INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS- MEANING

 Large scope: People, culture and politics of the world. World is in a constant flux and this makes it
all the vaster and more complex. These changes are not limited to telecommunication, technology,
travel but also public opinion, mind-set, persona, etc.
 Initially it was considered as a ritual to be dealt by Prime Minister, Foreign Minister. However, in the
contemporary era, the scope of international relations cannot be restricted to political leaders and
officers.
 The concepts of global village, one community and one world have emerged. We, as individuals,
groups, communities or nations, are affected by what takes place in the global arena.
 Political obligation  to do unto others what you would have done unto you- in one sense. This has
taken a global view.

AREAS FALLING UNDER INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

It involves the following, but not limited to the following:

1. Globalisation
2. State Sovereignty
3. Ecological Sustainability
4. Nuclear Proliferation
5. Nationalism
6. Global Economy
7. Foreign Policies
8. Human Rights
9. Human Security

DEFINITION

1. International Paradigm:
 Restricted to what goes on between the states.
 It considers international relations to be the study of states. It is known as the narrow view on
the study of international relations.
 International relations are concerned with the relationship among the world’s governments.
States are supposed to be the building blocks or units of world politics and it suggests that if
you understand the factors that influence how states interact with each other then you
understand world politics.
2. Global Paradigm:
  It does not deny the relation between States. It says that States are not the only actors in the
study of international relations. There are international organizations, MNCs, NGOs,
historical/geographical influences.
 All forms of interactions between members of separate states or societies, whether
government sponsored or not, would be a part of IR. It views that the world no longer
operates as disaggregated collection of states or units but rather as an integrated whole.

Is IR a study of states or not? And if not, what is Global Politics? How are IR, International Politics and
Global Politics different?

EVOLUTION OF THE STUDY OF IR

 IR is both an academic discipline and a field of enquiry.

 As a field of enquiry it has existed as a part of history.
 Its emergence as an academic discipline can be traced back to 1919. University College of Wales,
Aberystwyth, England created a separate dept. of International Politics and then in 1920, the
establishment of School of International Relations at LSE followed.
 Thucydides- ‘History of Peloponnesian War’
 Chanakya- ‘Arthshastra’
 Machiavelli- ‘Prince’
 The above authors talked about international relations but The term IR was first coined by Jeremy
Bentham in his book ‘Principles of Morals and Legislation’ in 1789.
 IR in its true form had begun only after World War I. It had a catastrophic effect. Major changes
occurred in the victorious as well as losing nations. This was when scholars began focusing on
international politics and international relations.
 Hans Morgenthau study of international affairs in nothing but “International Politics”. Study of
Internationalism lies in the study of politics between and among nations. It is the study of continuous
processes by which states adjust their national interests to accommodate those of other states. Power
is the means through which nations promote their national interests. Therefore, study of inter-state
relationship is international politics.

REALISM: Realists believe that man is essentially selfish and greedy. They explain international politics in
the sense that the relationship that happens between the state is all about their own self-interests. People
understand only power-politics. It does believe in cooperation but there is always the element of self-
interest. It essentially succumbs to cooperation to maintain balance of power and to prevent isolation. They
believe in “self-help system”.

LIBERALISM: They believe in goodness. International relation is a process characterised by inputs or

cooperation, peace, mutual accountability, etc. it is an offshoot of idealism
  1914-1918: period of speculation where realists had an upper hand to explain the war that was
happening.
 After the end of WWI, some powers of the world like US, UK and France tried to form an
organization to ensure peace in the world. Eventually, the Paris Peace Conference (1919) or Treaty
of Versailles took place, which gave birth to League of Nations (1920). LoN was the brainchild of
Woodrow Wilson- we need to make this world safe for democracy; we need to create an
international organization catering peaceful co-existence. He gave the famous 14 points (Mepau..
Speech??)
 In the context of the above Liberalists gained an upper-hand.
 However, then emerged fascism, Nazism, etc. WWII followed and Liberalist did not have an answer
to this. Then again realism took dominance.
 The constant alternate taking over followed UNCold WarEnd of Cold War.
 RealistsInternational affairs only in terms of politics. Promoting own political interests. Trade, eco
dev, tele-communication, technology, etc. is not taken into consideration.
 International politics is restricted to promoting own political interests. Restricted to military affairs
in the earlier days. (Self-interst)
 International Relations involve not only political interests but also all other aspects of mutual
relationship.
 Global Politics State is not the only actor. Democratization of diplomacy emerged. Public opinion
is also important.

