1

2

Conference Proceedings:Order and Disorder in the International System

The conference on “Order and Disorder in the International System” was held on March 11th, 2016 in the Investcorp Building at St Antony’s College. The conference was divided into three sections: The first section in-troduced the topic of order and disorder and international system, the second focused on European integration and disintegration, and the third discussed the rise of non-state actors. The conference was held in association with the John Smith Trust, which supported 22 young professionals who participated as part of the Associate Fellowship in Good Governance for GCC Countries.

The keynote speech was delivered by Margaret MacMillan, Warden of St Antony’s College, and focused on the im-portance of employing history to inform ourselves of con-temporary affairs. Although history never repeats itself, it echoes, and as Mark Twain puts it, “it rhymes.” MacMillan started by looking back to the pre-1914 era in internation-al relations. There was tremendous excitement in human and technological progress, a belief that humans seemed to be moving beyond open conflict and war as states settled disputes through arbitration while legal and institutional frameworks began to really develop around a number of treaties. While people were hopeful, they were also worried about financial and human migration and concerned over

Eugene Rogan, Professor of Modern Middle Eastern History and senior member of OxGAPS, opened the con-ference by welcoming the John Smith Associate Fellows and thanking the John Smith Trust for its support. Ro-gan noted that it was important to see the Gulf as an integral part of the international community; he explained that it influences trends which impact the rest of the world—such as the rise of non-state actors—and therefore an important area of study. Dennis Sammut, Special Adviser to the John Smith Trust, also gave welcoming re-marks. He outlined the aims of the John Smith Trust which center on good governance, cutting across partisan politics. He also stressed the importance of the Gulf as a complex, emerging region which needed to be engaged with on an equal footing.

3

FIRST PANEL: Order and Disorder in the International System

Chaired by Eugene Rogan, Director of the Middle East Centre at St. Antony’s College, University of Oxford

The first panel started with Jerome Ravetz, Associate Fel-low of the Institute for Science, Innovation and Society at Oxford, discussing the themes of faith and ignorance. Ravetz set out how faith and ignorance were closely inter-twined by using the example of the 2007 financial crash, when, according to him, faith in mathematics led to an ig-norance of ignorance itself. Ravetz then traced reason back to Descartes, who lived in a period of deep religious con-flict wherein knowledge, certainty, and truth were increas-ingly undermined and questioned. This insecurity chipped away at the very basis of society in the 17th century. From this emerged Descartes’ faith in mathematical reasoning. Looking through the history of science, Ravetz saw ever increasing complexity exemplified in abstruse mathemat-ical models used to approximate financial markets. Confi-

dence in these models, and a failure to admit that we cannot fully understand the markets, is also a problem. Ravetz explained that, “the answer is philosophical…that we have to recover from this blind faith in science and become comfortable with ignorance” and concluded that, “the awareness of ignorance is the beginning of wisdom.”

the speed of change taking place. MacMillan noted similar trends today with fears over expanding globaliza-tion. She ended the speech with a warning that we should not become complacent because it is all too easy for past mistakes to be made again.

Jeff Crisp, Research Associate at Oxford’s Refugee Studies Centre, was next on the panel and discussed the Syrian ref-ugee crisis. Crisp found the scale of the issue overwhelming, with 5 million refugees registered in the MENA region and 6 million internally displaced within Syria—the UN is appeal-ing for over $7 billion of funding for Syrian refugees this year. According to Crisp, the situation does not look positive and though the recent ceasefire seems to be holding, the position of refugees in surrounding countries is tenuous and donor fatigue is increasing. Some aspects of the crisis turned out better than expected. Its social and political impact in the re-gion, for example, has been less destructive than was expect-ed. Crisp considered Lebanon, which has a weak economy and a political system riven with sectarian rivalries but has managed to take in a large number of refugees (in proportion to its indigenous population). Crisp was critical of Turkey’s

