Textbook Outline

8/14/2019 Textbook Outline

1/63

Baylis, Smith and Owens: The Globalization of World Politics 4eRevision Guide

Chapter 1: Globalization and global politics

Over the last three decades the sheer scale and scope of global interconnectednesshas become increasingly evident in every sphere from the economic to the cultural.Sceptics do not regard this as evidence of globalization if that term means

something more than simply international interdependence, i.e. linkages betweencountries. The key issue becomes what we understand by the term 'globalization'.

Globalization is evident in the growing extensity, intensity, velocity, and deepeningimpact of worldwide interconnectedness.

Globalization denotes a shift in the scale of social organization, the emergence ofthe world as a shared social space, the relative deterritorialization of social,economic, and political activity, and the relative denationalization of power.

Globalization can be conceptualized as a fundamental shift or transformation in thespatial scale of human social organization that links distant communities andexpands the reach of power relations across regions and continents.

Globalization is to be distinguished from internationalization and regionalization.

The contemporary phase of globalization has proved more robust in the aftermath of9/11 than the sceptics recognize.

Contemporary globalization is a multidimensional, uneven, and asymmetricalprocess.

Contemporary globalization is best described as a thick form of globalization orglobalism.

Globalization is transforming but not burying the Westphalian ideal of sovereignstatehood. It is producing the disaggregated state.

Globalization requires a conceptual shift in our thinking about world politics from aprimarily geopolitical perspective to the perspective of geocentric or global politicsthe politics of worldwide social relations.

Global politics is more accurately described as distorted global politics because it isafflicted by significant power asymmetries.

Globalization creates a double democratic deficit in that it places limits ondemocracy within states and new mechanisms of global governance which lackdemocratic credentials.

Global politics has engendered its own global political theory which draws uponcosmopolitan thinking.

Cosmopolitanism offers an account of the desirability and feasibility of thedemocratization of global politics.

OXFORD H i g h e r E d u c a t i o n Oxford University Press, 2008. All rights reserved.


2/63


Distorted global politics can be interpreted as expressing a contest between theforces of statism and cosmopolitanism in the conduct and management of worldaffairs.



3/63


Chapter 2: The evolution of international society

'International society' is any association of distinct political communities which acceptsome common values, rules, and institutions.

It is the central concept of the 'English School' of International Relations.

Although originally coined to refer to relations among European states, the term maybe applied to many different sets of political arrangements among distinct politicalcommunities.

Elements of international society may be found from the time of the first organizedhuman communities.

Early forms of diplomacy and treaties existed in the ancient Middle East.

Relations among the city-states of ancient Greece were characterized by moredeveloped societal characteristics, such as arbitration.

Ancient China, India, and Rome all had their own distinctive international societies.

Medieval Europe's international society was a complex mixture of supranational,transnational, national, and subnational structures

The Catholic Church played a key role in elaborating the normative basis ofmedieval international society.

Islam developed its own distinctive understanding of international society.

The main ingredients of contemporary international society are the principles ofsovereignty and non-intervention and the institutions of diplomacy, the balance ofpower, and international law.

These took centuries to develop, although the Peace of Westphalia (1648) was akey event in their establishment throughout Europe.

The Napoleonic Wars were followed by a shift to a more managed, hierarchical,international society within Europe and an imperial structure in Europe's relationswith much of the rest of the world.

The League of Nations was an attempt to place international society on a moresecure organizational foundation.

The United Nations was intended to be a much improved League of Nations but thecold war prevented it from functioning as such.

Decolonization led to the worldwide spread of the European model of international

society.



4/63


The collapse of the Soviet Union completed this process.

Globalization poses serious problems for a sovereignty-based international society.

These include the challenges emanating from new forms of community, failing states

in Africa, American hyperpower, growing resistance to Western ideas, and globalpoverty and environmental issues.



5/63


Chapter 3: International history 190090

Debates about the origins of the First World War focus on whether responsibilityshould rest with the German government or whether war came because of morecomplex systemic factors.

The Paris Peace settlement failed to address the central problems of Europeansecurity, and in restructuring the European state system created new sources ofgrievance and instability.

The rise of Hitler posed challenges that European political leaders lacked the abilityand will to meet.

The German attack on the Soviet Union extended the scope and barbarity of the warfrom short and limited campaigns to extended, large-scale, and barbaricconfrontation, fought for total victory.

The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor brought America into the war in Europe andeventually led Germany into war on two fronts (again).

Debate persists about whether the atomic bomb should have been used in 1945,and about the effect that this had on the cold war.

The First World War produced the collapse of four European empires (the Russian,German, Austro-Hungarian, and the Ottoman Empire in Turkey).

Different European powers had different attitudes to decolonization after 1945:some, such as the British, decided to leave, while others sought to preserve theirempires, in part (the French) or whole (the Portuguese).

European powers adopted different attitudes to different regions/countries. Forexample, British withdrawal from Asia came much more quickly after 1945 than fromAfrica.

The process of decolonization was relatively peaceful in many cases; it led torevolutionary wars in others (Algeria, Malaya, and Angola), whose scale and ferocityreflected the attitudes of the colonial power and the nationalist movements.

The struggle for independence/national liberation became embroiled in cold warconflicts when the superpowers and/or their allies became involved, for exampleVietnam.

Whether decolonization was judged successful depends, in part, on whoseperspective you adoptthat of the European power, the independence movement,or the people themselves.

There are disagreements about when and why the cold war began, and who was

responsible.



6/63


Distinct phases can be seen in EastWest relations, during which tension and therisk of direct confrontation grew and receded.

Some civil and regional wars were intensified and prolonged by superpowerinvolvement; others may have been prevented or shortened.

The end of the cold war has not resulted in the abolition of nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons were an important factor in the cold war. How far the arms racehad a momentum of its own is a matter of debate.

Agreements on limiting and controlling the growth of nuclear arsenals played animportant role in SovietAmerican (and EastWest) relations.

Various international crises occurred in which there was the risk of nuclear war.

Judging how close we came to nuclear war at these times remains open tospeculation.



7/63


Chapter 4: From the cold war to the war on terror

The cold war was a complex relationship that assumed competition but remainedcold in large part because of the existence of nuclear weapons.

Most experts assumed the cold war would continue and were surprised when itcame to a peaceful conclusion.

There is no academic consensus as to why the cold war came to an end when it didor why it did.

The end of the cold war dividedand still dividesInternational Relations scholarsinto mainstream realists and ideas-oriented constructivists.

The term 'globalization' was rarely used before 1989 but became one of the mostpopular ways of defining international politics after the cold war.

Though globalization is a much disputed term, analysts agree that it describes aone-world system where all actors have to play by the same economic rules.

Globalization has become the master discourse of governments around the world.

Globalization has produced many winners and a large number of losers, but therewould appear to be no escaping its competitive logic.

Most experts did not anticipateand some did not look forward tothe new

American hegemony following the end of the cold war.

In spite of the spread of democracy and globalization, most US policy-makers stillviewed the world as a threatening and dangerous place during the 1990s.

After the fiasco in Somalia the majority of Americans were reluctant to use US forcesabroad.

The United States after the cold war is best described as a 'superpower without amission'.

In spite of the break-up of former Yugoslavia, Europe benefited as much from theend of the cold war as the United States.