IR: THE GREAT DEBATES

I. The First Great Debate (1930s-1950s)

 Between liberal internationalists (emphasising peaceful cooperation) and Realists
(believing in power politics).
 This was about the subject matter of IR.
II. The Second Great Debate (during 1960s)
 Between Behaviourists and Traditionalists (on whether it is possible to have objective
laws in IR)
 Because of abstract nature of the subject there was a lot of speculation and no objectivity
(unable to make predictions) and therefore behaviourists introduced empirical study for
the study of political science to bring more objectivity.
 This debate is about the method of IR and is not an extension of the first great debate.
III. The Third Great Debate (1970s-1980s)- Inter Paradigm Debate
 Between Realists and Liberals on one side and Marxist on the other who interpreted IR in
economic terms.
 The above 3 are rational theorists.
  This began even before the second debate was concluded.
 This is about the content or subject matter of IR.
IV. The Fourth Great Debate (1980s)
 Emerged in the consequence of Post-Positivism.
 Between Positivists and Post-Positivists-fair mixture of normative and empirical approach
(one theory and reality).
 Emergence of Social Constructivism, critical theory, post-structuralism, Feminism, Green
Politics, etc.
 This is about the method of IR.

WHAT IS GLOBAL POLITICS? IS IT DIFFERENT FROM INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS?

 Globalisation refers to heightened interaction taking place between States. It has transformed the
political and economic structures. It has also affected the lives of the people.
 Giddens (1999) the intensification of worldwide social relations that link distant localities in a way
that local happenings end up being shaped by events occurring miles away and vice versa.
 Held and McGrew The widening, intensifying, speeding up and growing impacts of worldwide
interconnectedness.
 Global Politics
 It can be explained by 2 conditions/parameters:
1. Worldwide: Politics has gone global and global is worldwide. One strong reason for this
is the presence and significance of UN. It is a global body having membership of almost
all countries. For instance, terrorism is an issue in almost all countries. Massod Azhar was
declared as global terrorist; China lifted its veto. Another example is that of climate.
Issues such as global warming, greenhouse effect, etc. affect all the nations who form part
of a global economy. It supports the idea of the world being borderless or trans-planetary
or one global village. This idea targets the sovereignty of nations.
2. Comprehensive: Comprehensiveness refers to all the elements within a system which
affect politics and not just the system as a whole. Each element is of equal significance.
Dimensions of global politics include national, sub-national, regional, worldwide. All
these elements together make up global politics.
Regional politics: Based on geographical proximity (ASEAN), social or cultural
homogeneity (Islam), shared political attitudes, economic interdependence.
Sub-national politics: bureaucracies, political parties, interest groups, etc.
 Statehood or sovereignty cannot be denied. The ideas of global politics and sovereignty are not
contradictory, rather complimentary to each other. Sovereignty is very much relevant.
  Advent of global politics does not imply that international politics or international relations are
irrelevant, rather, global and international co-exist and complement each other. States and nations
now operate in the context of global interconnectedness.

PERSPECTIVES ON GLOBALISATION

During the 1990s, globalisation became fashionable. However, by the end of the 2010s, many criticisms
emerged that question the existence and relevance of globalisation.

The classification was provided by Held et al (1999)

1. Hyperglobalists – they were the ‘believers’ as they believed that globalisation had a profound
revolutionary political shift in terms of economy, culture, etc. They also went on to talk about the
borderless State. They posited that States were irrelevant. Any resistance to globalisation, they thought,
would be damaging. Hyperglobalists supported the triumph of globalisation.

2. Sceptics – they were those who thought that globalisation was nothing but a fantasy and dismissed the
idea of a global economy. They believed that all economic and political changes were a result of
activities within the State and not at a transnational level. It was a tool that people such as politicians
used to further their personal goals.

3. Transformationalists – this was the middle path between the aforementioned two approached. It
accepts the changes brought about by globalisation, but at the same time does not deny the sovereignty
of States. Traditional notions of statehood cannot be debunked. This is the view that we accept in the
current era.