1 For more, see Jerome Ravetz, Faith and Reason in the Mathematics of the Crunch. Oxford Magazine. 2008.

4

Commodore Neil Brown, former Director of Naval Staff at the UK Ministry of Defense, looked at order and disorder in the international system through his experience combating mod-ern piracy, particularly off the coast of Somalia. In some ways, efforts towards combating piracy proves the ability of the world to cooperate effectively—Brown noted that 25 nations contributed to the Combined Task Force 150’s anti-piracy mission. Common interest between different members of the international community underpinned this success, Brown explained. The situation also proved the importance of inter-national spaces to national interests, including international trade, the stability of food supplies, and protecting ecology. According to Brown, the international maritime system had a major flaw: the inability of some states to fulfill their interna-

tional duties due to a lack of capacity to enforce their own rights. For example, Malawi until recently had just a single patrol boat to manage its whole coastline and protect its fish stocks against illegal fishing. Importantly, in this instance, one state’s failures harmed the wider international community.

Lucas Kello, Senior Lecturer in International Relations at the University of Oxford, detailed the increasing importance of cyber-security to the world, particularly in the military sphere. Looking over the history of technological advances, it was possible to see a time lag in the theories relating to those advances. According to Kello, “usually behind strategic blun-ders is bad theory of new technology.” Theories and strategies related to technology are just as important as the material ca-pabilities themselves. For example, in World War II, Germany was able to employ tanks to defeat France in just 6 weeks de-spite inferior numbers because of far more effective armored warfare doctrines. This same lag between technological ad-vance and theory can be seen in the cyber world today. Kello exemplified this lag with one of Germany’s contemporary cy-ber security policy documents, which was filled with misconceptions and flaws. Instability in the international system from cyber sources was not going to diminish anytime soon, he concluded.

Sam Daws, director of the Project on UN Governance and Reform at Oxford’s Centre for International Studies, set out his views on the UN as one of the key actors in the interna-tional system. The UN could be seen from many angles: as a forum for discussion, a legitimizer of global norms, and a provider of services such as global peacekeeping, among other roles. Daws found several challenges currently fac-ing the UN such as: ensuring there are adequate rules and institutions regarding the refugee crisis in Syria; the orga-nization’s ability to look beyond short-term fixes; and the organization’s ability to respond to crises in middle income countries such as Syria, Lebanon, and Turkey. Daws held

recent refugee deal, viewing it as a way for more prosperous nations to shift the burden onto less prosperous ones and of undermining the principles of the 1951 Refugee Convention. Responsibility needs to be shared, and Crisp gave the Canadian refugee resettlement system as an example of what can be achieved, noting its recent expansion from 25,000 to 60,000 places for Syrian refugees.

5

SECOND PANEL: European (dis)Integration?

Chaired by Paola Mattei, Fellow of the European Studies Centre at St. Antony’s College, University of Oxford

Othon Anastasakis, Director of South East European Stud-ies at St. Antony’s, considered the impact of the Greek cri-sis on the EU and the implications of a Grexit. Greece’s left wing government has tried to follow its ideological found-ing in accepting as many refugees as possible. However, the hundreds of thousands it has accepted are pushing it toward the brink of collapse. Despite such challenges, Anastasakis explained that Greece remains committed to democracy though the reform of its institutions. The Greek people also remain committed to the Eurozone but trust levels have plummeted—a Eurobarometer survey carried out by An-astasakis showed that trust for the EU among Greeks has fallen from 60% of the population ten years ago to just un-der 20% today. The situation in Greece is matched in oth-er parts of Europe’s periphery, such as Spain and Portugal. This prompted the European Central Bank’s recently announced stimulus package. Anastasakis also found it worrying that economic issues have now become so politicized. Recent Finnish economic difficulties arose from troubles with Russia—however, it was Finland’s relationship with the EU and it membership in the Eu-rozone which took center stage in the national debate over what the country should do, not the economics of the situation.

that the future of the UN as part of the international system does not look positive—though the 2015 Paris agreement showed a more flexible UN at work. He concluded by outlining possible reforms to the UN’s struc-ture, including expanding the number of powers with a permanent UN Security Council seat and reducing the power of a permanent member’s veto.