Europeans after the cold war were divided over a series of key issues, most notablythe degree of European integration, economic strategy, and the foreign policyaspirations of the European Union.

The European Security Strategyof 2003 was one of the first serious efforts by theEU to think about its international role under conditions of globalization.

Many issues face Europe, including Turkish membership of the EU, the position ofEurope's Muslims, and China's economic challenge.



8/63


The first Russian President, Boris Yeltsin, sought a new partnership with the Westbut was often accused by his domestic enemies of not defending the Russiannational interest.

Vladimir Putin, his successor, has pursued more authoritarian policies at home,brought Russia's economic assets back under state control, and pursued a morenationalist foreign policy abroad.

A new cold war between the West and Russia is unlikely because of the importanteconomic and political changes that have occurred in Russia since the collapse ofthe USSR in 1991.

Compared to Europe after 1945, the international relations of East Asia during thecold war were highly volatile, marked by revolutions, wars, and insurgencies.

The end of the cold war left many issues in its wake and led Aaron Friedberg (1993)to conclude that Asia was primed for further rivalry.

Friedberg's thesis has been challenged as being too pessimistic: economic growth,regional integration, America's presence, and Japan's peaceful foreign policycontinue to make the region less dangerous than he suggested.

One of the big questions now facing the region and the United States is 'risingChina'. Realists insist it will challenge the status quo. Others believe it can risepeacefully.

One of the defining areas of instability during the cold war was the Third World.

With the end of the cold war the term 'Third World' has been challenged by manyanalysts.

China and India are prime examples of countries where globalization has producedhigh levels of development.

Inequality creates security challenges in the form of migration, refugees, and incertain instances, political violence directed against the more powerful West.

September 11 effectively brought the post-cold war era to an end and in the processtransformed US foreign policy.

The war to remove Saddam Hussein was sold as part of the war on terror; very fewanalysts, however, saw a connection between Iraq and 9/11.

The reasons for going to war have been much disputed, though most people nowbelieve it was a strategic error.

The longer-term impact of the Bush doctrine could very easily weaken America'sglobal position over the long term.



9/63


Chapter 5: Realism

Realism has been the dominant theory of world politics since the beginning ofacademic International Relations.

Outside the academy, Realism has a much longer history in the work of classicalpolitical theorists such as Thucydides, Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Rousseau.

The unifying theme around which all realist thinking converges is that states findthemselves in the shadow of anarchy such that their security cannot be taken forgranted.

At the end of the millennium, Realism continues to attract academicians and informpolicy-makers, although in the period since the end of the cold we have seenheightened criticism of realist assumptions.

There is a lack of consensus in the literature as to whether we can meaningfullyspeak about Realism as a single coherent theory.

There are good reasons for delineating different types of Realism.

Structural realism divides into two camps: those who argue that states are securitymaximizers (defensive realism) and those who argue that states are powermaximizers (offensive realism).

Neoclassical realists bring individual and unit variation back into the theory.

Statism is the centrepiece of Realism. This involves two claims. First, for thetheorist, the state is the pre-eminent actor and all other actors in world politics are oflesser significance. Second, state 'sovereignty' signifies the existence of anindependent political community, one which has juridical authority over its territory.Key criticism: Statism is fl awed both on empirical (challenges to state power from'above' and 'below') and normative grounds (the inability of sovereign states torespond to collective global problems such as famine, environmental degradation,and human rights abuses).

Survival: The primary objective of all states is survival; this is the supreme national

interest to which all political leaders must adhere.Key criticism: Are there no limits to what actions a state can take in the name ofnecessity?

Self-help: No other state or institution can be relied upon to guarantee your survival.Key criticism: Self-help is not an inevitable consequence of the absence of a worldgovernment; self-help is a logic that states have selected. Moreover, there arehistorical and contemporary examples where states have preferred collectivesecurity systems, or forms of regional security communities, in preference to self-help.



10/63


Chapter 6: Liberalism

The liberal tradition in political thought goes back at least as far as the thinking ofJohn Locke in the late seventeenth century. From then on, liberal ideas haveprofoundly shaped how we think about the relationship between government and

citizens.

Liberalism is a theory of both government within states and good governancebetween states and peoples worldwide. Unlike Realism, which regards the'international' as an anarchic realm, Liberals seek to project values of order, liberty,justice, and toleration into international relations.

The high-water mark of liberal thinking in international relations was reached in theinter-war period in the work of Idealists who believed that warfare was anunnecessary and outmoded way of settling disputes between states.

Domestic and international institutions are required to protect and nurture thesevalues. But note that these values and institutions allow for significant variationswhich accounts for the fact that there are heated debates within Liberalism.

Liberals disagree on fundamental issues such as the causes of war and what kind ofinstitutions are required to deliver liberal values in a decentralized, multiculturalinternational system.

An important cleavage within Liberalism, which has become more pronounced in ourglobalized world, is between those operating with a positive conception of

Liberalism, who advocate interventionist foreign policies and stronger internationalinstitutions, and those who incline towards a negative conception, which places apriority on toleration and non-intervention.

Early liberal thought on international relations took the view that the natural orderhad been corrupted by undemocratic state leaders and outdated policies such as thebalance of power. Prescriptively, Enlightenment liberals believed that a latentcosmopolitan morality could be achieved through the exercise of reason and throughthe creation of constitutional states. In addition, the unfettered movement of peopleand goods could further facilitate more peaceful international relations.

Although there are important continuities between Enlightenment liberal thought andtwentieth-century ideas, such as the belief in the power of world public opinion totame the interests of states, liberal Idealism was more programmatic. For idealists,the freedom of states is part of the problem of international relations and not part ofthe solution. Two requirements follow from their diagnosis. The first is the need forexplicitly normative thinking: how to promote peace and build a better world.Second, states must be part of an international organization, and be bound by itsrules and norms.

Central to Idealism was the formation of an international organization to facilitatepeaceful change, disarmament, arbitration, and (where necessary) enforcement.The League of Nations was founded in 1920 but its collective security system failedto prevent the descent into world war in the 1930s.



11/63


The victor states in the wartime alliance against Nazi Germany pushed for a newinternational institution to be created: the United Nations Charter was signed in June1945 by 50 states in San Francisco. It represented a departure from the League intwo important respects. Membership was near universal and the great powers were

able to prevent any enforcement action from taking place which might be contrary totheir interests.

In the post-1945 period, liberals turned to international institutions to carry out anumber of functions the state could not perform. This was the catalyst for integrationtheory in Europe and Pluralism in the United States. By the early 1970s Pluralismhad mounted a significant challenge to Realism. It focused on new actors(transnational corporations, non-governmental organizations) and new patterns ofinteraction (interdependence, integration).

Neo-liberalism represents a more sophisticated theoretical challenge tocontemporary Realism. Neo-liberals explain the durability of institutions despitesignificant changes in context. In their view, institutions exert a causal force oninternational relations, shaping state preferences and locking them into cooperativearrangements.

Democratic peace Liberalism and neo-liberalism are the dominant strands in liberalthinking today.



12/63


Chapter 7: Contemporary mainstream approaches: neo-realism and neo-liberalism

The neo-neo debate has been the dominant focus in international relations theoryscholarship in the USA for the last 1015 years.

