains in place and sovereignty is undiminished as a guiding principle
- Sovereign state has been able to isolate itself from the corrosive effects of functionalism
- Loyalty to the state rested upon two pillars: contract between generations past, present and future, as well as the ability to provide physical security
- Mitrany also offered an a-political, positivist account of functional cooperation, which lessened its credibility
- Even the most technical of solutions will always have political implications, and it will always have the potential to benefit one group and disadvantage another
- Example: Universal Postal Union will always have issues with political, religious or pornographic material through the mail
- Gathering weathering data is also practical, but also faces resistance by closed societies
- Therefore, functionalist model of international co-operation has to be regarded as a failure

Integration theory, federalism and neofunctionalism
- Functionalism looks to the creation, where sovereign state takes a back seat
- In contrast, integration looks to the creation of new states by the integration of existing states, generally on a regional basis and possibly, in the long run, the creation of a single world state
- Thus, federalism and neofunctionalism
- In post-war world, avoiding a third European war: Solution: United State of Europe (a federal arrangement in which the sovereignty of its members would be suppressed
- In early 1940s, the Council of Europe proved that taking away sovereignty wouldn't work
- Instead, they drew on functionalist ideas
- Undermining state sovereignty from below, stripping away the powers of the state
- Eventual formation of the EU
- European Commission: capacity to initiate policy
- European court able to decide many intra-community disputes
- Initially was intended to create a new state via institution building. Central purpose: to create a federal Europe
- Still remains a long-term goal
- Not designed in a form follows function basis
- Abolition of internal tariffs meant to equalise production and transport costs. Idea: parties and pressure groups will gradually come to put pressure on central institutions rather than local governments
- Politics is the enemy of functionalism, but it is now being used as the driving force for European integration
- This departure: neofunctionalism
- How has it worked? neofunctionalism hasn't always been constant. Functional spillover has occurred in some areas, and sometimes not. Some pressure groups operate regionally, others not
- Not been a smooth process of spillover. Has taken place at differing speeds
- Other writers: attribute the integration process to interstate bargaining
- Problems emerge and are soled politically by state governments and not in accordance with any functional logic
- However, this can lead to a pooling of sovereignty and policy networks on a EU scale
- Going back to a 'Federal Europe': Maastricht treaty brought the issue to the fore.
- In Britain, federalism is seen as a process of centralization that takes power away from the states
- In Germany, it is seen as a process of decentralisation
- Defining characteristic of a federal system: federal authority has some powers it can exercise effectively without reference to the lower levels and vice versa
- Rejection of the proposed EU constitution of 2004: fears about EU expansion

Global economic institutions: Bretton Woods and after
- Before 1914, free trade, gold standard
- This collapsed under the strain of war
- Intended to come back after war, but Wall Street Crash prevented this
- High protection of trade and monetary controls
- Britain left the gold standard in 1931, and in 1932 established a system of Imperial Preferences
- By mid-1930s, the US was taking the initiative at international trade conferences to reshape world economy with Britain
- Wanted commitment to free trade, but British were protectionist
- Both powers met at Bretton Woods in 1944 to negotiate the shape of the post-war economic order. which became known as the Bretton Woods System
- It aimed to depoliticise the international economy by dividing up the various international issues among separate institutions
- Thus ITO would handle trade matters, World Bank would handle capital movements, and the IMF would deal with intl. money and balance-of-payments crises
- Would be functional institutions of the UN but isolated from the SC and other UN bodies dealing with political affairs
- Were to be regulatory: I.E: World Bank wouldn't have funds of its own beyond a small amount of working capital, but would raise money commercially that it would then lend on to states
- In the immediate post-war period it was impossible to bring these institutions on line, no country could compete with the US
- Reconstruction of the capicalist world economy was the Cold War: Marshall Aid, transferred money to Europeans and Japanese. But operated as a response to the threat of communism
- However, the BWS ceased to exist after attempt to have fixed currency rates. This was due to currency crises
- Though, its institutions are still in place
- IMF and World Bank oriented towards the developing world
- Still some progress to be made on the free trade area

International regimes and regime theory
- Regime: implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules and decision-making procedures around which actors' expectations converge in a given area of international relations
- The principles upon which the trade regime is built are that trade is good, free trade is better than controlled trade, and free trade promotes peace
- These principles constitute the embedded liberalism of the trade regime
- The norms of the regime give these principles some practical content
- - I.e: it is a norm that if it is not possible for trade to be free, tariffs are a better mechanism for restraint than quotas because they cause less interference in the market
- The rules: set out in detail what these norms imply, and set out the sanctions exceptions to these norms
- The decision making procedures: WTO, UNCTAD, etc
- These may be implicit or explicit. Explicit rules are written down
- Implicit rules are understood without being written down
- 'Around which actors' expectations converge': actors in world trade - firms, states, and individual consumers have expectations about the principles, norms, rules and decision making procedures that will apply in this area. If they converge, it is a regime, if not, it is not.
- Regimes are seen as part of global governance, but it should be noted that, despite the importance of the WTO in the trade case, they present a clear break from the emphasis on institutions characteristic of the BWS
- why are regimes set up and why do they persist? Because of the theory of hegemonic stability
- USA had the capacity to provide hegemonic leadership because of the poverty of the rest of the capitalist world, and their fear of the Soviet Union. Created the post-war institutional structure.
- Post-war institutional structure was underwritten by the power of the USA, and countries were able to take it as a substitute for international government
- However, this behaviour creates conditions for downfall. Hegemon has to play fair, but rivals are not so hampered. They will use the regime set up by the hegemon to the full, taking advantage of access to the hegemon's market, but relying on the hegemon not to overreact to their own measures to prevent its access to their markets
- USA was outproduced and the USA then became tempted to act on the short-term basis of self interest
- Good news: regimes may survive after hegemony
- They are set up by hegemon, and remain there even after hegemon disappears
- Rules and institutions keeps countries in place

Global governance and collective security
- Most important 20th century attempt to change the way the world handles security issues was the doctrine of 'collective security'
- The attempt to replace the self help balance of power system that prevailed before 1914
- Formation of LON, and UN
- Roots of these institutions: Peace project and Concert of Europe
- Peace Project (Kant's Perpetual Peace of 1795)
- Idea: states of Europe would form a kind of parliament or assembly wherein disputes would be solved
- Concert of Europe: Idea that the Great Powers would consult and co-oordinate policy on issues of common concern
- Root idea: great power brought with it great responsibility
- However, the common interest was weighted towards the interests of the Great Powers themselves. If the superpowers were in conflict, nothing was done
- Both of these traditions: exist at the beginning of the 21st century: UN institutional reform and global democratization
- Institutions set up by the UN and the LON represent a hybrid of both traditions
- Doctrine of Collective Security draws on the universalism of the Peace Projects, but it is meant to be operated by states which retain the power of deciding when the obligations of collective security are binding
- Poor record of these global institutions: system works properly only when they both point in the same direction
- The most important task that global institutions can perform today is not to solve problems but to give or withhold their blessings to those who can and do act
- Most explanations for the creation of IOs: response to problems
- However, upon closer look, IOs exercise power autonomously in many ways unintended and unanticipated by states at their creation
- This article: constructivist approach, explain both the power of IOs and their propensity for dysfunctional behaviour
- Argument: rational-legal authority that IOs embody gives them power independent of the states that created them and channels that power in particular directions
- Bureaucracies make rules, but in so doing they also create social knowledge
- However, this normative valuation that makes bureaucracies powerful can also make them unresponsive and inefficient
- IOs: more than the reflection of state preferences and that they can be autonomous and powerful politics
- Can also be dysfunctional and inefficient
- Characteristics of bureaucracy as a generic cultural form shape IOs
- This paper: 1. offers a different view of the power of IOs and whether or how they matter in world politics, 2. perspective provides a theoretical basis for treating IOs as autonomous actors in world politics and thus presents a challenge to the statist ontology that prevails, 3. Offers a different vantage point from which to assess the desirability of IOs
- Paper asks: how are things in the world put together so that they have the properties they do?
- Assumptions drawn from economics that undergrid neoliberal and neorealist treatments of IOs do not always reflect the empirical situation of most IOs. These provide research hypotheses about only some aspect of IOs and not others
- Second part of paper: constructivist approach to examine the power yielded by IOs and the sources of their influence
- Realist and liberal theories: only make predictions about and look for a very limited range of welfare-improving effects caused by IOs, thus the implementation of a sociological approach
- In the third part of the paper: explores the dysfunctional behavior of IOs (behavior that undermines the states goals of the organization

Theoretical Approaches to Organisations
- Two broad strands of theorizing about organisations: economistic and sociological
- Economistic approach comes out of economics depts. And business schools for whom the fundamental theoretical problem is why we have business firms
- This body of organization theory informs neoliberal and neorealist debates over intl institutions
- Sociological approaches provide reason why organisations that are not efficient or effective servants of member interests might exists. They lead us to look for kinds of power and sources of autonomy in organizations that economists overlook
- Stand in contrast to the economistic approaches in that they offer a different conception of the relationship between organizations and their environments, and they provide a basis for understanding organizational autonomy

IOs and their environment
- Environment assumed by economic approaches: very thin socially and devoid of social rules, cultural content, etc.
- Competition, exchange and other pressures for efficiency are the dominant environmental characteristics
- In contrast, sociologists study organisations in a wider world of nonmarket situations and they begin with no such assumptions. Organisations treated as social facts to be investigated.
- Environments can favour organisations for reasons other than efficient or responsive behaviour
- They may be chosen for what they are rather than what they do
- Empirically, organisational environments can take many forms. Some exist in competitive environments, and many do not. Some operate with clear criteria for success, but others operate with much vaguer missions
- When one chooses a theoretical framework, one should choose one whose assumptions approximate the empirical conditions of the IO being analysed
- Economistic approaches make certain assumptions about environment
- Specifying different or more varied environments for IOs would lead us to look for different and more varied effects in world politics.