Nick Witney, Senior Policy Fellow at the European Coun-cil on Foreign Relations, examined Britain’s relationship with the EU as part of the debate leading up to the mem-bership referendum. Witney voiced his personal desire for Britain to stay in the EU, though his own work examining EU foreign policy left him critical of some aspects of the organization, notably its bureaucracy. Witney emphasized the importance of the EU’s economic and security benefits and criticized the British media’s persistent critical narra-tive over the past 40 years, one which is further fueled by governments quick to blame their own problems on Eu-rope. Witney found that the debate over the EU in Britain should be led by the head rather than the heart. A vote to leave would be a strong indication of Britain’s withdrawal from foreign affairs and international relations rather than

a new start as the “buccaneering nation” which some envision. This turn has already been seen in Britain’s lack of involvement in situations such as the conflict in Ukraine. According to Witney, the world’s harsh environ-ment—financial crisis, decline of the West, and rise of rogue states—means that it is more important than ever to stay a part of the international system and the EU.

6

Julian Hargreaves, Research Associate at Cambridge’s Centre of Islamic Studies, looked at the rise of Islamophobia and its impact on stability in the EU. First off, Hargreaves set out his desire to have more evidence-based discussions over issues such as Islamophobia. Hargreaves also wanted to move away from talking about “Islam” as a removed concept rather than Muslims as humans against whom abuse is directed. Islam-ophobia can be expressed in a number of ways, according to Hargreaves. Prejudice can manifest institutionally, through the police—stopping and searching disproportionate num-bers of young Muslim men for instance—or through the criminal justice system. It can also arise elsewhere, such as in the media, arts industry, and within society at the level of daily social interaction. Hargreaves asserted that it is im-portant not to define Muslims through Islam alone. Ethnici-ty, socio-economic backgrounds, and education are important factors when considering individuals, and even the overuse of the term “Islamophobia” could reinforce negative stereotypes.

Jan Zielonka concluded the panel by considering the rise of nationalism across Europe and the consequences for the functioning of the EU. Zielonka criticized the politici-zation of nationalism and the way it is defined by political needs. Zielonka found defining a “nationalist” tricky, ask-ing if David Cameron or Boris Johnson are nationalists. It is certainly easier to label some in Europe as nationalist, said Zielonka, such as Marie Le Pen, but noted that such labels do no leave room to examine other policies, such as the National Front’s economic strategy. Zielonka saw the EU as facing a turning point in its history and was close to the limits to which the nation-state could remain the driving force of international integration. The nation-state must be prepared to kill itself off, according to Zielon-ka. The difficulty is that small-scale reform of the EU ap-

pears pointless in a system that is so complex, massive, and interconnected. However, at the same time major reform seems impossible because of that same complexity. The future does not look bright in the current context for the EU, but given a change in circumstance, Zielonka believed reform continues to be possible.

THIRD PANEL: The Rise of Non-State Actors

Chaired by Adeel Malik, Fellow at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies

Annette Idler, Director of the Changing Character of War Programme at Oxford, addressed the nature of non-state actors and their behavioral patterns. She began by noting that non-state actors such as the Islamic State are now often perceived as significant threats on par with legitimate state actors. This complicates the nature of conflict and the web of actors with which a state must contend. Idler defined “non-state” actors as groups of at least three individuals with some organized structure that persist over time seeking to challenge the state

7

Filippo Dionigi, a Fellow at LSE’s Middle East Centre, spoke on Hezbollah and its nature as a state within a state. He found that myriad factors led to the group’s creation: the Iranian Revolution, the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the Lebanese Civil War and domestic politics, prominent institutional fra-gility, and the socio-political context of the Shia population in Lebanon. He noted the domestic, international, and global implications of the organization. On a domestic level, Hez-bollah has undergone a “socialization” from roughly 1992 to 2005 in which the organization has gained political legit-imacy within the parliament and other political entities. On an international level, the organization has become a central aspect of the foreign policies of Syria and Iran. He saw non-state actors often as clients of foreign states. Dionigi included that Hezbollah has long been capable of not only guerrilla warfare, but also all-out war with Israel, further blurring the definition of a non-state actor. He noted further that, “Non-state actors emerge out of state fragility…and conditions that allow them,” pointing to the necessity of strong state functions in order to overcome the attractiveness of non-state entities.