More than just theories, neo-realism and neo-liberalism represent paradigms orconceptual frameworks that shape individuals' images of the world and influenceresearch priorities and policy debates and choices.

There are several versions of neo-realism or neo-liberalism.

Neo-liberalism in the academic world refers most often to neoliberal Institutionalism.In the policy world, neo-liberalism is identified with the promotion of capitalism andWestern democratic values and institutions.

Rational choice approaches and game theory have been integrated into neo-realistand neo-liberal theory to explain policy choices and the behaviour of states inconflict and cooperative situations.

Neo-realist and neo-liberal theories are status quo-oriented problem-solvingtheories. They share many assumptions about actors, values, issues, and powerarrangements in the international system. Neo-realists and neo-liberals studydifferent worlds. Neorealists study security issues and are concerned with issues ofpower and survival. Neo-liberals study political economy and focus on cooperationand institutions.

Kenneth Waltz's structural realism has had a major impact on scholars inInternational Relations. Waltz claims that the structure of the international system isthe key factor in shaping the behaviour of states. Waltz's neo-realism also expandsour view of power and capabilities. However, he agrees with traditional Realistswhen he states that major powers still determine the nature of the internationalsystem.

Structural realists minimize the importance of national attributes as determinants of astate's foreign policy behaviour. To these neorealists, all states are functionallysimilar units, experiencing the same constraints presented by anarchy.

Structural realists accept many assumptions of traditional Realism. They believe thatforce remains an important and effective tool of statecraft and balance of power isstill the central mechanism for order in the system.

Joseph Grieco represents a group of neo-realists or modern realists who are criticalof neo-liberal Institutionalists who claim states are mainly interested in absolutegains. Grieco claims that all states are interested in both absolute and relative gains.How gains are distributed is an important issue. Thus, there are two barriers tointernational cooperation: fear of those who might not follow the rules and therelative gains of others.



13/63


Scholars in security studies present two versions of neo-realism or modern realism.Offensive neo-realists emphasize the importance of relative power. Like traditionalRealists, they believe that conflict is inevitable in the international system andleaders must always be wary of expansionary powers. Defensive realists are oftenconfused with neo-liberal Institutionalists. They recognize the costs of war and

assume that it usually results from irrational forces in a society. However, they admitthat expansionary states willing to use military force make it impossible to live in aworld without weapons. Cooperation is possible, but it is more likely to succeed inrelations with friendly states.

Contemporary neo-liberalism has been shaped by the assumptions of commercial,republican, sociological, and institutional Liberalism.

Commercial and republican Liberalism provide the foundation for current neo-liberalthinking in Western governments. These countries promote free trade anddemocracy in their foreign policy programmes.

Neo-liberal Institutionalism, the other side of the neo-neo debate, is rooted in thefunctional integration theoretical work of the 1950s and 1960s and the complexinterdependence and transnational studies literature of the 1970s and 1980s.

Neo-liberal Institutionalists see institutions as the mediator and the means to achievecooperation in the international system. Regimes and institutions help govern acompetitive and anarchic international system and they encourage, and at timesrequire, multilateralism and cooperation as a means of securing national interests.

Neo-liberal Institutionalists recognize that cooperation may be harder to achieve inareas where leaders perceive they have no mutual interests.

Neo-liberals believe that states cooperate to achieve absolute gains and the greatestobstacle to cooperation is 'cheating' or non-compliance by other states.

The neo-neo debate is not a debate between two polar opposite worldviews. Theyshare an epistemology, focus on similar questions, and agree on a number ofassumptions about international politics. This is an intra-paradigm debate.

Neo-liberal Institutionalists and neo-realists study different worlds of international

politics. Neo-realists focus on security and military issues. Neo-liberal Institutionalistsfocus on political economy, environmental issues, and, lately, human rights issues.

Neo-realists explain that all states must be concerned with the absolute and relativegains that result from international agreements and cooperative efforts. Neo-liberalInstitutionalists are less concerned about relative gains and consider that all willbenefit from absolute gains.

Neo-realists are more cautious about cooperation and remind us that the world isstill a competitive place where self-interest rules.



14/63


Neo-liberal Institutionalists believe that states and other actors can be persuaded tocooperate if they are convinced that all states will comply with rules and cooperationwill result in absolute gains.

This debate does not discuss many important issues that challenge some of the core

assumptions of each theory. For example, neorealism cannot explain foreign policybehaviour that challenges the norm of national interest over human interests.

Globalization has contributed to a shift in political activity away from the state.Transnational social movements have forced states to address critical internationalissues and in several situations that have supported the establishment of institutionsthat promote further cooperation, and fundamentally challenge the power of states.

Neo-realists think that states are still the principal actors in international politics.Globalization challenges some areas of state authority and control, but politics is stillinternational.

Neo-realists are concerned about new security challenges resulting from unevenglobalization, namely, inequality and conflict.

Globalization provides opportunities and resources for transnational socialmovements that challenge the authority of states in various policy areas. Neo-realists are not supportive of any movement that seeks to open critical securityissues to public debate.

Free market neo-liberals believe globalization is a positive force. Eventually, all

states will benefit from the economic growth promoted by the forces of globalization.They believe that states should not fight globalization or attempt to control it withunwanted political interventions.

Some neo-liberals believe that states should intervene to promote capitalism with ahuman face or a market that is more sensitive to the needs and interests of all thepeople. New institutions can be created and older ones reformed to prevent theuneven flow of capital, promote environmental sustainability, and protect the rights ofcitizens.



15/63


Chapter 8: Marxist theories of international relations

Marx's work retains its relevance despite the collapse of Communist Party rule in theformer Soviet Union.

Of particular importance is Marx's analysis of capitalism, which has yet to bebettered.

Marxist analyses of international relations aim to reveal the hidden workings ofglobal capitalism. These hidden workings provide the context in which internationalevents occur.

Marx himself provided little in terms of a theoretical analysis of internationalrelations.

His ideas have been interpreted and appropriated in a number of different andcontradictory ways, resulting in a number of competing schools of Marxism.

Underlying these different schools are several common elements that can be tracedback to Marx's writings.

World-system theory can be seen as a direct development of Lenin's work onimperialism and the Latin American Dependency School.

Immanuel Wallerstein and his work on the modern world-system makes a keycontribution to this school.

Wallerstein's work has been developed by a number of other writers who have builton his initial foundational work.

Drawing upon the work of Antonio Gramsci for inspiration, writers within an 'Italian'school of International Relations have made a considerable contribution to thinkingabout world politics.

Gramsci shifted the focus of Marxist analysis more towards superstructuralphenomena. In particular, he explored the processes by which consent for aparticular social and poitical system was produced and reproduced and through theoperation of hegemony. Hegemony allows the ideas and ideologies of the rulingstratum to become widely dispersed, and widely accepted, throughout society.

Thinkers such as Robert W.Cox have attempted to 'internationalize' Gramsci'sthought by transposing several of his key concepts, most notably hegemony, to theglobal context.

Critical theory has its roots in the work of the Frankfurt School.

Habermas has argued that emancipatory potential lies in the realm of

communication and that radical democracy is the way in which that potential can beunlocked.