IO autonomy
- Economistic approaches treat IOs as creations of states designed to further their interests
- Treat IOs as empty shells or impersonal policy machinery manipulated by actors
- However, in reality, IOs breach the limits of realism by violating the ontological structures of these theories
- Neorealist and neoliberal approaches do not grant IOs autonomy and purpose independent of the states that comprise them
- Is this a reasonable approximation of the empirical condition of most IOs? No. Yes, IOs are constrained by states, but the notion that they are passive mechanisms with no independent agendas of their own is not valid.
- Examples: Field studies of EU provide evidence of independent roles for eurocrats. Studies of the World Bank identify an independent culture and agendas for action.
- Thus, IOs are independent actors with their own agendas and they may embody multiple agendas and contain multiple source of agency
- Principal-agent analysis understands IOs as agents of states. Concerned with whether agents are responsible delegates of their principals. Treats IOs as independent actors, autonomous action by IOs is expected.
- Problem with principal-agent analysis: requires a priori theoretical specification of what IOs want
- Scholars of American politics: produced theoretical propositions about what US bureaucratic agencies want. Theorised that bureaucracies had interests defined by the absolute of relative size of their budget and the expansion of protection of their turf
- Realism and liberalism provide no basis for asserting independent utility functions for IOs. Ontologically, they are theories about states. No basis for imputing interests to IOs beyond the goals states give them
- Strands of sociological theory: can help us investigate the goals and behaviour of IOs by offering a very different analytical orientation than the one used by economists. Since Weber, sociologists have explored the notion that bureaucracy is a peculiarly modern cultural form that embodies certain values and can have its own distinct agenda and behavioural dispositions
- They explore the social content of the organisation (culture, legitimacy, dominant norms)
- These approaches recognise that organisations also are bound up with power and social control in ways that can eclipse efficiency concerns

The Power of IOs
- IOs can become autonomous sites of authority because of power stemming from
- 1 the legitimacy of the rational-legal authority they embody
- 2 the control over technical expertise and information
- The first is neglected by political science literature, and the second has been conceived of very narrowly.
- Taken together, these two features provide a theoretical basis for treating IOs as autonomous actors in contemporary world politics by identifying sources of support for them in the larger social environment
- These two features: the autonomy that flows from them is best understood as a constitutive effect, an effect of the way bureaucracy is constituted, which makes possible other processes and effects in global politics

Sources of IO Autonomy and Authority
- Weber and his study of bureaucratization: provide precision, rationality, knowledge, but they come at a steep price. They are political creatures that can be autonomous from their creators and can come to dominate the societies they created to serve, because of both the normative appeal of rational-legal authority in modern life and the bureaucracy's control over technical expertise and information
- Bureaucracies embody a form of authority, rational-legal authority that modernity views as particularly legitimate and good. Authority invested in legalities, procedures and rules, and thus rendered impersonal.
- This authority is 'rational' in that it deploys socially recognised relevant knowledge to create rules that determine how goals will be pursued. The rules and the job are the source of great power in modern society. It is because bureaucrats in IOs are performing duties of office and implementing rationally established norms that they are powerful
- A second basis of autonomy and authority is bureaucratic control over information and expertise. Autonomy derives from specialised technical knowledge, training and experience that is not immediately available to other actors. This gives bureaucracies power over politicians. It invites and at times requires bureaucracies to shape policy and not implement it.
- The make bureaucracies powerful by creating the appearance of depoliticization. They present a neutral image, however, beyond this characters, ideas of culture-values stand
- Bureaucracies also carry behavioural dispositions and values flowing form the rationality that legitimates them as a cultural form: They can undermine personal freedom in important ways. The very impersonal, rule bound character that empowers bureaucracy also dehumanises it. They exercise their power in repressive ways, in the name of general rules because rules are their raison d'être.
- Weber's insight: powerful critique of the ways in which international relations scholars have treated IOs.
- Examples of the ways in which IOs have become autonomous because of their embodiment of technical rationality and control over information are not hard to find. I.E: UN peacekeepers derive part of their authority from the claim that they are independent, objective, neutral actors

The power of IOs
- If IOs have autonomy and authority in the world, what do they do with it? Three broad types of the way in which IOs exercise power by virtue of their culturally constructed status as sites of authority
- 1 How IOs classify the world
- 2 Fix meanings in the social world
- 3 articulate and diffuse new norms, principles and actors around the globe

- The classification process of IOs is bound up with power. Bureaucracies are ways of making, ordering and knowing social worlds. They do this by moving persons among social categories or by inventing and applying such categories
- This capacity is a source of power
- Power is frequently treated by the objects of that power as accomplished through caprice and without regard to their circumstances but is legitimated and justified by bureaucrats with reference to the rules and regulations of the bureaucracy
- Consequences of this exercise of power may be life threatening. Example: definition of refugee and its evolution.

The fixing of meanings
- IOs exercise power by virtue of their ability to fix meanings, which is related to classification
- It established parameters, boundaries and features of acceptable action.
- Example of the institutionalisation of the concept of 'development'
- Example of the re-examination of security post Cold War

Diffusion of norms
- Having established rules and norms, IOs are eager to spread the benefits of their expertise and often act as a conveyor belt for the transmission of norms and models of good political behaviour
- Serve as the missionaries of our time
- Example of decolonisation: UN charter announced an intent to universalise sovereignty as a constituitive principle of the society of states at a time when over half the globe was under some kind of colonial rule. Also established the Trusteeship Council. Consequences of these actions: empowering international bureaucrats to set norms and standards for stateness
- Realists and neoliberals may well look at these effects and argue that the classificatory schemes, meanings and norms associated with IOs is simply epiphenomenal of state power, but these theories provide no ontological independence for IOs

The Pathologies of IOs
- Bureaucracies are created, propagated and valued because of their supposed rationality and effectiveness in carrying out social tasks
- However, folk wisdom about bureaucracies is that they are inefficient and unresponsive
- IOs too are prone to dysfunctional behaviours, however, this has not been investigates because the theoretical apparatus they use in IR provides few grounds for expecting undesirable IO behaviour
- The frameworks they have adopted assume that IOs are reasonably responsive to state interests, otherwise states would withdraw from them
- However, this assumption is a necessary theoretical axiom of these frameworks. Rarely treated as a hypothesis subject to empirical investigation
- Bodies that may explain dysfunctional IO behaviour (behaviour that undermines the IOs stated objectives)
- Five features of bureaucracy that might produce pathology
- Current theories about dysfunction can be categorized in two dimensions: 1. Whether they locate the cause of IO dysfunction inside or outside the organisation, and 2. Whether they trace the causes to material or cultural forces
- Bureaucratic politics, bureaucratic culture, world polity model, realism/neoliberal institutionalism
- Bureaucratic politics: name of the game is politics: bargaining along regularised circuits among players positioned hierarchically within the government. Government behaviour can thus be understood as results of these bargaining games. In this view: decisions are not made after a rational decision process but rather through a competitive bargaining process over turf, budgets, and staff, etc.
- Realism/neoliberal institutionalism: traces behaviour to the material forces located outside the organisation. State preferences and constraints are responsible for understanding IO dysfunctional behaviour. States are to blame for bad outcomes
- Cultural theories: have internal and external variants
- Divided according to whether they see the primary causes of the IOs dysfunctional behaviour as deriving from the culture of the organisation or of the environment (internal vs external)
- World polity: external culture to understand an IOs dysfunctional behaviour: 1. Because IO practices reflect a search for symbolic legitimacy rather than efficiency, IO behaviour might be only remotely connected to the efficient implementation of its goals and more closely coupled to legitimacy criteria that come from the cultural environment. 2. World polity is full of contradictions. Environments are ambiguous about missions and contain varied, functional normative and legitimacy imperatives
- IOs develop distinctive internal cultures that can promote dysfunctional behaviour (pathological)
- Bureaucracies specialise and compartmentalise. They create a division of labour on the logic that because individuals have only so much time, knowledge and expertise, specialisation will allow the organisation to emulate a rational decision making process. However, this can limit bureaucrats' field of vision and create subcultures within bureaucracy that are distinct from those of the larger environment
- Five mechanisms by which bureaucratic culture can breed pathologies: the irrationality of rationalisation, universalism, normalisation of deviance, organisational insulation, and cultural contestation

Irrationality of rationalisation
- Rationalisation processes at bureaucracies: could be taken to extremes and become irrational rules. They can become so powerful that they determine the ends and the way the organisation defines its goals.