When examined in the backdrop of Realism, Liberalism and Marxism, the following relationships emerge:

1. Realism – Sceptics.

The State continues to be the most important unit, but they do not believe that globalisation and the State are
antagonous to each other. Globalisation, they say, is the manifestation of the State itself. At the same time,
realists believe that globalisation does not bring people at parity. It does not bring peace and cooperation
because some States will always be at the mercy of others.

2. Liberalism – Hyperglobalists.

They believe globalisation to be a victory of the market, as resources can be brought to their maximum
benefit.

3. Marxists do not accept globalisation at all. They see it as a tool to further class differences.
ACTORS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

 State as the Key Actor

 Westphalian Peace Treaty- 1648 1618-1648- Thirty Years War: WPT marked the victory
of the secular forces over the spiritual sanctity used by the Church for carrying out
malpractices.
 Montevideo Convention-1933 Article 1 of the convention read State as a person of
international law. state as a person of international law should possess the following
qualifications
(i) permanent population
(ii) defined territory
(iii) government
(iv) and the capacity to enter into relations with other states.
 Nation A nation has a shared culture of history, ethnicity, language, etc. There has to be a
feature of commonality.
 Nation State a system of organization in which people with a common identity live inside a
country with firm borders and a single government
 Nation State System A pattern of political life in which people are separately organized into
sovereign states that interact with one another in varying degrees and varying ways.
 Features
1. First explanation for state as a key actor. One of the major organizing principles for a
State to be is “Nationhood”.
2. State: self-governing political entities; Nation: common identity among people. State may
contain one or more nations and a Nation may be made up of several states. [common
shaded part: Nation State]
Tibet, Taiwan, Kurdistan, Catalonia, Kosovo these are nations which consider
themselves to have a separate nationhood but their nationhood has not been recognized.

State Nation

This sovereignty of the state is recognised by other states through diplomatic relations or
membership in the UN.
 3. State answers to no higher authority.
4. It has complete sovereignty, both internal and external.
5. With few exceptions, a state has a capital city and a seat of government. Switzerland
does not have an official capital city. Bern is the seat of government of Switzerland but it
has not been officially declared as the capital city.
6. State as an actor also includes bureaucracies and ministries within itself.
 International System is the set of relationship among the world’s states, structured according to
certain rules and patterns of interactions.
 2 Challenges to Sovereignty: Concept of Sub-nationalism this concept questions the
sovereignty of the state. When people identify with a nationality that the State government
does not represent. Another issue is Globalisation.
 Two Views on Sovereign States in International System
1. State-Centric View: existence of the sovereign states through a model which is known as the
‘Billiard Ball Model’. This view draws an analogy between billiard ball and the States.
 This view is supported by Realists.
 Just like billiard balls, States are also impermeable and self-contained units. These self-
contained units function on their own and cannot be penetrated. Like billiard balls, they have
a hard shell.
 Just like collisions take place between billiard balls, interactions take place between States.
The collisions or interactions which take place between the States are largely because of 2
reasons- Security and Military (Peace or War; Diplomacy or Military Action).
 This kind of a set up in international relations has 2 implicationsDomestic Politics: this is
what goes on within the hard shell of States. International Politics: this occurs as a result of
collision of interaction.
a) Borders Matter: direct implication of Domestic Politics.
b) Distribution of Power: the interaction which happen between the States are dependent
upon the power of the States, implying that practically, all States are not equally
powerful. This denotes that there is a distribution of power which is responsible for the
kind of interactions that take place. The more powerful are able to intrude into the affairs
of the less powerful nations. Therefore, International Relation is more in the interest of
the powerful. The more powerful have a stronger hold as against the less powerful.
 Question raised against this model:
a) Transnational flows: THE FLOWS OF TECHNOLOGY, RESOURCES, ETC.
b) Interdependence: How do you explain the concept of self-contained units, when there is
interdependence between States. Welfare and well-being are also security matters which
were not taken into account by this model.
 Collective effort was put in and another model came up (discussed below)
 2. Mixed-Actor View: this view came up with the ‘Cobweb Model’.
 You cannot explain IR through the Billiard Ball Model. BB Model says that there is no
interaction, rather there is a push and pull effect dominated over by the more powerful
States. This was denied by this view.
 There is a cob-web interaction that takes place between the States.
 Non-State Actors

MNCs- Multi-National INGOs- International Government

Corporations Organization
 Companies that span borders.  Govt., states are the members.
 2-way relationship.  Usually large organizations.
 Impact state politics (e.g.  Specific functions: Eco, pol,
political funding) env., etc.
 E.g. Samsung, Apple, Maruti,  E.g. WTO, UN, OPEC, NATO
etc.
NSA

Others- Criminal, Religious, Ethnic NGOs- Non Government Organizations

groups  Large or small
 Global presence  Individuals and organizations could
 Global reach and appeal be members.
 Non-categorized NSAs  Also can work as pressure groups-
 E.g. Al Quaida, ISIS, Diaspora lobbying.
Communities, Anti-Capitalist  Eg: Amnesty International, Red
movements, Drug Cartels Cross, etc.