16/63


Andrew Linklater has developed on critical theory themes to argue in favour of theexpansion of the moral boundaries of the political community and has pointed to theEuropean Union as an example of a post-Westphalian institution of governance.

New Marxism is characterized by a direct (re)appropriation of the concepts andcategories developed by Marx.

Rosenberg uses Marx's ideas to criticize Realist theories of international relations,and globalization theory. He seeks to develop an alternative approach whichunderstands historical change in world politics as a reflection of transformations inthe prevailing relations of production.

For Benno Teschke, the study of social property relations provides the means foranalyzing the key elements of international relations, and the transitions betweenone international system and another.



17/63


Chapter 9: Social Constructivisim

Constructivists are concerned with human consciousness, treat ideas as structuralfactors, consider the dynamic relationship between ideas and material forces as aconsequence of how actors interpret their material reality, and are interested in how

agents produce structures and how structures produce agents.

Knowledge shapes how actors interpret and construct their social reality.

The normative structure shapes the identity and interests of actors such as states.

Social facts such as sovereignty and human rights exist because of humanagreement, while brute facts such as mountains are independent of suchagreements.

Social rules are regulative, regulating already existing activities, and constitutive,making possible and defining those very activities.

Social construction denaturalizes what is taken for granted, asks questions about theorigins of what is now accepted as a fact of life and considers the alternativepathways that might have produced and can produce alternative worlds.

Power can be understood not only as the ability of one actor to get another actor todo what she would not do otherwise but also as the production of identities andinterests that limit the ability of actors to control their fate.

Although the meanings that actors bring to their activities are shaped by theunderlying culture, meanings are not always fixed and the fixing of meaning is acentral feature of politics.

Although Constructivism and rational choice are generally viewed as competingapproaches, at times they can be combined to deepen our understanding of globalpolitics.

The recognition that the world is socially constructed means that Constructivists caninvestigate global change and transformation.

A key issue in any study of global change is diffusion, captured by the concern withinstitutional isomorphism and the life-cycle of norms.

Although diffusion sometimes occurs because of the view that the model is superior,frequently actors adopt a model either because of external pressures or its symboliclegitimacy.

Institutional isomorphism and the internationalization of norms raise issues ofgrowing homogeneity in world politics, a deepening international community, andsocialization processes.



18/63


Chapter 10: Alternative approaches to international theory

Theories can be distinguished according to whether they are explanatory orconstitutive and whether they are foundational or anti-foundational. As a roughguide, explanatory theories tend to be foundational and constitutive theories tend to

be anti-foundational.

The three main theories comprising the inter-paradigm debate were based on a setof positivist assumptions.

Since the late 1980s there has been a rejection of positivism.

The current theoretical situation is one in which there are three main positions: first,rationalist theories that are essentially the latest versions of the Realist and Liberaltheories; second, alternative theories that are post-positivist; and third, SocialConstructivist theories that try to bridge the gap.

Alternative approaches at once differ considerably from one another, and at thesame time overlap in some important ways. One thing that they do share is arejection of the core assumptions of rationalist theories.

Historical sociology has a long history. Its central focus is with how societies developthe forms that they do. It is basically a study of the interactions between states,classes, capitalism, and war.

Charles Tilly looks at how the three main kinds of state forms that existed at the end

of the Middle Ages eventually converged on one form, namely the national state. Heargues that the decisive reason was the ability of the national state to fight wars.

Michael Mann has developed a powerful model of the sources of state power, knownas the IEMP model.

The concerns of historical sociology are compatible with a number of the otherapproaches surveyed in this chapter including feminism and post-modernism.

Liberal feminism looks at the roles women play in world politics and asks why theyare marginalized.

Marxist/socialist feminists focus on the international capitalist system and patriarchy.

Standpoint feminists want to correct the male dominance of our knowledge of theworld.

Post-modernist feminists are concerned with gender as opposed to the position ofwomen as such. They look into the ways in which masculinity and femininity getconstructed.

Post-colonial feminists work at the intersection of gender, race, and class on a globalscale.



19/63


Lyotard defines post-modernism as incredulity towards metanarratives, meaning thatit denies the possibility of foundations for establishing the truth of statements existingoutside of discourse.

Foucault focuses on the powerknowledge relationship and sees the two asmutually constituted. It implies that there can be no truth outside of regimes of truth.How can history have a truth if truth has a history?

Derrida argues that the world is like a text in that has to be interpreted. He looks athow texts are constructed, and proposes two main tools to enable us to see howarbitrary the seemingly 'natural' oppositions of language actually are. These aredeconstruction and double reading.

Given the state-centrism and positivism of IR, post-colonial approaches have beenlargely ignored until recently as old disciplinary boundaries are breaking down.

Post-colonialism essentially focuses on the persistence of colonial forms of power incontemporary world politics, especially how the social construction of racial,gendered, and class differences uphold relations of power and subordination.

Racism, in particular, continues to operate in both obvious and sometimes subtleways in contemporary world politics but this is not captured in traditional approachesto international theory.

Post-colonial research seeks to offer positive resources for resistance to imperial

and other forms of power and not just critique.



20/63


Chapter 11: International ethics

Globalization lends support for cosmopolitan ethical theory.

Cosmopolitanism advances the idea of a universal human community in which

everybody is treated as equal.

The most important cosmopolitan thinker is Immanuel Kant.

Cosmopolitanism has both moral and political meaning.

Cosmopolitanism does not require a world state.

Cosmopolitans emphasize both positive and negative duties, usually expressed interms of responsibilities not to harm and responsibilities to provide humanitarian

assistance or hospitality.

Realism and pluralism are the two most common objections to cosmopolitan ethicsand the possibility of moral universalism.

Realists argue that necessity demands a statist ethics, restricting moral obligationsto the nation-state.

Pluralism is an 'ethics of coexistence' based on sovereignty.

There are two components of the just war tradition: jus ad bellum and jus in bello.

Just war is different from holy war.

The just war tradition contains elements of cosmopolitanism and communitarianism.

Discussions of global justice are dominated by utilitarian and Rawlsian theories.

It is not always agreed that inequality is itself a moral problem.

Cosmopolitans argue that there is a responsibility of the rich to help the poor

stemming from positive and negative duties.



21/63


Chapter 12: The changing character of war

War has been a central feature of human history.

Since the end of the cold war both the frequency and lethality of war has shown a

sharp decline.

War between the great powers in particular has become much more unlikely than inprevious eras.

Changes in the international system may be changing the character of war.

War in the contemporary era is not always easy to define.

War is a brutal form of politics.

Contemporary warfare is being influenced by globalization.

War requires highly organized societies.

War can be a powerful catalyst for change.

The nature of war remains constant, but its form reflects the particular era andenvironment in which it occurs.

Dramatic technological advances mean that a revolution in military affairs may be

underway.

Few states currently possess such technology.

The 'information age' is increasingly reflected in 'information warfare'.

Opponents with little or no access to RMA technology are likely to use 'asymmetricwarfare' to fight the war on their own terms.

Most recent conflicts have been characterized by the kind of ferocity that was typical

of 'modern' war, but overall casualty levels have been much lower.

The post-modern age has seen warfare take numerous, varied forms.

'Virtual war', with few casualties, is an attractive option, but is extremely difficult andprobably impossible to achieve in practice.