Bureaucratic universalism
- Bureaucracies orchestrate numerous local contexts at once. They flatten diversity because they are supposed to generate universal rules and categories that are inattentive to contextual and particularistic concerns

Normalisation of deviance
- Bureaucracies establish rules to provide a predictable response to environmental stimuli in ways that safeguard against decisions that might lead to accidents and faulty decisions. Over time, expectations can become rule. They become institutionalised to the point where deviance is normalised

- Organisations vary in the way to which they receive and process feedback from their environment about performance
- Those insulated from such feedback often develop internal cultures that do not promote the goals and expectations of those outside of the organisation who created it and whom it serves
- Two causes for this: professionalism and organisations for whom successful performance is difficult to measure

Cultural contestation
- Organisational contestation about budgets, tasks, and internal cultures

- IR has paid little attention to the internal workings of IOs or about the effects they have in the world
- Viewing IOs through a constructivist or sociological lens reveals features of IOs that should concern IR scholars
- IOs treated as purposive, powerful and normative actors
- United Nations: Universal Declaration of Human Rights
- Foundation of the global human rights regime

The global human rights regime
- An international regime is defined as a set of principles, norms, rules and decision making procedures that states and other intl. actors accept as authoritative in an issue-area
- This particular regime: strongly accepted rights, but weakly implemented

International human rights norms:
- Charter of UN, respect for human rights as one of the principal objectives
- Commission on Human Rights - Declaration
- Civil and political rights, protection against abuse by the state
- Economic, social and cultural rights guarantee individuals access to essential goods and services (RIGHT TO FOOD, HEALTHCARE, EDUCATION, ETC)
- Ratified by 173 states
- Three principal mechanisms of international action: multilateral implementation vs bilateral foreign policy vs NGOs

Multilateral implementation mechanisms:
- Principal mechanism: reporting (supervisory committees)
- Universal periodic review: Usually superficial review as its done by states
- Country specific and thematic special procedures: more substantial
- ICC: Has powers of judicial enforcement, but its usually for war or genocide
- Imbalance in regions. For example, in Asia, lack of a regional human rights agency

Evaluating multilateral mechanisms:
-Global human rights regime: based on national implementation of intl. human rights norms with modest international oversight.
- Only good implementation is in Europe
- Reports, reviews, complaints and investigations aim to encourage and help to facilitate compliance with intl. norms
- Most abusive states try to hide or deny violations
- Most states can be induced to make symbolic gestures that ease the suffering of at least some victims and they can be nudged if changes are narrow/incremental
- Intl. norms: independent impact.
-Authoritative norms: facilitate bilateral and transnational action
- Same with legal norms
- International Bill of Human Rights provides an authoritative list of interdependent, indivisible and universal human rights, covering a wide range of rights.
- Extensive body of almost universally endorsed law: most important contribution of the global human rights regime
- Global human rights regime is based on national implementation of intl. norms
- Multilateral implementation systems: facilitate national compliance
- Strong multilateral procedures are a consequence, not a cause, of good human rights practices

The bilateral politics of human rights
- Bilateral foreign policy: second principal mechanism of international action of behalf of human rights:
The evolution of bilateral human rights diplomacy
- 1977, Human rights committee began its operations
- Carter: verbally aggressive international human rights advocacy
- Genocide: greater bilateral action
- States developed programmes of civil society support, enhanced their democratisation initiatives
- 9/11: tainted human rights
- In second decade of the twenty-first century, human rights is embraced as a legitimate element of national foreign policy

Assessing bilateral action:
- States: greater material resources than multilateral human rights institutions, however, human rights usually sidelined

The non-governmental politics of human rights
- NGO's as human rights advocates
- NGOs and individuals: principal components of 'civil society'
- NGOs: played important role in getting human rights into UN charter
- NGOs: now central feature of the global human rights regime
- Amnesty, human rights watch, etc
- Principal resources: information and the energy of ordinary people
- 'Name and shame'
- Lobbying operations
- Civil society advocacy

Assessing NGO advocacy:
- Some are ineffective
- Serious issues of political and financial accountability
- Lack power of states
- however, no other interests

Human rights and IR theory
- Liberalism: key for liberals, highly supported
- New liberals reject the classical liberal emphasis on property
- Liberal democratic welfare state

- Realism: Classical realism: national interest defined in terms of power
- Moral concern, add on
- Foreign policy: concerned with the national interest

- Social constructivism: social construction of the national interest
- In constructing human rights, international society has been reshaped
- State sovereignty and human rights, shape each other
- How violations are constructed

- Critical perspectives on human rights: By whom and for whom have international human rights been constructed?
- Western hegemony
- Voluntary demand from below rather than imposition from above?
Whose rights?
- Human rights: part of common sense
- To be against them, to be against humanity
- Their protection: obligation for all states
- Crimes against humanity - intervention
- 1789, France, every man had natural rights
- Leviathan: guaranteed rights through a framework of law
- Alternative to Leviathan: anarchy
- Locke: legal rights substituted for natural rights
- Is the state the best guarantor of human rights?
- Who has rights? Ideas of human rights help define what it is to be human
- Answer to question of who has rights depends on what we consider to be worthy of protection

The French headscarf ban:
- Immigration: challenge to secularism in French constitution
- Some see the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen: all citizens are equal in the eyes of the law
- Others see hijab wearing as fundamental human right (Declaration)
- Public confrontations
- From seen as a religious symbol to seen as a rebellious symbol
- Banning dressing representing religious affiliation
- Religious divisiveness
- Muslims should make more effort to reconcile their faith with the demands of national integration
- Undermines global values and religious freedom
- Islam not covered in the 1905 Law
- Not all religious communities equally affected by the 2004 ban
- Illustrates the contentious nature of human rights
- They display that they are Muslim/Sikh first and French second
- Support on the ban by French Muslim Council: patriarchal oppression

Human Rights and universality:
- Revolutionary France, birthplace of human rights
- Rights in human nature rather than divine authority
- Declaration of independence: universal
- French: how can it be interpreted?
- Burke: only real rights were those of citizens
- Man: no gender, abstract entity, unencumbered
- Marx: need for emancipation from religious belief
- Two responses to whether rights are universal:
1. Asserts universality of human rights on the basis of a purported universal human nature (problems: ignores the culturally contested nature of human identities)
2. Asserts the radically incompatible nature of human values and identities (Western notions of human agency)
- Can only be applied through liberal democracy
- Asians value order, community and social harmony over individual freedom and democracy
- though Western in origin, Buddhist, Muslim, Sikh and Hindu roots too
- Human rights: global language of modernity, universal category which cannot be appropriated by any one specific culture

Bare life, Human Rights and sovereign power:
- Ambiguity of institutionalised human rights: makes them very difficult to deal with
1. French state: considers the subject of human rights to be a citizen
2. Others consider culture, religion and tradition to be integral human rights
- Entry of bare life into politics: it is precisely bare natural life that appears here as the source and bearer of rights (1789)
- Gives right to men, but are to be exercised by citizen
- Politicisation and depoliticisation of the veil
- Politicises the veil in that the wearing of the veil is invested in political significance
- Depoliticised: expelling it from the public sphere
- How should one's rights to freely manifest one's religious or cultural identity or identities be protected?
- Human rights may need to be protected from their own institutionalisation in order for everyone to enjoy the equal freedom and dignity that ought to come from being human

Conclusion: universal?
- Domestic vs intl. human rights
- By banning the veil: French state strips its citizens of their bios and reduces them to what Agamben refers to as bare life
- It is not clear who has rights, however, if rights are to be considered universal, there needs to be an acceptance that there is more than one way to be human
Power, Politics, and the World Economy
- Nations, even the biggest, dependent on their economies
- Business, economy and political and IR are all interconnected
- How states and markets interact and coexist within the global system. They shape and influence each other
- Governments depend on business: states are only as powerful as their economies are wealthy and prosperous
- International politics shape and are shaped by the changing character of the world economy

Two Great Eras of Economic Globalization
- Two great eras
- First: Late nineteenth century: GB led the establishment of an open world economy in which goods, capital, ideas and people moved relatively freely across Europe and beyond
- Collapsed in the wake of WWI
- US led the second era of globalisation after WW2
- After Cold War, further previously communist countries entered this arena
- By the turn of the 21st century, World economy was truly globalised system, econmpassing all regions. Current center of gravity is shifting away from the Western economies toward Asia and the developing world
- Made the world richer
- However, it has also created new problems and pressures
- Rapid flow of money into different economies has led to destabilising currency crises, such as in Latin America in the 1980s, East Asia in the 1990s, and the great financial crisis of 2008
- Brought to the fore debates about the virtues and dangers of open and relatively unregulated financial markets
- Has also created anxiety over culture and identity. Some worry about excessive immigration
- Example of China and Google censoring