BY THE WAY OF INTERACTIONS WHAT INTERESESTS ARE SERVED? ARE THERE ANY
PROBEMS IN SERVING THESE INTERESTS?

 Interests in Inter-State Interaction 3 broad categories (not exhaustive)

1. Security: This is primarily promoted by the Realists.
2. Economy and Welfare: This would be promoted by Liberalists; Comprehensive Economic
Partnership Agreement-CEPA (between Japan and N. Korea), Comprehensive Economic
Cooperation Agreement-CECA (Malaysia and Singapore), One Belt One Road-OBOR and now
BRI (China)
3. Ideological interests/ Promotion of Ideologies: this is primarily promoted by Constructivists.
Democracy, Feminism, human rights, etc.
 Foregoing Individual Interests for ‘Collective Interest’
 The problem of how to provide something that benefits all members of a group and ensure
that all the nations serve for the collective interests even if they have to temporarily forego
their individual interests.
 The following three Principles offer possible solutions to the core problem of getting
individuals/nations to cooperate for the common good even when there is no such Central
Government or World Government to ensure this:
1. Dominance
 Identification of ‘social loafers’ (defectors who do not cooperate) is an important
issue in international politics, considering the absence of a World government.
 The principle of dominance solves the problems of collective good by establishing
a power hierarchy in which those at the top control those below.
 The fight for gaining a position of dominance is a fight for status and leads to
global hegemony. A global hegemon or a group of global hegemons arise. They
gain the power of dictating terms. When others succumb to such terms there occurs
symbolic submission.
 2 Advantages of the dominance solution to the collective good problem:
a) It forces members of the group to contribute to the common good.
b) It minimises open conflict within the group.
 Disadvantage: Autocracy and Oppression
2. Reciprocity
 The principle of reciprocity solves the problems of collective good by rewarding
behaviour that contributes to the group and punishing behaviour that pursues self-
interests at the expense of the group.
 Reciprocity forms the basis of most of the norms and institutions in the
international system.
 This is done on a one-to-one basis. No third party or a government is needed.
 This usually works when 2 nations are on an equal footing. There arises a problem
when they are not an equal footing
 Major problem: ‘Downward Spiral’ overestimating own accomplishments and
under estimating accomplishments of the others.
3. Identity
 This is the 3rd potential solution which lies in the identities of participants as
members of a community.
 Previous 2 principles are based on the principle of self-interest. However, this
concept starts from the concept of family which eventually turns into a State. Thus
emerged the idea of helping each other and sacrificing self-interests.
 Disadvantage: ‘Demonizing a group” it creates a hierarchy. A labelling process
emerges in which some nations are labelled as philanthropists and those unable to
contribute are labelled otherwise. This intensifies the gap between developed and
developing countries.
 CORE PRINCIPLES FOR SOLVING THE COLLECTIVE GOODS PROBLEM
Principle Advantages Disadvantages
Dominance Order, Stability, Predictability, Minimizes Open Oppression, Resentment, etc.
Conflicts, etc.
Reciprocity Incentive for mutual cooperation Downward spirals, Complex Accounting
Identity Redefining interest, Sacrifice, Benefits, etc. Demonizing a group