monopoly on violence. She advocated broadening this definition beyond its usual limitations to include gangs, cartels, and other criminal groups. Idler saw three major trends in contemporary non-state groups: their fur-ther territorial proliferation, an increasingly transnational nature (see “Islamic State”), and the use of informa-tion technology to coordinate. Idler then continued to describe the general behavioral patterns to which non-state actors adhere. Cooperation among non-state actors typically relies upon their interests, personal bonds between different groups’ leaders, a group’s ideological values (such as nationalism or revolution), and control over specific territories by different groups. Idler noted the important implications of successful non-state actors, including the tendency for the government to lose legitimacy. Idler presented two overarching recom-mendations. First, we must understand alliance structures in order to stay ahead of the shifting, fluid nature of non-state groups instead of lagging behind. Secondly, we must focus on the peaceful but illicitly governed regions of a country in order to oust non-state actors instead of working only where there is violence.

Michael Stephens, Head of the Royal United Services Insti-tute (RUSI) in Qatar, weighed in on the debate regarding whether “Islamic State” is a non-state actor or a de-facto state. He declared that it could be considered both, and that it does not truly meet the definition of either. According to Stephens, “[IS] likes to be an amorphous, shifting movement that the West does not know how to contain.” Islamic State could be considered borderless, considering its branches in Yemen, Sinai, and elsewhere. At the same time, the organi-zation has proven incredibly resilient due to its ability to ac-tually govern. At this point, Stephens noted, “Islamic State’s” budget is mostly self-sufficient, with donations accounting for less than two percent of its overall value. Stephens saw the current “Islamic State” as a refinement of the “genetic code” inherited from Al-Qaeda central and the 2012 Al-Qaeda on

the Arab Peninsula “Islamic Emirate” in Yemen. Stephens found that IS may even have its own foreign policy of “neocolonialism” given its desire to reach and take territory abroad. In another development of Al-Qaeda strategy, whereas AQAP targeted areas in Yemen where the central government was weak, IS initially hit where governance was strong, in Mosul and eastern Syria. In closing, Stephens noted a change since the 1980s and the war in Afghanistan in the ability of militants to understand and manipulate their operational climate. Accord-ing to him, IS has “set the bar very high” for militants several decades in the future. The IS experience could be

8

Names of participating Fellows from the John Smith Trust Associate Fellowship in Good Governance for GCC Countries (in alphabetical order):

Abdullah Al Abdouli; Abdullah Al Ajmi; Ahmed Alghasra; Amna Sadiq; Balsam Al-Ayoub; Batool Hasan; Daen Al-Kuwari; Eiman Al Asad; Fahad bin Saad al Saud; Fajer Ahmed; Fatma Al Arimi; Lina Al Qaddoumi; Lolwah Alkhater; Mariam Abuidrees; Maryam Al Subaiey; Mohamed Al Sabab; Mohammed Al Sayed; Noor Alfares; Roua Al-Hayki; Sara Masry; Sharif Al Farsi; Yazeed Saud Binmoeql

used either to counter the narrative of jihadist ideology, or simultaneously could be a warning of future things to come.

The Conference concluded with remarks by Adel Hamaizia, Vice Committee Chairman of OxGAPS, followed by remarks from two of the participating Associate Fellows from the John Smith Trust Associate Fellowship in Good Governance for GCC Countries, Lina Al Qaddoumi, and Fajer Ahmed.

Oxford Gulf & Arabian Peninsula Studies Forum | St Antony’s College, 62 Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6JF, UK

www.oxgaps.org

Conference on

“Order and Disorder in the International System” Friday, 11 March 2016 – St Antony’s College, University of Oxford

Investcorp Lecture Theatre

Conference Concept: The 21st century has witnessed various disruptions that have reverberated throughout the world. The conference aims to provide a wide range of views on factors affecting order in the international system. The conference starts off with topical issues of global relevance, followed by a regional focus, and concludes with a featured theme focus. Themes:

1) Order and Disorder in the International System From a technological revolution, to a financial crisis, to a refugee crisis, the international system is undergoing a series of disruptions and systemic shocks. The opening panel will focus on key trends affecting order and global governance in the 21st century, with an assessment of how they impact the world today.