States and Markets: Three Great Traditions of Thought
- Over the centuries, political thinkers have offered different perspectives about the relationship between states and markets and their effects on IR

Economic Liberalism:
- Dates back to Adam Smith
- Believe in free markets, harmony of interests between countries, and the positive effects of an open world economy on politics and foreign policy
- Role of the state in the national economy should be quite limited
- Government should try to minimise its intrusions
- Basic functions of the state: provide property rights, enforce rule of law, and provide for the national defense
- Government to be a night watchman
- Main players are private citizens as consumers and producers
- Absolute gains: economic interaction creates only winners, and with that, peace
- David Ricardo: took it further and developed the law of comparative advantage (state beneficial for both parties of the deal)
- Liberals see states and societies adapting themselves to the imperatives of economic integration and wealth generation

Economic nationalism
- Puts states first, emphasises the key role of the state in shaping market relations to national advantage
- Alexander Hamilton: focused on the political dynamics of state competition
- Take further in Germany by Friedrich List
- Don't trust on the invisible hand
- Emphasise the importance of states as facilitators of economic growth
- Governments must build banks, nurture industries and plan institutions to facilitate economic advancement at home and assure that the nation state gets the best deal from engaging economically abroad
- Hamiltonian view sees countries in competition with each other
- They must seek to promote, and if necessary protect, the national economy from the economic exploitation of other countries
- relative gains (gains one country makes in relation to other countries
- Even if both sides gain from economic relations, on side might gain disproportionately more and use its gains to dominate the other side
- This Hamiltonian view: economic component of realist international relations theory

- Derived from Karl Marx
- Economic relations tend to shape political relations, and the main economic actors are classes, rather than individuals or the state
- For Marxists, the state within a capitalist society is neither a neutral referee nor a facilitator of economic development for the nation state as a whole. The state has the mission to protect and advance the interests of the capitalist class.
- This is at the expense of the working class
- Political struggles would lead to the ultimate triumph of the working class, leading to a post-capitalist society in which all people were the owners and beneficiaries of economic activity
- Zero-sum struggle in which one side's gain is another's loss
- Marxists see the state operating in the service of national capitalist interests
- Lenin: WWI seen as a War driven by states seeking to advance their national capitalist interests
- Marxists see international economic relations as a continuing drama in which capitalists in rich countries, backed by their states, dominate those in weaker and less developed countries
- Institutions are instruments of the rich countries, protecting their interests even as they offer aid and assistance to less developed states
- Struggle between workers and the capitalist class within societies is matched by the struggle of advanced states and struggling societies

States and Markets in a World of Anarchy
- States are both politically sovereign and economically interdependent
- World of commerce and trade must co-exist with sovereign-territorial states that compete and cooperate with each other
- Capitalism tends to be transnational, nation states are inherently territorial
- Each has been threatened by the other
- Example: Great Depression: governments were thrown into chaos
- Implications for the goals of states in the world economy?
- Competitive structure of inter-state relations creates incentives for states to get involved in their national economies to promote economic growth and advancement
- States seek both power and wealth, the ability to protect themselves

The Two-Sided Government: Managing Domestic and International Relations
- World economy is embedded within the broader system of states
- States look inward at society and outwardly towards world politics
- Historically: relationships of governments to the outside world and to their domestic societies: have developed hand in hand
- The more intense the inter-state competition, the more governments needed to mobilise and extract resources from their societies
- As states interact with their own societies, limits and constraints on what leads can do emerge
- Decentralisation vs centralisation of a state will shape its action
- Furthermore, a variety of factors will shape the capacities of states:
- The most basic is the sovereign integrity of the state and military and administrative control of its territory
- Sometimes, Governments that we think of as more developed may exhibit limited capacity
- Example of Greece, spent too much without the ability of collecting that much from population

Promoting National Economic Growth
- Economic growth: vital component of state power
- How is it achieved? Many have done it by opening up, and extract and use its resources
- But states interested in promoting long-term economic growth and advancement have also found reasons to protect domestic industries at their initial stage of development and shelter critical industries from foreign competition

Protecting Autonomy
- Governments also care to protect their country's autonomy
- Don't want economy too dependent on others
- Issue of dependability has become an important issue as the world economy has become more interdependent
- Example of Ukraine trying to distance itself away politically from Russia but can't because it is dependent on it's natural gas
- Can also be used as a tool of power
- A state that opens itself up to dependence on another state: must make calculations
- One must consider whether one is sensitive vs vulnerable upon the absence of a given resource
- If Ukraine can find another partner for export of natural gas, it is sensitive. If not, it is vulnerable.
- In summary, an open system of trade, money and finance creates efficiency gaines that leaves all states better off than if they simply remained national economies. But, a state contemplating expanding its exposure to the world economy must calculate the trade-off between the absolute economic gains from trade and the possible loss of autonomy

Pursuing Relative and Absolute Gains
- Finally, states operating within a competitive international environment will care about absolute gains and their relative standing with other states
- Liberal economic theory: absolute gain. Trades will be based on specialisation and comparative advantage. In doing so, these countries experience more economic gains than they would if they did not engage in free trade
- However, sometimes, states care more about relative economic gains
- Especially if it is a rival or potential enemy

State Building, War and Markets
- Governments must continually choose between the best tradeoffs internally vs externally
- Political interdependence vs political autonomy
- Governments want the economy to lay golden eggs, so they can take a few of those eggs for their purposes

Great Powers and the World Economy
- The most powerful states, however, have additional opportunities
- They can use their disproportionate political and economic power to shape the world economy in which they participate
- They may use markets and the expansion of economic openness and integration as a tool of security policy and international order building
- Example: US after WW2
- 1. A powerful state may take special advantage of the fact that an open world economy increases the nation's access to markets, technology, resources
- 2. Opportunity to influence the political and economic orientation of other states and regions
- 3. Best opportunity: to shape the overall orientation of the international system

Leadership and the Liberal World Economy
- To lead a world economy one must be open
- One must also show the ability to lead
- A leading state can exercise leadership during crisis by keeping its domestic market open to trade in goods from other countries
- Current leader USA

The Contemporary World Economy: Globalisation and its Challenges
- Will globalisation move forward or retreat?
- Pushback on globalisation by some. Reasons to worry
- 1. Global financial crisis
- 2. Pressure on the American dollar
- 3. Energy supply race
- 4. WTO and Doha round has stalled
Sources of inequality

Neoliberal reform

Changes in the global economy in the late twentieth century
- Three changes took place in the late 20th century are shaping current patterns of global inequality
1. Reversal of the significant post WW2 shift towards greater equality in the advanced industrial economies, initiated by neoliberal reform in the UK and the US from the 1970s onwards
2. The creation of a genuinely global capitalist economy over the same period as a consequence of the rise of the Asian economies, and the re-establishment of market economies in the former SU and in Eastern Europe after 1989
3. Concurrent promotion by leading governments and international institutions of greater openness and competitiveness in the emerging global capitalist economy
- Has risen income of people around the world
- However, it has also made countries unequal internally
- Capitalism reduces inequalities between countries, but it increases inequalities between individuals
- Furthermore, this comes from labour income inequality
- Data shows:
1. that a substantial redistribution of income took place around the time of WW2 and was sustained thereafter
2. it shows that to the extent that this was a global phenomenon it was unusual and relatively short lived.
3. it suggests at least three different patterns: an East Asian Pattern, and two Western patterns

Measuring and comparing inequality
- Complicated process
- Cannot be done without good basic data and ways of comparing them
- US has bad income inequality compared to Scandinavian nations

Developing and emerging economies
- As the UK and the US have become unequal, the structure of the global economy as a whole has been in the same direction
- BRIC countries growing but so is inequality

Liberal and developmental perspectives on inequality
- Information above tells us about the patterns, but not why
- Policy choices may explain rising inequality in some countries
- Current approaches to growth an inequality, and the extent which they are reflected in the policies promoted by governments and international institutions around the world

Liberal globalism
- Advocate a world of liberal democratic states integrated through the market, on the ground that growth is good for the poor
- Solution for the poverty question: more integration, not less
- Takes an optimistic view on the impact of growth on poverty reduction
- Degree of inequality is inevitable
- As economic growth depends upon private enterprise, it is essential for states to encourage economic activity across borders, and reward entrepreneurs
- Hostile to state intervention

Global developmentalism:
- Co-operation between states and the participation of all states in global markets, but reject the liberal approach on the grounds that it overlooks the privileged position of the rich countries in the global economy as currently constituted, and the tendency for the benefits of growth to be unequally distributed
- The enforces liberalisation of global markets rules out such things as industrial development strategies that rely for a period of selective protectionism
- Place greater stress on the continuing relevance of developmental strategy than on the prioritization of further liberal integration
- Tend to be more critical of emerging patterns of inequality: dismiss the liberal approach as faith based social science