LEVEL OF ANALYSIS

 A level of analysis is a perspective of international relations based on a set of or processes that suggest
possible explanations to the ‘Why’ question of IR.
 Assist in decision making process.
 Three Levels of Analysis:
1. Individual Level- Micro level
This concerns the perception, choices and action of individual human beings. Great leaders influence
the course of history, as do individuals, citizens, thinkers, soldiers, workers, etc. Examples of
attributing decisions to certain leaders. If it weren’t for Lenin, Russia as we know today wouldn’t
exist, Nixon vs. Kennedy in case of Cuban Missile Crisis, Nehru and Kashmir.
2. Domestic Level- Miso level
This concerns the aggregations of individuals within states that influence state actions in the
international arena. Decisions taken at the domestic level influence international relations. Problem
of sub-state nationals is an example.
3. Inter-State or International or Systemic Level- Macro Level
It concerns the influence of the international system upon outcomes. This level of analysis therefore
focuses on the interactions of states themselves without regard to their internal make-up or the
individual leaders who lead them.
4. Global Level- the above four give rise to this level
It seeks to explain international outcomes in terms of global trends and forces.
 Example of 2003 Attack on Iraq in relation to the above 3 levels:
1. Bush’s antagonism against Gaddafi
2. Post 9/11 attacks, Bush admin thought that this posed threat to their internal democratic system.
3. Gaddafi regime was not suited to Bush’s administration. They couldn’t gel together.
4. Middle East vs. the West

THE FOUR LEVELS OF ANALYSIS

Individual Level Perceptions, cognitions, decisions, learning patterns, accidents of history, etc.
Domestic Level Nationalism, ethnic conflict, type of government, political parties, interest groups,
public opinion
Inter-State Level Power balances and interdependence
Global Level Religions, fundamentalism, terrorism, world environment, etc.

HANDOUT: How Decisions are Made?

 The method which might be followed by individuals or politicians in their policy decisions.
 Rational actor model: rational active approach they will go through all the physical options or
alternatives available, scrutinise the options and adopt the best option. Not ‘maximising’ but
‘satisficing’– bounded rationality.
 Incrementalism: they only build up on the existing policies. They don’t believe in ‘innovation’. They
believe in ‘inertia’. “Science of muddling through”
 Organizational model: decisions are taken according to the principles of the organization.
 Belief Systems: belief systems and cognitions also play an important role. Concept of “Group
Think”coercive groups (for e.g. elite group) where conformity and consent are of utmost importance.
Such groups many a times fall prey to irrational decisions. E.g. Pearl Harbour Case (warnings were not
taken seriously if precautionary measure were taken its fate would have been something else), Bay of
Pigs (Kennedy thought he could overthrow Fidel Castro), Space Shuttle Disaster-1986 (delay in launch
due to political pressure, technical faults were detected but ignored).

MODULE II

Theories of Global Politics

Rationalist SOCIAL Reflection

Realist- neo CONSTRUCTION Post Modernism
Liberalist- neo Feminism
Critical Theories

Liberalist had given their view on how to deal with the war. Realists discussed the faults of Liberalists. They
called the liberalists as the “idealists” or “utopians”. They completely ignored the concept of power politics.
They had over-estimated the rationality of human beings.

Realists and liberalist pick up one particular belief and further enlarge them and therefore they are
determinists
 REALISM

 Definition of power politics by Morgenthau (a realist) “Politics is a struggle for power over men, and
whatever its ultimate aim maybe power is its immediate goal and the modes of acquiring, maintaining
and demonstrating it determines the technique of political action
 Donnelly (2000)Realism talks about 2 concepts
1. Egoism: selfish, brutish and competitive nature of human beings which is one of their defining
features.
2. International Anarchy: states operate or function in the politics of international anarchy in the sense
that states are sovereign
 Egoism would be endorsed by Classical Realism
 International Anarchy would be endorsed by Neo-Realism or Structural Realism.
 Major Proponents of Realism
1. E.H. Carr [Classical Realist]: in his Polemic (verbal attack on the existing system) work- “Twenty
Years Crises- 1919-1939”
2. Morgenthau [Classical Realist]: in his seminal work- “Politics among Nations: The Struggle for
Power and Peace” (1948)
3. Kenneth Waltz [Neo-Realist]- “Man, the State and War” (1959) Starting of neo-realism
4. Gideon Rose [Neo Classical Realist]- “World Politics” (1998)
5. George Kennan [cannot be categorically defined; was ambassador to USSR and then to Yugoslavia]-
“Realist as Moralist” (1989)
6. Reinhold Niebuhr [vehemently criticized theological liberalism and Christian values]- “the Nature
and Destiny of Man” (1941-43)
 The concept of realism was started mainly by E.H. Carr and Morgenthau
 The roots of realism had been there even before the term “Realism” emerged. (Thucydides, Machiavelli
Hobbes who spoke about human nature)