2) European (dis)Integration? The EU is the most integrated region in the world and is often perceived as a successful model of integration. However, over the past few years it has been fundamentally undermined by a series of challenges. The panel will shed light on various trends affecting the EU’s stability

3) The Rise of Non-State Actors Over the past decades, non-state actors, particularly in the Middle East, have defied basic norms and conventions, in some cases making groups more powerful than the states in which they operate. The panel will explore case studies pertaining to this phenomenon, offering insights on how non-state actors impact order and political systems in the sub-regions they operate in.

Conference Programme Time Description

08:45 – 09:30 Registration and Refreshments – Hilda Besse Building lobby

09:30 – 10:00 Opening Session

Welcoming Remarks by: Dr. Eugene Rogan, Director of the Middle East Centre and Senior Member of the OxGAPS Forum Dr. Dennis Sammut, Special Adviser to the John Smith Trust

Keynote Address by Prof. Margaret MacMillan Warden of St Antony’s College, University of Oxford

10:00 – 11:30 Panel 1: Order and Disorder in the International System Chair: Dr. Eugene Rogan, Director of the Middle East Centre, St Antony’s College

Topic 1: What are the lessons of the 2008 Financial Crisis and how can science help mitigate uncertainties? Speaker: Dr. Jerome Ravetz, Associate Fellow Institute for Science, Innovation and Society, University of Oxford

Topic 2: How does the current refugee crisis impact international security? Speaker: Dr. Jeff Crisp, Research Associate Refugee Studies Centre, University of Oxford

Topic 3: How does international maritime law promote order in the international system? Speaker: Cdre. Neil Brown, CQS, and formerly Director of Naval Staff, UK Ministry of Defence

Topic 4: How is the technological revolution impacting international order? Speaker: Dr. Lucas Kello, Senior Lecturer in International Relations University of Oxford

Topic 5: Can the United Nations successfully respond to the new challenges facing the international community? Speaker: Sam Daws, Director, Project on UN Governance and Reform Centre for International Studies, University of Oxford

Oxford Gulf & Arabian Peninsula Studies Forum | St Antony’s College, 62 Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6JF, UK

www.oxgaps.org

11:30 – 11:45 Coffee Break

11:45 – 13:15 Panel 2: European (dis)Integration? Chair: Dr. Paola Mattei, Fellow of the European Studies Centre, St Antony’s College

Topic 1: How is the Greek crisis challenging the EU and what are the implications of a Grexit? Speaker: Dr. Othon Anastasakis, Director, South East European Studies at Oxford (SEESOX), St Antony’s College, University of Oxford

Topic 2: How does British Isolationism impact the EU and what are the implications of a Brexit? Speaker: Nick Witney, Co-director of European Power Programme European Council on Foreign Relations

Topic 3: How does the rise of Islamophobia impact stability in the EU? Speaker: Dr. Julian Hargreaves, Research Associate Centre of Islamic Studies, University of Cambridge

Topic 4: How does the rise of nationalism across Europe affect the functioning of the EU? Speaker: Prof. Jan Zielonka, Professor of European Politics and Ralf Dahrendorf Fellow, St Antony’s College, University of Oxford

13:15 – 14:15 Complimentary Lunch*

14:15 – 15:45 Panel 3: The Rise of Non-State Actors Chair: Dr. Adeel Malik, Fellow at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies

Topic 1: What are non-state actors and their behavioural patterns? Speaker: Dr. Annette Idler, Director of Studies Changing Character of War Programme, University of Oxford

Topic 3: State within a state? The case of Hezbollah Speaker: Dr. Filippo Dionigi, Middle East Centre London School of Economics and Political Science

Topic 4: Non-state actor or de facto state? The case of ‘Islamic State’ Speaker: Michael Stephens, Research Fellow for Middle East Studies and Head of the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) Qatar

15:45 Closing Remarks

In Partnership With