Liberalism, developmentalism and international institutions
- International institutions over the last two decades have been proposing liberal globalism, unfailingly promoting liberal policies centred on further integration of the global economy
- Argued for greater openness in the global economy, and at national level they have favoured sound macro-economic policy and a market-friendly orientation on the part of governments
- According to them, a liberal policy is still the best hope for the poor
- A better investment climate for everyone report: governments should pursue liberal reforms in order to promote opportunity and entrepreneurship among their citizens
- 2 features of this approach: international institutions to become increasingly interventionist with regard to domestic policy
- Institutions formerly focused on global developmentalism focused on global liberalism
- Issue has been recognised as poverty rather than inequality, and where it has been seen as inequality, the approach advocated is the increased access for the poor to the principal elements of a liberal global economy

Historical materialism and the expansion of the global working class
- Communist Manifesto
- Historical materialism: history of class struggles
- Society is increasingly shaped by the class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat
- This is the driving force behind social change
- Five Concepts from Capital to understand contemporary patterns of inequality

1. Primitive accumulation: the process by which the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are initially constituted through the twin process of the expropriation of the peasantry and the accumulation of resources in the hands of a minority
2. The exploitation of labour: source of profit is the capacity of the capitalist to pay workers for only a part of the surplus their labour creates, and to expropriate the rest for themselves
3. The profit motive: the orientation of the capitalist towards the accumulation of capital, rather than any broader social purpose
4. The constant revolution of production: the pressure on capitalists to complete with each other to reduce the price of production in order to sell their goods in the market, either by obliging workers to accept lower pay or work longer hours, or by innovation and investment that increases the productivity of the worker
5. Competition on a global scale: the resulting tendency for the production process to spill out beyond national borders and operate on a global scale

- Marx and Engels predicted that if capitalism became global it would be through an uneven process of development, the key feature of which would be that the conflict between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat would increasingly shape political and social change
- Governments currently driven by intense global competition to create a better climate for investment in their own countries
- Workers are losing out to owners of capital, and poor workers are falling back in relation to a minority of favoured top earners
- The expansion of the global proletariat is the objective of both INTL organisations and ntl governments around the world.
- The logic of the polities of the World Bank and other intl organisations is to increase as much as possible both the size of the global workforce and its utility to or exploitability by capital
- The combination of globally integrated markets and the huge labour reserves in the developing world suggests that this is a fundamental structural feature of the world economy for the foreseeable future

- Economic integration is occurring in the context of wider earnings inequality and perceptions of job insecurity
- Reasons why some people are better off than others relate to policy choices within individual countries and across international organisations that favour not only open markets but also owners of capital
- Current trends will lead to further growth but greater inequality
- Economic gap between the rich and poor states
- 20 richest states achieved an increase of nearly 300% in GDP
- Poorest achieve an increase of 20%
- Washington consensus has led to high levels of inequality within and between states
- Attempts by the global hunger and poverty regimes can be categorised into two very broad types
- Dominant mainstream/orthodox approach vs critical alternative approach, which incorporates other more marginalised understandings of the development challenge and process

- Basic agreement on the material aspects of poverty (lack of food, clean water and sanitation) but disagreement on the importance of non-material aspects, like culture and society
- Key differences emerge in regard to how material needs should be met, and hence about the goal of development
- Most governments, institutions, etc adhere to the orthodox conception
- It means: where people don't have the money to buy adequate food or satisfy other basic needs
- Based on money, so a community that provides for itself outside monetised cash transactions and wage labour is regarded as poor
- It is seen as incumbent upon the developed countries to help the Third World to eradicate poverty
- Solution for this: greater global economic integration
- Some institutions have tried to extend further the conception of poverty, such as the UNDP
- Distinguishing between income poverty and human poverty
- A more critical view of poverty places more emphasis on lack of access to community-regulated common resources, community ties, and spiritual values

- Traditional view on development: synonymous with economic growth in the context of a free market international economy
- Economic growth identified as necessary for combating poverty
- Example of the world Bank who uses this conception
- Alternative view: places significance in human rights

Economic liberalism and the post-1945 international economic order: seven decades of orthodox development
- IMF, World Bank and Gatt provided the institutional spine for liberal international economic order based on the pursuit of free trade
- These institutions have favoured developed Western nations
- The Third World pursued a strategy of import substitution industrialisation in order to try to break out of their dependent position in the world economy as peripheral producers of primary commodities for the core developed countries
- Many went into debt, and the Group of Seven gave loans through the IMF and World Bank
- Pushed Developing countries to pursue market-oriented strategies based on rolling back the power of the state and opening Third World economies to foreign investment
- After the collapse of the SU in 1989, this neo-liberal economic and political philosophy came to dominate development thinking across the globe

The development achievement of the post-war international economic order: orthodox and alternative evaluations
- Some gains for developing countries during the post-war period with the GDP per capita criteria
- Proportion of people living on less than 1.25 dollars a day declined to 22.2% of the global population
- However, these gains have no uniformly spread across all developing countries. Much of the reduction attributed to China and India
- Latin America, East Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa still have high levels of poverty
- Orthodox views inequality positively as a spur to competition and entrepreneurial spirit
- Advocates of a critical alternative approach emphasise the pattern of distribution of gains in global society and in individual states, rather than growth
- Believe that the economic liberalism that underpins the process of globalisation has resulted and continues to result in increasing economic differentiation between and within countries, and that this is problematic

A critical alternative view of development
- Numerous efforts to come up with newer definitions stem from grass roots development organisations, individuals, UN organisations and private foundations
- Dag Hammerskjöld Foundation argued that the process of development should be need oriented, endogenous, self-reliant, ecologically sound, and based on structural transformations
- Since then, there's been a growth in attempts by the UN to incorporate these terms

- In recent decades global food production has burgeoned, but hunger and malnourishment remain widespread
- The orthodox explanation for continued existence of hunger is that population growth outstrips food production
- An alternative explanation is the lack of access or entitlement to available food
- These are affected by factors such as the North-South global divide
- Globalisation can simultaneously contribute to increased food production and increased hunger
- Nearly half the world live on less than 2 dollars a day
- Massive improvements, but those living in extreme poverty increased in sub-Saharan Africa
- UNDP, World Bank and IMF are the principal institutions for economic development and debt relief
- Aid used by the US as a potential impediment to terrorism
- In light of the MDGs of 2000, nations were required to increase their aid to 0.7 percent of gross national income
- However, many remain far short of that goal
- US contributes the most
- Only NOR, SWE, LUX, DEN and NL reached the UN target
- Three disagreements in the foreign aid debate:

1. the extent to which it is simply an instrument of foreign policy, and therefore not intended to actually improve the lives of those most in need
2. which types of foreign aid are most beneficial in combating poverty, regardless of the motivation
3. the relative importance of foreign aid compared to other forms of economic activity in rising living standards

Can foreign aid reduce poverty? Jeffrey D. Sachs: Yes
- National and international efforts in the past years have been successful
- Biggest developments seen in Asia, more education, health and infrastructure
- The reason for this is because of US and Japanese aid

Development assistance as a tool in promoting economic development
- Aid has worked in conjunction with powerful market forces, most importantly international trade and investment
- Aid should not be seen as a substitute for market-led development, but rather as a complementary component of market forces

US commitments to economic development and poverty reduction
- The US cannot carry the world's development financing burden on its own
- Must be a global effort, based on agreed targets
- Most important shared global goals are the MDGs
- Effective for the following reasons:

1. The world has agreed to the goals and reconfirmed that support each year since 2000
2. The world has agreed to a trade and financing framework in the Monterrey Consensus
3. The MDGs address extreme poverty in all its interconnected dimensions: income, hunger, disease and deprivation
4. The MDGs promote long-term economic growth and wealth creation by encouraging countries to focus on productive investments to end the poverty trap
5. The MDGs are ambitious and yet achievable
6 The MDGs are quantitative and time-bound, therefore offering objective indicators of success and accountability

Current levels of US official development assistance in comparative perspective
- Development, defence and diplomacy are the three pillars of US national security, but current investments are almost entirely in the direction of defence spending
- Development aid divided into bilateral (direct to countries) and multilateral (to organisations)
- however, only 1/4 of overall bilateral aid is spent on development directed at long-term poverty reduction and disease control
- Majority given to emergencies and US political aims
- Also, as a share of national income, US aid is actually the lowest among donor countries
- EU countries agreed to contribute at least 0.51% of GNP as PDA by 2010, and 0.7% by 2015
- US's remains stuck as 0.16%

Private Development assistance
- Developed countries were meant to give 1% of national income per year to poor countries
- 0.7% to be public, and 0.3% to be private
- No donor country's private sector has come close to reaching the 0.3% target
- Poor countries need to maintain relative open trading systems. It is essential for economic development

What works and what doesn't work with ODA
- ODA works when it is used for development assistance
- Success stories
- The Asian Green Revolution
- Smallpox Eradication
- Family planning
- Campaign for Child Survival
- Treatment for AIDS, TB and Malaria
- 6 crucial lessons from these:
1. The interventions are based on a powerful, low-cost technology. With the diffusion of powerful technology comes development
2. Interventions are easy to deliver, based on standardised protocols and local ownership
3. They are applied at the scale needed to solve the underlying problem
4. They are reliably funded
5.They are multilateral. One country can't pay for the whole effort
6. The interventions have specific inputs, goals and strategies so that success rates can be assessed
- Overarching lesson: be practical when deploying development aid, understand the targeted inputs, the outputs, the financing, and the objectives