'New wars', following state collapse, are often conflicts over identity as much asterritory.

The new wars in fact follow a pattern of warfare that has been typical since the late

1950s.



22/63


Such conflicts typically occur in countries where development is lacking and there issignificant economic insecurity.



23/63


Chapter 13: International and global security

Security is a 'contested concept'.

The meaning of security has been broadened to include political, economic, societal,

environmental, and military aspects.

Differing arguments exist about the tension between national and internationalsecurity.

Different views have also emerged about the significance of 9/11 for the future ofinternational security.

Debates about security have traditionally focused on the role of the state ininternational relations.

Realists and neo-realists emphasize the perennial problem of insecurity.

The 'security dilemma' is seen by some writers as the essential source of conflictbetween states.

Trust is often difficult between states, according to realists and neo-realists, becauseof the problem of cheating.

Realists and neo-realists also point out the problem of 'relative gains' whereby statescompare their gains with those of other states when making their decisions about

security.

Neo-realists reject the significance of international institutions in helping many toachieve peace and security.

Contemporary politicians and academics, who write under the label of LiberalInstitutionalism see institutions as an important mechanism for achievinginternational security.

Liberal Institutionalists accept many of the assumptions of Realism about thecontinuing importance of military power in international relations, but argue thatinstitutions can provide a framework for cooperation which can help to overcome thedangers of security competition between states.

Constructivist thinkers base their ideas on two main assumptions: (1) that thefundamental structures of international politics are socially constructed; and (2) thatchanging the way we think about international relations can help to bring aboutgreater international security.

Some Constructivist thinkers accept many of the assumptions of neo-realism, butthey reject the view that 'structure' consists only of material capabilities. They stress

the importance of social structure defined in terms of shared knowledge andpractices as well as material capabilities.



24/63


Constructivists argue that material things acquire meaning only through the structureof shared knowledge in which they are embedded.

The power politics and realpolitik practices emphasized by Realists are seen as

derived from shared knowledge which can be self-fulfilling.

Critical security theorists argue that too much emphasis is given by mostapproaches to the state.

Some critical security theorists wish to shift the main referent to the individual andsuggest that 'emancipation' is the key to greater domestic and international security.

Feminist writers argue that gender tends to be left out of the literature oninternational security, despite the impact of war on women.

Feminist writers also argue that bringing gender issues back in will result in areconceptualization of the study of international security.

Post-modernists try to reconceptualize the debate about global security by looking atnew questions which have been ignored by traditional approaches.

There is a belief among post-modernist writers that the nature of international politicscan be changed by altering the way we think and talk about security.

Supporters of the 'global society school' argue that the end of the twentieth century

witnessed an accelerating process of globalization.

Globalization can be seen in the fields of economic development, communications,and culture. Global social movements are also a response to new risks associatedwith the environment, poverty, and weapons of mass destruction.

The 'fracture of statehood' is giving rise to new kinds of conflict within states ratherthan between states which the state system cannot deal with. This has helpedencourage an emerging politics of global responsibility.

There are disputes about whether globalization will contribute to the weakening ofthe state or simply to its transformation, and over whether a global society can becreated which will usher in a new period of peace and security.



25/63


Chapter 14: International political economy in an age of globalization

Immediately after the Second World War international institutions were created tofacilitate cooperation in the world-economy.

The onset of the cold war postponed the operation of these institutions, as theUnited States stepped in directly to manage the reconstruction of Europe and theinternational monetary system based on the dollar.

The Bretton Woods system of managed exchange rates and capital flows operateduntil its breakdown in 1971 when the USA announced it would no longer convert thedollar to gold.

The 1970s were marked by a lack of international economic cooperation among theindustrialized countries, which floated their exchange rates and indulged in newforms of trade protectionism.

Developing countries' dissatisfaction with the international system came to a head inthe 1970s when they pushed unsuccessfully for a new international economic order.

Trade negotiations were broadened to include many new areas but this led to laterresistance from emerging economies.

In 2007 a power shift became more obvious in the global economy, with emergingeconomies such as China and India playing a more prominent role in negotiations intrade, finance, and development assistance.

Rational choice explains outcomes in IPE as the result of actors' choices, which areassumed always to be rationally power or utility maximizing within given particularincentives and institutional constraints.

Institutionalists apply rational choice to states in their interactions with other states inorder to explain international cooperation in economic affairs.

Constructivist approaches pay more attention to how governments, states, and otheractors construct their preferences, highlighting the role of identities, beliefs,traditions, and values in this process.

Neo-Gramscians highlight that actors define and pursue their interests within astructure of ideas, culture, and knowledge which itself is shaped by hegemonicpowers.

Globalization poses some new constraints for all states, including the most powerful.In particular, the emergence of global capital markets means that all governmentshave to be cautious in their choice of exchange rate and interest rate policies.

On other issues of economic policy, wealthier and more powerful countries are less

constrained by globalization than is portrayed by the globalists. This is because thefirms and investors whom governments are keen to attract are not solely concerned



26/63


with levels of taxation and wages. They are equally concerned with factors such asthe skills of the workforce, the provision of infrastructure, and proximity to markets.

At the international level the more powerful states in the system get to set (andenforce) many of the rules of the new global economy.

Institutionalists argue that international institutions will play an important and positiverole in ensuring that globalization results in widely spread benefits in the world-economy.

Realists and neo-realists reject the institutionalist argument on the grounds that itdoes not account for the unwillingness of states ever to sacrifice power relative toother states.

Constructivists pay more attention to how governments, states, and other actorsconstruct their preferences, highlighting the role that state identities, dominantbeliefs, and ongoing debates and contestation plays in this process.



27/63


Chapter 15: Gender in world politics

Feminism is a movement dedicated to achieving political, social, and economicequality for women.

The goal of feminist theory is to explain why women are subordinated. Feministsbelieve that we cannot separate knowledge from political practice and that feministknowledge should help improve women's lives.

There are a variety of feminist theories, such as liberal, Marxist, socialist, post-modern, and post-colonial. Each gives us different explanations for women'ssubordination.

Feminists define gender as distinct from sex. Gender is a set of socially constructedcharacteristics that define what we mean by masculinity and femininity. It is possiblefor women to display masculine characteristics and vice versa.

Gender is a system of social hierarchy in which masculine characteristics are morevalued than feminine ones.

Gender is a structure that signifies unequal power relationships between women andmen.

IR feminists use gender-sensitive lenses to help them answer questions about whywomen often play subordinate roles in global politics. IR feminists build on other IRtheories, such as liberalism, critical theory, Constructivism, post-modernism, and

post-colonialism. They go beyond them by introducing gender as a category ofanalysis.

Liberal feminists believe women's equality can be achieved by removing legalobstacles that deny women the same opportunities as men.

Post-liberal feminists disagree with liberal feminists. They claim that we must lookmore deeply at unequal gendered structures in order to understand women'ssubordination.

Feminist critical theory examines how both ideas and material structures shape

people's lives. IR feminist critical theorists show how changes in the meaning ofgender have changed the practices of international organizations over time.

Feminist constructivists show us the various ways in which ideas about gendershape and are shaped by global politics. Elisabeth Prgl shows us how these ideasshaped the framing of international legal conventions.