Modernising US development assistance in the 21st century
- Development goals must be clear and appropriate, the technologies must be identified, the systems for delivery must be assessed, and the multilateral financing must be assured

The Goals
- Development commitments should be centred around the MDG's for their quantitative targets and the automatically US alignment
- They should also be aimed at sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia, the Andean region, Haiti, and the remaining pockets of extreme poverty in South Asia
- Development aid for middle income countries (BRICS) should be scaled back accordingly

The Technologies
- For each of the MDGs, there is a set of core interventions, based on proven low-cost technologies that can spur rapid advances toward the goals:
- Income poverty: micro-finance, electricity generation, all-weather roads, access to internet, improved population health
- Hunger: improved food production through the extension of Green revolution technologies, micronutrient supplementation, school feeding programs
- Universal school completion: construction of schools, training of teachers, WIFI, computers at schools
- Gender equality: micro-finance for women's groups, improved inheritance and property rights
- Reduced maternal mortality
- Control of AIDS, TB and Malaria
- Universal access to family planning and contraceptive services
- Safe drinking was and sanitation

The Delivery systems
- Delivery system scan be corrupted
- One must subject them to monitoring, endorsed by local communities

The Financing
- Aid donor should be directed at communities and regions that cannot fund their own developmental efforts
- It should avoid program designs that aim to have the poorest of the poor pay for vital services
- They should be a mix of bilateral and multilateral initiatives
- Using appropriate organisations for education, agriculture and infrastructure financing

The structure of US development assistance
- Strong case for moving US development assistance to a new, separate, cabin level department for International Sustainable Development
- This would house important organisations
- Case for this dept:
- The need to upgrade US development assistance as a pillar of US national security
- Need to improve US gvt management and expertise in public health, climate change, agronomy, demography, environmental engineering, and economic development
- Need to work with similar depts world-wide
- The need to depoliticise development assistance
- Need for coherent US policies that impact international sustainable development

- USAID currently politicised (Iraq and Israel-Palestine)
- This dept. would bring together aid programs
- Bolster technical competence, and it would fix procurement and contracting systems
- Businesses would be encouraged to utilise their technologies

The financing of US development assistance in the next administration
- Current 100 billion dollars per year for development is inadequate to support the MDGs
- US should join the EU in setting a specific timetable for increasing aid through the period to 2015

No: George B. N. Ayittey
- Africa remains a paradox: immense economic potential and yet faltering economic progress
- Despite signs of progress, development prospects remain bleak
- Promises of wealthy nations to double aid to Africa to 50 billion dollars
- Debt relief
- African heads of state are demanding total cancellation
- Truth is that Africa really doesn't need foreign aid
- The resources it needs can be found in Africa itself

Africa's leaky begging bowl
- Has the resources to launch self-sustaining growth and prosperity
- Problem has been a leadership that is programmed to look only outside Africa (principally the West) for such resources
- Result: dependency on foreign aid
- African Union's initiatives still sought 64 billion dollar investments
- Need for the African Union to look within the continent for capital formation
- Corruption and money not going to aid, corrupt leaders keeping it for themselves
- African Union report claimed that Africa loses an estimated 148 billion dollars annually to corrupt practices (25% of the continent's GDP)
- Civil wars also cost Africa at least 15 billion annually in lost output, wreckage of infrastructure and refugee crises
- Misguided agricultural policies and neglect of peasant agriculture has led to increased food import spending
- All of this accumulated loss overshadows the 64 billion NEPAD sought in investments from the West

Monumental leadership failure
- Foreign aid business has become a massive fraud
Donors are being duped
- Officials knew that about 30% of investments went right in to the pockets of corrupt leaders
- Monumental leadership failure remains the primary obstacle to Africa's development
- Has destroyed Africa's productive base
- Police bribed in the accusation of corruption

Acrobatics on reform
- Efforts to stem corruption in Nigeria began making headlines in August 2004
- Three out of every four lawmakers are corrupt
- Ask these leaders to develop their countries, and they will develop their pockets
- Reform process has stalled through vexatious chicanery, will-full deception and vaunted acrobatics
- Without genuine political reform, more African countries will implode

Better ways of helping Africa
- Smart aid: empowers African civil society and community-based groups to monitor aid money and to instigate reform from within
- Requires arming these entities with information and with the freedom and the institutional means to unchain themselves from the vicious grip of repression, corruption and poverty
- Need a free and independent media
- An independent electoral commission, an independent central bank, an efficient professional civil service, and a neutral, professional armed security force
From Environment to Biosphere
- Environmental discussion from the 1960s onwards focused in part of the human disruptions of parts of this environment
- Concern about wasting, running out of key minerals, fuel supplies and even food added worries about pollution
- Most governments now have environment departments
- How society is organised does get discussed, but frequently in terms of the appropriate role for experts and government regulations
- most of the distinctions used do not help to describe our present predicament or help to try an work out how to proceed in particular circumstances
- Human activity has become a force of nature, changing planet to the extent that geologists are discussing a new period in earth's history
- Humanity is deciding what kind of planet future generations will live in
- We are playing God, choosing which life forms will exist in the future

Climate change
- Climate change emphasises how human activity is causing changes in our planet
- Role of greenhouse gasses
- Humans are reversing the long term trend of using petroleum, coal and natural gas
- By turning rocks into air, we are changing the makeup of the atmosphere and in the process changing the systems that drive the biosphere's climate and creating a new set of circumstances for humanity

Capitalism and industrialisation
- Coal has been used for centuries, but since the beginning of the industrial revolution it has had noticeable effect on the earth's atmosphere
- Accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
- Carboniferous capitalism
- Cars have become symbols of modernity, but consume a very substantial part of the energy used in contemporary society

Accelerating change and unpredictable effects
- Climate change has affected large portions of daily life and occupation
- The phenomenon of global warming: CO2 starts to accumulate
- Estimated to get as high as 500 parts per million in the atmosphere
- Many of the likely responses to increased atmospheric temperatures will be neither gradual nor predictable
- Heating is having effects on the polar regions
- Warming of ocean water and melting of ice on land raises sea levels
- Another possible effect: severity of large storms
- Emergency measures do frequently save lives and reduce the damage to property
- Example of Cuba and the flexible system of neighbourhood and community responsibility

- UN and the environment:
- Conference on the human environment 1972
- Kyoto Protocol nor the Framework Convention have not been effective

How do we frame the issue in terms of global politics?

Environmental history:
- Ecological imperialism by Alfred Crosby
- Matters of imperialism are linked directly to the ecological consequences of European conquest
- The history of imperialism is all about changing landscapes and ecologies
- For example, introduction of species to new environments has altered them
- Environments were rendered tame and safe for European settlement
- But this expansion of human control over environments and the conversion of wilderness into tamed landscape is a larger part of human experience as agriculture has gradually eliminated hunter gatherer peoples into marginal areas

Indigenous perspectives
- In this process, not only have species been eradicated, but indigenous cultures have also perished
- Much of expansion was done at the expense of the indigenous cultures that were there before Europeans encountered them
- Key assumptions in the conquest of the Americas: land Europeans were entering was empty since it wasn't being farmed or used productively

- Petroleum has become an essential commodity
- Some of the oil wells in current use are in remote places where indigenous peoples live
- These peoples have been involved in many struggles against the environmental despoliation caused by wells and pipelines
-America is at war in the Middle East in part to protect an unsustainable global society

Challenging carboniferous capitalism
- We can no longer operate on the assumption that there is a separation between us and the planet
- There is no external nature that we can manipulate
- Without having to deal with the consequences
- However, as much as this is accepted, the use of fossil fuels has continued apace
- Negotiation of climate change has been ineffective
- The political and economic arguments against tackling environmental change have usually asserted that change is simply too expensive
- Currently no mechanism in human affairs to decide on what should be produced, or how and where to ensure that catastrophe is avoided
- Global agreements on climate change are attempts to rectify this gap
- They mostly look to limit damage rather than change modes of living so as not to damage in the first place
- Issuing carbon use permits, and allowing businesses to trade those that they don't use should in theory encourage efficiency improvements

- Facing major changes in the circumstances of human existence demands that different questions be posed, and the big issues of how to live collectively in a changing biosphere are discussed much more carefully
- We need institutions that arrange matters so that we produce the things we actually need to live well without completely disrupting natural cycles in the biosphere
- We are living in a biosphere that our actions are reshaping
- We need to rethink these modern assumptions if we are to shape the Anthropocene in ways that ensure human civilisation continues
- No longer just a matter of pollution and resource constraints
- Indigenous lessons: inhabiting rather than controlling
- Ecological footprints of individual states vary
- Developed countries biggest emitters of CO2
- Rendered more unsustainable by the process of globalisation
- Freer trade can also have environmental consequences by disrupting local ecologies and livelihoods
- Globalisation has promoted the sharing of knowledge and the influential presence of non-governmental organisations in global environmental politics
- Global problems need global solutions, yet local actions remains vital

Environmental issues on the international agenda: a brief history
- In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, international environmental politics was strictly limited, but from around 1960 its scope expanded as environmental problems acquired a transnational and then a global dimension
- The process was reflected in and stimulated by the three great UN conferences of 1972, 1992, and 2002, whose most important role was to make the connection between the international environmental and development agendas, as expressed in the important concept of sustainable development
- International environmental politics reflected the issue-attention cycle in developed countries and relied heavily on increasing scientific knowledge
- UNEP created in 1972 out of first UN meeting

The functions of international environmental cooperation
- Intl cooperation establishes governance regimes to regulate transboundary environmental problems and sustain the global commons
- They encompass more than formal agreements between states
- The pursuit of power, status and wealth is rarely absent from international deliberations
- This is often neglected in discussions of international environmental cooperation, even though many of the great international gatherings reflect struggles for national and organisational advantage
- Organisations seek to maintain their financial and staff resources as well as their place within the UN system

Transboundary trade and pollution control
- Regulation of transboundary environmental problems is the longest-established function of international cooperation, reflected in hundreds of multilateral, regional, and bilateral agreements providing for joint efforts to manage resources and control pollution
- Trade restrictions can be used as an instrument for nature conservation

Norm creation
- Laws and norms develop parameters for acceptable behaviour
- Example of a norm: governments should give 'prior informed consent' to potentially damaging imports
- UN Earth summits were important in establishing environmental norms
- Combines sovereignty over national resources with state responsibility for external pollution

Aid and capacity building
- Aid and technology transfer needed to promote sustainable development have seen many disappointments

Scientific understanding
- Greatest international effort to generate new and authoritative scientific knowledge has been in the area of climate change through the IPCC

Governing the commons
- The commons all have an environmental dimension as resources but also as sinks that have been increasingly degraded
- Ocean has been overfished and trashed
- Tragedy by the commons: where there is unrestricted access, people will take as much as possible and exploit it
- One may solve the problem by turning the common into private property or by nationalising it, but this is not available for the global commons

Climate change
- Only in the late 1980s did sufficient international consensus emerge to stimulate action on climate change
- IPCC predicts that if nothing is done to curb intensive fossil fuel emissions, there will be a likely rise in mean temperatures of the order of 2.4-6.4 degrees celsius by 2099
- Sea level rises and turbulent weather to be expected
- Temperatures should not increase beyond 2 degrees celsius
- Montreal Protocol shows that regime building is taking place, to be followed by a protocol
- Framework Convention on Climate change of 1992 envisaged the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and their removal by sinks
- Kyoto protocol had not only to limit industrial emission but also energy, transport and agriculture
- North-South divide also has an impact with the regime, the Montreal Protocol mediated with this by setting out the 'common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities'
- Aim of Kyoto protocol was to bind most of the developed nations, but only the EU's efforts were remarkable
- Kyoto mechanisms soon proved to inadequate
- Climate regime has been afflicted by the free rider problem: if some countries join together and agree to make cuts that are costly, then others who do not can enjoy the environmental benefits of such action without paying
- Copenhagen negotiations showed the BASIC group as key players in climate diplomacy

The environment and International Relations theory
- Neglect of environmental issues in traditional and realist IR theorising
- Those who try to explain the record of environmental regimes tend to adopt a liberal institutionalist stance
- Marxist and Gramscian writers would reject the formation of global governance regimes and place focus on the state system as part of the problem, and focus on the study in which global capitalism is damaging to the environment
- Scholars are now also interested in the extent to which the environment in general and particular environmental problems are now being seen as security issues, and whether the securitization of the environment is something to be welcomed

- Environmental issues now have a central place on the international agenda
- Climate change perceived to be at least the equal of any other issue as the most important faced by humankind
- Rise of environmental issues is associated with globalisation
- International response to environmental change has been in the form of attempts to arrange global environmental governance through extensive cooperation
- Since Cold War, number of wars have decreased
- However, some present and displaying new characteristics

The utility of warfare
- In the modern era of history, war has traditionally been seen as a brutal form of politics, a way in which states sought to resolve certain issues in IR
- However, in the Cold War period, they didn't take this approach
- They were a response to rather more amorphous and less predictable threats such as terrorism, insurgencies, and internal crises
- Carl von Clausewitz: argued that the fundamental nature of war as the use of violence in pursuit of political goals is immutable
- Nature of war refers to the constant, universal and inherent qualities that ultimately shape war as a political instrument throughout the ages, such as violence, chance and uncertainty
- The forms of war relate to the impermanent circumstantial and adaptive features that war develops, and that account for the different periods of warfare throughout history, each displaying attributes determined by socio-political and historical preconditions, while also influencing those conditions
- He also distinguished between the objective and subjective nature of war
- Objective: comprising elements common to all wars
- Subjective: comprising elements that make each war unique
- For Clausewitz, the novel characteristics of war were not the result of new inventions, but of new ideas and social conditions
- Wars are a socially constructed form of large-scale human group behaviour and must be understood within the wider contexts of their political and cultural environments
- In era of globalisation, new fields of warfare have emerged
- Non-state actors have transformed both cyberspace and the global media into crucial battlegrounds, alongside terrestrial military and terrorist operations
- The tangible capacity for war-making has also been developing
- Military technology has also been developing, impact on scale and size of weapons and armies

- Hedley Bull's: organised violence carried on by political units against each other
- Wright: a conflict among political groups, especially sovereign states, carried on by armed forces of considerable magnitude, for a considerable period of time

The nature of war
- What has changed in the nature of war?
- large scale wars easy to identify, but lower in the spectrum of violence, it begins to overlap with other forms of conflict such as terrorism, insurgency, criminal violence, etc
- war always involves violence, but not all violence can be described as war

War and society
- War is a form of social and political behaviour
- Contemporary warfare takes place in a local context, but it is also played out in wider fields and influenced by non-governmental organisations, intergovernmental organisations, regional and global media, and users of the Internet
- In many ways, wars are fought in the media
- War is paradoxical, makes people kill each other and cooperate at the same time

Modernity and warfare
- Each period affects war differently
- Modern period of wars was characterised by the rise of nationalism and increasingly centralised and bureucratic state with rapidly rising populations
- Populations were also seen as the enemies
- Another feature: warfare was governed by rules (development of international law)

War and change
- War may create conditions conducive to social change and political modernisation
- May lead to technological advances
- Conduct of war may enrich a nation but it may also weaken it
- War is a profound agent of historical change, but it is not the fundamental driving force of history

The revolution in military affairs
- Schools noticing change in warfare notice different aspects of warfare
- Revolution in military affairs: when a nation's military seizes an opportunity to transform its strategy, military doctrine, training, education, organisation, equipment, operations, and tactics to achieve decisive military results in fundamentally new ways
- Breakthroughs in military technology mean that military operations will be conducted with such speed, precision, and selective destruction that the whole character of war will change and this will affect the way that military/political affairs are conducted in the future
- However, RMA might produce an over-simplistic picture of the complex nature of war

Military responses to the RMA
- Literature has been mostly American
- Asymmetry in warfare has produced guerilla-style conflict against technological superiority

Technology and the RMA
- Focus on military leads to an underestimation of the political and social dimensions of war
- Growing significance of drones

Postmodern war
- War is being transferred to private organisations
- Globalisation has weakened the national forms of identity that have dominated IR in the past two centuries
- Media has become increasingly important in shaping and constructing the meanings of wars
- War is being outsourced into the hands of PMCs
- Nuclear taboo, reflected in nuclear proliferation

New wars
- Kaldor has suggested that a category of new wars has emerged since the mid-1980s. Driving force behind these: globalisation
- New wars linked to the disintegration and collapse of states
- In the past decade: 95% of armed conflicts have taken place within states, rather than between them
- Clashes of cultures and identities
- War has also been feminised
- Children have become participants

Post-Westphalian warfare
- Involvement of non-state actors is striking
- Assumption that war is something that takes place between states is based on the acceptance of the Westphalian state system as the norm
- Issues of poverty linked into warfare, whether it has an impact on security or stability
- Economies of new wars are decentralised
- Participation in the war by the general population is low
- Unemployment high
- Fighting units finance themselves in other ways: open war economy of organised groups
- For some, the economic rational rather than politics is what drives the new wars
- War has become a continuation of economics by other means
- Therefore, in some conflicts, was has become the end rather than the means

- End of the cold war has altered the dominant patterns of war that had been in place for the previous fifty years
- New forms of conflict are for the most part not new as such, but have received more Western attention since the end of the cold war
- Lower casualty levels
- The fofrms of warfare that are the most prevalent currently are directly linked to the globalised international economy
- Three arguments used to justify the 2003 Iraq War
- First: national security (it was developing deadly weapons)
- Second: international security (Iraq was supposed to comply with a series of UN SC resolutions and was failing)
- Third: human security (Iraqi people had suffered too long under a tyrannical regime
- Counter arguments:
- Were there really WMDs?
- Invasion of Iraq would lead to support of terrorist groups
- divisions within the Security council
- humans: could they be liberated while risking the death of many?
- After WMDs were not found, only base was human security
- Set against the chaos left after the Iraq was
- US wanting to transform Iraq into a liberal democracy
- Concern of this article: cases made for war are not simply surface forth, designed to beguile and bemuse public and wider international opinion
- Argument: a vital source of legitimacy is evidence that any force is being used in pursuit of essentially liberal values
- Coalition leaders felt that they were on firm ground using humanitarian arguments to justify a substantial and potential hazardous military operation in Iraq
- Potential sources of legitimacy: can be summarised by the concepts of national, international and human security
- Protagonists will try to show that their preferred course supports all three, even though in practice they may have to be weighed against each other
- Understanding these normative streams is essential if sense is to be made of contemporary debates about the legitimate use of armed force
- Normative streams associated with national and international security, as reflected in traditional IR theory, take familiar forms while that within the area of human security has yet to be established, because they focus on the structures of power within states rather than between states
- In terms of human security, strongest theme to emerge is the responsibility to protect the weak and vulnerable
- Wars conducted for this purpose are called liberal wars
- In liberal wars, the effects and consequences are illiberal
- Have events since 9/11 transformed the debate?