Post-modern feminists are concerned with the link between knowledge and power.They suggest that men have generally been seen as knowers and as subjects ofknowledge. This influences how we see global politics.



28/63


Post-colonial feminists criticize Western feminists for basing feminist knowledge onWestern women's lives and for portraying Third World women as lacking in agency.They suggest that women's subordination must be differentially understood in termsof race, class, and geographical location, and that all women should be seen asagents rather than victims.

Traditional stories about war portray men as protectors and women and children asbeing protected. In today's wars, women and children are being killed and injured inlarge numbers. This challenges the myth of protection.

War is associated with masculinity. Our image of a soldier is a heroic male. Thisimage is being challenged by an increasing number of women in militaries aroundthe world. There is a debate among policy-makers and in militaries, and even amongsome feminists, as to whether women should fight in military combat.

Militarized masculinity is popular when states are preoccupied with national securitythreats. This has larger consequences. Conciliatory options in policy-making tend toget discounted. It makes it difficult for women's voices to be seen as legitimate,particularly in matters of security policy.

Feminists define security broadly to include the diminution of all forms of violence,physical, economic, and ecological. The national security of states, defined inmasculine terms that emphasize military strength, can cause a trade-off with thephysical and economic security of individuals.

In every society, women are disadvantaged relative to men in terms of material well-

being. We need to put on our gender lenses to explain why. This gender-sensitiveperspective helps us see how women's relative disadvantage is due to the gendereddivision of labour.

The gendered division of labour dates back to seventeenth century Europe and thesubsequent separation of paid work in the public sphere from unpaid work in theprivate sphere. The role distinction between workers in the public and privatespheres has an effect on the kind of work that women do in the public sphere.

Women are disproportionately clustered in low-paying jobs in garment industries andservices. Home-based workers are predominantly women also. Women do more

subsistence agriculture than men and men more often work with advancedagricultural technologies.

In addition to paid work, women perform most of the reproductive and caring labourin the private sphere. This is known as the double burden. The double burdenconstrains women's choices in the public sphere. When it is not paid, householdlabour is invisible in economic analyses.

We must not overgeneralize about the negative effects of the gendered division oflabour. When women have more opportunities for waged work, this is empowering.However, women often perform the same tasks for lower wages than men.



29/63


Much of the success in moving towards gender equality is due to women'sorganizing in NGOs and social movements. These organizations have been able toget women's issues on the policy agendas of the United Nations and otherintergovernmental organizations.

Feminists believe that feminist knowledge should be useful for improving women'slives. Many feminist social movements are informed by feminist emancipatoryknowledge.

The United Nations has begun to disaggregate its data by sex. This was animportant step in getting women's issues on its agenda. Data are vital for identifyingproblems and lobbying for change. The adoption of the Gender Development Indexhas helped us to see where problems are most acute and to track evidence ofimprovement.

Gender mainstreaming is a policy that evaluates legislation in terms of whether it islikely to increase or decrease gender equality. It has been adopted by a number ofintergovernmental organizations, such as the United Nations, and by some nationalgovernments.



30/63


Chapter 16: International law

States have strong incentives to free themselves from the insecurities ofinternational anarchy.

States face common coordination and collaboration problems, yet cooperationremains difficult under anarchy.

To facilitate cooperation, states create international institutions, of which three levelsexist in modern international society: constitutional institutions, fundamentalinstitutions, and issue specific institutions or 'regimes'.

We are concerned with fundamental institutions, of which international law is one ofthe most important.

Modern international law is a historical artefact, a product of the revolutions inthought and practice that transformed the governance of European states after theFrench Revolution (1789).

Prior to the French Revolution, in the 'Age of Absolutism', law was understoodprincipally as the command of a legitimate superior, and international law was seenas a command of God, derived from natural law. In the modern period law has cometo be seen as something contracted between legal subjects, or their representatives,and international law has been seen as the expression of the mutual will of nations.

Because of its historical roots, the modern institution of international law has a

number of distinctive characteristics, informed largely by the values of politicalLiberalism.

The most distinctive characteristics of the modern institution of international law areits multilateral form of legislation, its consent-based form of legal obligation, itslanguage and practice of justification, and its discourse of institutional autonomy.

So long as international law was designed to facilitate international order, it wascircumscribed in key ways: states were the principle subjects and agents ofinternational law; international law was concerned with the regulation of inter-staterelations; and the scope of international law was confined to questions of order.

The quest for global governance is pushing international law into new areas, raisingquestions about whether international law is transforming into a form ofsupranational law.

Individuals, and to some extent collectivities, are gradually acquiring rights andresponsibilities under international law, establishing their status as both subjects andagents under international law.

Non-governmental actors are becoming increasingly important in the development

and codification of international legal norms.



31/63


International law is increasingly affecting domestic legal regimes and practices, andthe rules of the international legal system are no longer confined to issues of order.As international humanitarian law evolves, issues of global justice are permeatingthe international legal order.

Placing limits on the legitimate use of force is one of the key challenges of theinternational community, and the laws of war have evolved to meet this challenge.

The laws of war have traditionally been divided into those governing when the use offorce is legitimate, jus ad bellum, and how war may be conducted, jus in bello.

Laws governing when war is legally permitted have changed dramatically over thehistory of the international system, the most notable difference being between thenineteenth-century view that to wage war was a sovereign right to the post-1945view that war was only justified in self-defence or as part of a UN mandatedinternational peace enforcement action.

Laws governing how war may be conducted divide, broadly, into three categories:those governing weaponry, combatants, and non-combatants.

Realists argue that international law is only important when it serves the interests ofpowerful states.

Neo-liberals explain how self-interested states come to construct dense networks ofinternational legal regimes.

Constructivists treat international law as part of the normative structures thatcondition state and non-state agency in international relations. Like other socialnorms, they emphasize the way in which law constitutes actors' identities, interests,and strategies.

New Liberals emphasize the domestic origins of state preferences and, in turn,international law. Within international law, they stress the need to disaggregate thestate to understand transnational legal integration and interaction, and they prioritizeinternational humanitarian law.

Critical legal studies concentrates on the way in which the inherent Liberalism of

international law seriously curtails its radical potential.



32/63


Chapter 17: International regimes

Regimes represent an important feature of globalization.

There is a growing number of global regimes being formed.

The term regimes, and social science approaches to them, are recent but fi t into along-standing tradition of thought about international law.

The onset of dtente, the loss of hegemonic status by the USA, and the growingawareness of environmental problems sensitized social scientists to the need for atheory of regimes.

Liberal Institutionalists and Realists have developed competing approaches to theanalysis of regimes.

Regime theory is an attempt initiated in the 1970s by social scientists to account forthe existence of rule-governed behaviour in the anarchic international system.

Regimes have been defined by principles, norms, rules; and decision-makingprocedures.

Regimes can be classified in terms of the formality of the underlying agreements andthe degree of expectation that the agreements will be observed. Full-blown, tacit,and dead-letter regimes can be identified.

Regimes now help to regulate international relations in many spheres of activity.

The market is used by Liberal Institutionalists as an analogy for the anarchicinternational system.

In a market/international setting, public goods get underproduced and public badsget overproduced.