The human security agenda
- Traditional IR theory has assumed that for states, national security is the prime value because it deals with threats to their very existence
-Stable international order is the goal of international security
- This contest concerns the best way of securing the rights of states
- The rights of individuals or of groups do not count for much
- From the national perspective, these rights must be subservient to those of the state, especially at time of national emergency
- However, a national security agenda must be about more than external enemies
- States are often afraid of internal threats
- Thus, needs of international and human security clash
- Human security streams blame other aspects which national and international security are not concerned with
- For example, class, religion, ethnicity, language, democracy and free trade
- To incorporate these issues into national and international agenda is to attempt to rebalance political structures of the country, in favour of the weak and vulnerable
- This tendency has been present since the end of the Cold War
- Clinton administration wanted to spread greater democratisation as that would lead to peace
- Same was followed by the Bush administration
- Declared a war on tyranny
- Such a war does not require military operations
- Interventionist agenda felt throughout political spectrum
- Challenge to the previous consensus that there should be no interference in the internal affairs of other states, and that, even if confined to non-military means, and violation of this principle was detrimental to international order
- wars conducted in pursuit of a humanitarian agenda, and which are likely to lead to pressures for a domestic political reform and reconstructions are liberal wars
- Focuses on the balance of power within a state rather than between states, and can thus be presented as rescuing whole populations
- They are initiated because values are being affronted
- Wars of choice rather than of survival

Liberalism and neo-conservatism
- Describing such interventions as liberal wars raises a number of objections
- A liberal war is a misnomer, urge to war is associated with neo-conservaties
- However, origins of neo-conservatism are liberal. Lie in response to a section of the Democratic party to the foreign policy debates of the early 1970s
- Overall, naming it liberal is correct

Liberalism and European moderation
- Another objection: in Europe liberalism is more associated with the international security than the human security agenda
- Liberal not so interventionist in this region
- However, same applies

Unnatural wars
- Wars are also inherently illiberal in their effects and their consequences

A liberal war on terror?
- Liberal attitudes to war reflect the combined impact of the ideological currents at play at different stages in the history of the international system as well as the contemporary configurations of power
- Now, rather than defending weak states against aggressors one protects the vulnerable
- Contemporary diplomatic discourse takes the form of establishing legitimate conditions
- Cases for war in Afghanistan and Iraq have been based on the need to prevent further terrorist attacks
- Ideological threat to liberal values is not at the same level as Nazism or Communism because it is not backed by a powerful state
- Although concerns about terrorism and weapons of civil destruction appear to put Western security interests to the fore, they link back to the concerns that might prompt the liberal wars in two critical respects
1. Terrorism feeds off the conflicts of the troubled regions of the world
2. There is an underlying theme that attacks on those unable to defend themselves must always be condemned and those who perpetrate such crimes must be restrained and brought to justice

In sum:
- Stress on democracy and human rights has become a feature of legitimacy of liberal wars
- The advantage of stressing the importance of the liberal dimension is that it sets the standards for Western governments, against which they should be judged when putting civilians at risk or in their treatment of prisoners
- We are entering a new stage where all wars Western powers get involved in will take on aspects of liberal wars
- The legitimate use of armed force will be in support of liberal values, and in particular against those preparing for, supporting or engaging in acts of civil destruction
- Relationship between terrorism and globalisation is difficult to describe
- Inaccurate to suggest globalisation is responsible for terrorism
- Terrorism exploits globalisation
- Terrorism is a global problem, must be combatted as such

- Terrorism: characterised by the use of violence
- Violence takes many forms
- Most disagreements about terrorism are in its purposes
- Defining it can be hard because many terrorist groups compete
- Reaching consensus on what constitutes terrorism is difficult
- Legitimacy of terrorist means and methods is the foremost reason for disagreement
- Some view terrorist acts as legitimate only if they meet criteria associated with revisionist interpretations of just war
- Realists suggest that the political violence used by terrorist groups is illegitimate on the basis that states alone have monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force
- Designed to achieve political change
- Weakest form of irregular warfare with which to alter the political landscape
-Some terrorist attacks have promoted political change
- Terrorist groups risk fading into obscurity if they don't do anything newsworthy
- Definition: the use of violence by sub-state groups to inspire fear, by attacking civilians or symbolic targets, for purposes such as drawing attention to a grievance, provoking a severe response, or wearing down their opponent's moral resolve, to effect political change
- Technologies of globalisation have been used by terrorists to increase their reach

Terrorism: from transnational to global phenomenon (1968-2001)
- Three factors led to the birth of transnational terrorism in 1968
- The expansion of commercial air travel, the availability of televised news coverage, and broad political and ideological interests among extremists that intersected around a common cause
- Skyjackings became common because almost no one checked for passports
- States acquiesced to terrorist demands
- Cooperation, between IRA and ETA
- Need for media coverage, increasingly spectacular attacks
- Post-Cold War, state law enforcement and paramilitary force were effectively effective in combating terrorism

Terrorism: the impact of globalisation
- Al-Qaeda was significant, however, after the death of Osama bin Laden, it's become more of a loose network
- Now employs 'franchises' all around Islamic areas
- Threat links to globalisation: culture, economics and religion

Cultural explanations
- Culture one of the reasons why terrorism has been successful
- Rejection of materialist values
- Cultural identity
- Free market capitalism overwhelms the identity of groups
- Islamic civilisation
- However, victims of militant Islamic terrorist violence have been other Muslims and not Western 'others'

Economic explanations
- Global economic decisions can be unfavourable to underdeveloped nations
- Resort to other markets
- Fanon: power imbalances would exist as long as inequalities existed
- Terrorist violence thus motivated by such
- Terrorist organisations sometimes provide a lot of money

Religion and 'new' terrorism
- Emergence of religious reasons to kill 'infidels
- 'Global jihad': reaction to the perceived oppression of Muslims worldwide
- Two choices: adopt Western values, or preserve their spiritual purity by rebelling
- Secular states cannot threaten materially that which the terrorists value spiritually
- They seek to replace the normative structure of society
- However, purpose still remains uncertain: what do they want? more power? for foreign forces to leave?
- Some want to assume power of states and impose Sharia law

Globalisation, technology and terrorism
- Technologies have improved the capability of groups in the following areas: proselytising, coordination, security, mobility and lethality

- Expansion of the Internet allows groups to further their reach
- Have also expanded the volume, range, and sophistication of propaganda materials
- Showing attacks through videos
- Music and inspirations for jihad

- Internet has enabled terrorist cells to mount coordinated attacks in different countries
- Can work independently and cooperate at long distances
- Has allowed Al Qaeda to abandon its fixed hierarchy towards a virtual global militant Islamic 'community of practice'

- Has been maintained by limiting communication or using secure lines
- Use of anonymity protection services
- Private chat rooms

- Reduced size and increased capabilities of personal electronics also give terrorists mobility advantages
- Terrorist use of commercial transportation
- Use of containers

- Biggest concern: use of WMDs
- Al Qaeda threat of use of biological and chemical weapons
- State sponsorship no longer required, terrorists learning how to produce attacks and weapons more effectively
-Virtual jihad academy
- IEDs (improvised explosive devices)

Combating terrorism
- Collective action by states has been successful
- Normative actions has not been
- Establishment of the International Civil Aviation Organisation to improve information-sharing and legal cooperation
- Interpol
- However, most initiatives and responses throughout this decade were largely unilateral, regional or ad hoc in nature
- Best solution is to pool resources together in a coalition of the willing
- Presence of drones
- Military force should only be used in extreme circumstances: may have negative consequences
- One must also attack terrorism virtually

- Globalisation has increased the technical capabilities of terrorists, but it has not altered the fundamental fact that terrorism represents the extreme views of a minority of the global population
- Globalisation has changed the scope of terrorism but not its nature