Liberal Institutionalists draw on the Prisoners' Dilemma game to account for thestructural impediments to regime formation.

A hegemon, 'the shadow of the future', and an information rich environment promotecollaboration and an escape route from Prisoners' Dilemmas.

Realists argue that Liberal Institutionalists ignore the importance of power whenexamining regimes.

Realists draw on the Battle of the Sexes to illuminate the nature of coordination andits link to power in an anarchic setting.



33/63


Chapter 18: The United Nations

The United Nations was established to preserve peace between states after theSecond World War.

In a number of ways, the institutions of the United Nations reflected lessons learnedfrom its predecessor, the League of Nations.

The institutions and mechanisms of the United Nations reflect both the demands ofgreat power politics (i.e. Security Council veto) and universalism. They also reflectdemands to address the needs and interests of people, as well as the needs andinterest of states. The tensions between these various demands are a key feature ofUN development.

The cold war and the decolonization process had discouraged more activeinvolvement by the United Nations within states.

After the cold war, it became more difficult for states and diplomats to accept thatwhat happened within states was of no concern to outsiders.

It became more common for governments to see active membership in the UnitedNations as serving their national interest as well as being morally right.

By the mid-1990s the UN had become involved in maintaining international peaceand security by resisting aggression between states, by attempting to resolvedisputes within states (civil wars), and by focusing on conditions within states,

including economic, social, and political conditions.

New justifications for intervention in states were being considered by the 1990s.

Most operations of the United Nations were justified in the traditional way: as aresponse to a threat to international peace and security.

The number of institutions within the UN system that address economic and socialissues has significantly increased. Several Programmes and Funds were created inresponse to Global Conferences.

Despite a shortage of funds and coordination problems, the UN has done importantwork in key economic and social areas.

The Millennium Development Goals have focused attention on measurablesocioeconomic targets and have further integrated the work of the UN at the countrylevel, but progress towards reaching the goals has been uneven.

In the mid- to late 1990s under the leadership of then Secretary-General Kofi Annan,the UN embarked on an overarching reform effort.

Reform of the economic and social arrangements of the UN aimed at improvingcoordination, eliminating duplication, and clarifying spheres of responsibility.



34/63


These efforts strengthened the norms of the multilateral system.



35/63


Chapter 19: Transnational actors and international organizations in global politics

The concept of the 'state' has three very different meanings: a legal person, apolitical community, and a government.

The countries and governments around the world may be equal in law, but have fewpolitical similarities. Many governments control less resources than manytransnational actors.

It cannot be assumed that all country-based political systems are more coherentthan global systems, particularly as national loyalties do not match countryboundaries.

By abandoning the language of 'states' and 'non-state' actors, we can admit thepossibility of theorizing about many types of actors in global politics. Bydistinguishing government from society and nation from country, we can ask whetherprivate groups, companies, and national minorities in each country engage intransnational relations.

The ability of TNCs to change transfer prices means that they can evade taxation orgovernment controls on their international financial transactions.

The ability of TNCs to use triangulation means individual governments cannotcontrol their country's international trade.

The ability of TNCs to move production from one country to another means

individual governments are constrained in regulating and taxing companies.

The structure of authority over TNCs generates the potential for intense conflictbetween governments, when the legal authority of one government hasextraterritorial impact on the sovereignty of another government.

In some areas of economic policy, governments have lost sovereignty and regulationnow has to be exercised at the global level rather than by governments actingindependently.

Effective action against transnational criminals by individual governments is difficult

for the same reasons as control of TNCs is difficult.

Groups using violence to achieve political goals generally do not achieve legitimacy,but in exceptional circumstances they may be recognized as national liberationmovements and take part in diplomacy.

The transnational activities of criminals and guerrillas shift problems of the domesticpolicy of countries into the realm of global politics.

Terrorism may be particular to individual countries, have transnational aspects or be

carried out by groups in a transnational network, but it is not a single political force.



36/63


Governments cannot act as independent sovereign actors in response to terrorismnor in using violence themselves.

Most transnational actors can expect to gain recognition as NGOs by the UN,provided they are not individual companies, criminals, or violent groups and they do

not exist solely to oppose an individual government.

The ECOSOC statute provides an authoritative statement that NGOs have alegitimate place in intergovernmental diplomacy.

The creation of a global economy leads to the globalization of unions, commercialbodies, the professions, and scientists in international NGOs, which participate in therelevant international regimes.

Governments can no longer control the flow of information across the borders oftheir country.

Improved communications make it more likely that NGOs will operate transnationallyand make it very simple and cheap for them to do so.

NGOs from each country may combine in four ways: as international NGOs, asadvocacy networks, as caucuses, and as governance networks.

International organizations are structures for political communication. They aresystems that constrain the behaviour of their members.

Governments form intergovernmental organizations and transnational actors forminternational non-governmental organizations. In addition, governments andtransnational actors accord each other equal status by jointly creating hybridinternational NGOs.

International organizations are more than the collective will of their members. Theyhave a distinct impact upon other global actors.

The high politics/low politics distinction is used to marginalize transnational actors. Itis invalid because politics does not reduce to these two categories.

A simple concept of power will not explain outcomes. Military and economicresources are not the only capabilities: communication facilities, information,authority, and status are also important political assets. In addition, skills inmobilizing support will contribute to influence over policy.

Different policy domains contain different actors, depending upon the salience of theissues being debated.

TNCs gain influence through the control of economic resources. NGOs gaininfluence through possessing information, gaining high status and communicating

effectively. TNCs and NGOs have been the main source of economic and politicalchange in global politics.



37/63


38/63


crude calculations of the power and interests of key actors such as states, cognitivefactors such as shared scientific knowledge, the impact of non-governmental actors,and even the extent to which the system of states is itself part of the problem.

IR scholars are also interested in the extent to which the environment in general and

particular environmental problems are now being seen as security issues inacademic, political, and popular discourse, and whether this securitization of theenvironment is something to be welcomed.



39/63


Chapter 21: Terrorism and globalization

Agreement on what constitutes terrorism continues to be difficult given the range ofpotential acts involving violence.

Terrorism, or acts of violence by sub-state groups, has been separated from criminalacts on the basis of the purpose for which violence is applied, namely politicalchange.

Terrorist groups succeed when their motivations or grievances are perceived to belegitimate by a wider audience. Disproportionate or heavy-handed responses bystates to acts of terrorism serve to legitimize terrorist groups.

The definition of globalization, as with terrorism, is open to subjective interpretationbut the technologies associated with globalization have improved terroristcapabilities.

The majority of transnational terrorist attacks from 1979 onwards targeted Americancitizens and symbols.

Trends in terrorism since 1968 include greater casualties, increasing sophistication,and suicide attacks.

Transnational Marxist-Leninist groups have replaced by global militant Islamicterrorist groups.

Cultural, economic, and religious aspects provide necessary, but insufficientexplanations for globalized terrorist violence individually.

The current wave of terrorist violence uses religion as a motivator and to provide thejustification to kill non-combatants.

The ultimate purpose for modern militant Islamic violence is applied is obtainingpolitical power in order to conduct political, social, economic, and religious reformaccording to Sharia law.

Elements of globalization that permit the rapid exchange of ideas and goods canalso be leveraged and exploited by terrorist groups.

The technologies associated with globalization allow terrorists to operate in a highlydistributed global 'network' that shares information and allows small cells to conducthighly coordinated, lethal attacks.

Globalization may allow some terrorist groups to acquire, manufacture, and useweapons of mass of destruction in order to conduct catastrophic attacks.

States, individually and collectively, have political, military, legal, economic, and

technologies advantages in the struggle against terrorist groups.



40/63


Differences between states over the nature and scope of the current terrorist threat,and the most appropriate responses to combat it, reflect subjective characterizationsbased on national biases and experiences.



41/63


Chapter 22: Nuclear proliferation

Nuclear weapon production requires a broad-based technological infrastructure andindividuals with key skills.

Nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons differ in their management of the chainreaction, and in the nature of the energy produced.

In 1948, the United Nations introduced the category known as WMD.

A new category has appeared known as CBRN.

Nuclear weapons produce energy in three formsblast, heat and nuclearradiationand the phenomenon known as EMP.

Nuclear weapons were used at the end of the Second World War and have not beenused in conflict since.

The testing of thermonuclear weapons indicated the greater explosive capacity ofthis type of weapon, although the trend has been towards weapon designs withlower yields.

The nature of nuclear weapons and the dissemination of the capabilities tomanufacture them around the world since 1945 makes nuclear proliferation a goodillustration of the globalization of world politics.

The end of the cold war and the dissolution of the former Soviet Union generatednew problems.

Greater attention has been paid to theoretical aspects.

A debate has emerged over the merits of the further proliferation/spread of nuclearweapons.

Because of new proliferation challenges generated by what some analysts call the'second nuclear age', a debate has begun over whether the nuclear non-proliferationregime should be supplemented or supplanted by a new more flexible approach tothe problems of global nuclear governance.

A major element of the nuclear proliferation process is the acquisition of thetechnologies to produce fissile materials to construct either a fission (nuclear) orfusion (thermonuclear) weapon.

The effects of nuclear weapons are considerable and are manifest in the form ofblast, heat, and nuclear radiation.

Since 1945, the spread of nuclear technology for civil and military purposes has

meant that states beyond the five which possess nuclear weapons now have the



42/63


capacity to produce nuclear devices at relatively short notice, if they have notalready done so.

Over the same period the structure of the civil nuclear trading market has alsochanged, leading to proliferation concerns because there are more nuclear suppliers

around.

There has also been a diffusion of ballistic missile and spacelaunch technologysince 1945.

A debate over the merits of deploying defensive systems to counter ballistic missileshas emerged and the ABM Treaty agreed in 1972 between the United States andthe former Soviet Union is no longer in force.

The characterization of motivations for acquiring nuclear weapons has become morecomplex.

There are difficulties in determining whether nuclear proliferation has occurred.

A number of states have the potential to manufacture nuclear weapons if theywanted, and a few embarked on military nuclear programmes before abandoningthem.

The role of non-state actors has added a further dimension to the nuclearproliferation issue.

There is an ongoing task of ensuring the safety and security of nuclear materialsaround the world.

The complexity surrounding compliance with international obligations has been afeature of debate since the early 1990s.

Nuclear control and anti-proliferation measures have been evolving since 1945.

The IAEA has established a global safeguards system.

Attempts to implement a CTBT and negotiate a FMCT have stalled following aperiod of renewed impetus after 1995.

A number of NWFZs have been negotiated.

The NPT now has 188 parties, although India, Israel, and Pakistan remain non-signatories.

In 1987 the MTCR began operating and The Hague Code of Conduct wasintroduced in 2002.

NPT Review Conferences have been held every five years since 1970.



43/63


Since 1995, the NPT has encountered several challenges related to new incidencesof nuclear testing, attempts to achieve universality, disposal of fissile material,compliance, and verification.

It has been suggested that a 'second nuclear age' has emerged.

New measures have been implemented in response to the continuing globalizationof the nuclear proliferation issue.



44/63


Chapter 23: Nationalism

Nationalism claims that the nation exists and should form the basis of the politicalorder.

Nationalism can be considered as ideology, as sentiments, and as politics.

There are different typologies of nationalism, such as ethnic/civic, elite/mass, state-strengthening/state-subverting.

The most important debates on nationalism concern whether it is cause orconsequence of nation, the relative importance of culture, economics and politics,and the different roles played by internal and external factors.

It is impossible to define a 'nation-state' in objective terms without accepting theassumptions of nationalism. Therefore, nation-state will be defined largely in termsof its self-description and that of the international community.

There is no simple sequence leading either from nationalism to nation-stateformation to changes in the global political order or the other way round.

There is no single, dominant form of nationalism. Instead it can take ethnic, civic,and other forms, be elite or popular, strengthen or subvert existing states.

The best place to start is with the central political actors. These are the mostimportant state or states in each historical phase.

The political ideology of states matters most because they have the most power andothers tend to respond to their power and ideologies. At the start of our history globalconflict is shifting power to extensive middle classes in Britain and France, and thenational idea justifies demands for reforms which challenge 'top-down' ideals ofpower based on religion, monarchy, and privilege.

Once the process is in motion it develops its own momentum. British victory overFrance popularizes its liberal, constitutionalist nationalism which is taken up inimitative form by elites elsewhere. These elites are able, especially when linked tomodernizing states like Prussia, Japan, and the North in the American Civil War, to

form powerful nation-states.

Those nation-states generate new forms of nationalism. Subordinate nationalitiesreact against new state nationalism. These states take up illiberal, imperialistnationalism to challenge British hegemony. Such imperialist nationalism provokescolonial societies to develop counter-nationalism.

State-subverting nationalism usually cannot on its own defeat imperial powers. Alsoimportant is that those powers are weakened in global conflict with each other.



45/63


Therefore the ability of state-subverting nationalism to form nation-states is based ona combination of its own social base and political organization, the power and policyof the state it confronts, and a favourable international situation.

The sacrosanct principle of state sovereignty was weakened with the end of the cold

war, new nation-state formation, and new economic and cultural forms ofglobalization.

This provoked a first wave of state-subverting ethno-nationalisms which could leadto violence and ethnic cleansing.

However, international recognition for new states as civic, territorial entities, alongwith new forms of intervention and pressure, put pressure on nationalism to moveaway from this ethnic and statesubverting character.

There is a state-strengthening nationalism which focuses on the threats globalizationpose to the nation-state. This nationalism can paradoxically get stronger the morethe nation-state is weakened.

However, perhaps more important is the shift of nationalism away from a state focustowards concerns with devolution, cultural recognition, and transnational linkages.Nationalism, once again, is showing how adaptive it is to changes in the nature ofglobal politics.



46/63


Chapter 24: Culture in world affairs

Culture defines the identity of individuals in a society. A culture is composed of thecustoms, norms, and genres that inform social life. Religion remains a key influence.

Civilization is the broadest form of cultural identity, and represents a level of identitythat may spread across nations and states.

Cultural groups often define themselves by representing different cultures as alien,or as the 'Other'.

The West has been the dominant civilization in the modern age, and all othercivilizations have had to deal with its influence, whether welcome or not.

The end of the cold war heightened the significance of cultural identity. Thehegemony of the West and

Textbook Outline

Documents

Transcript of Textbook Outline