Thinker Key Text Big Ideas

Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War [431- International Politics- Endless struggle for power;
404 BC] roots in human nature; Justice, Law Society have no
place, etc.
Machiavelli The Prince [1532] Principles are subordinate to Policies, adapt to
changing power/political configuration
Hobbes Leviathan [1651] Insatiable lust for power, non-rational appetites, etc.
Rousseau The State of War Not human nature but anarchical society that fosters
jealousy, respect, lust, etc.
 Thucydides
 Peloponnesian War: Conflict between Atehns and Sparta; Melian dialogue bw Athens and
Melians (ancestors to Spartans)
Focus on “what is rather than what should be”. Strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must;
Power transcended ethics at that time
 Machiavelli
 First person in the field of political theory concept who had separated morality and ethics from
politics.
 “All treaties and obligations be disregarded if security and community is under threat. You
should not care that you should be loved
 Hobbes
 Rousseau did not think that human nature was bad as such but fear, insecurity and jealousy lead to that
nature.
 Doctrine of “Raison D’etat” “the reason of the state”. This is the Raison Detre (reason behind
existence) for state.
 The insights that realist offer into the way state should conduct itself are often grouped under the
doctrine of raison d’etat.
 They provide maxims to leaders on how to conduct their foreign affairs and to ensure security of the
state.
 Friedrich Meinecke- he says that raison d’etat is the fundamental principle of international conduct.
It is the state’s first law of motion and tells what the statesmen should do to preserve the health and
strength of the state.

[CHECK IF NOTES INCOMPLETE]

 Key Tenets of Realism

1. Statism
 The nature of the competition is viewed in zero-sum terms: somebody’s gain will be
somebody’s loss
 Undertheorized and inconsistently used
2. Survival
3. Self Help
[Read the handout]

LIBERALISM

 Man is a rational organism, having the potential to enhance both material and moral.
 Bad behaviour is not the result of an essentially bad humanity. It is the result of either corrupt social
institutions or misunderstanding between leaders.
 Even if there are wars, such situation can be moderated or eliminated.
 Ways to deal with such situations:
(1) Reformation of social institutions that have gone corrupt
(2) Collective actions- concept of collective security is an outgrowth of this concept.

ORIGIN OF LIBERALISM

 The common idea- ‘faith in democracy’ and ‘market capitalism’.

 18th Century Enlightenment
 Intellectual movement which emphasised individuality and challenged the existing religious
practices. Scepticism, reason and individuality are the significant components of this phase.
 Contribution to Liberalism: It rests on the Greek idea that individuals are rational human beings,
able to understand laws governing both nature and human society. They also have the capacity to
improve their condition by creating a just society.
 If this just society is not achieved, the reason is not the bad behaviour of human beings, rather the
institutions.
 4 thinkers:
1. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1275)
 Italian thinker
 He gave the ‘Just War Theory’ this theory finds place somewhere between
‘realpolitic’ (realism) and ‘pacificism’ (denies the existence of any moral reason for
war). Wars can be justified if there are theological principle of faith or philosophical
principle of reason.
 A just war would be a just war if:
(a) It was the last resort
(b) There was a just cause
(c) there was proportionality
(d) there was some legitimate authority
(e) there was right intention
(f) there was reasonable prospect of success
 movement form high politics to low politics
2. Montesquieu (1689-1755)
 French philosopher.
 People are essentially good but what causes problems is the institutions which make
these people corrupt.
 Education and awareness can solve the problem of corrupt institutions.
3. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)
 Both Kant and Bentham believed in the barbaric nature of international regime.
  Kant used the term ‘lawless state of savagery’ for the international regime.
[International anarchy, as we call it today]
 He gave the theory of Universal and Perpetual Peace. He wrote 3 definitive articles
explaining this theory:
(a) I Definitive Article: The civil constitution of every state shall be republican.
Decisions shall not be taken arbitrarily, the element of consent of the citizens has
to be there always. The underlying assumption was that man is rational and
therefore the collective consensus would be inclined against the idea of a war.
(b) II Definitive Article: the right of nations shall be based. Every state, for its own
security and for the security of other nations as well, oughtto enter into a
constitution in which rights of each can be secured. Such a constitution would be a
civil one.The implication of what he said: idea of World Government. This should
be different from what a peace treaty is, because a peace treaty does not have
universal application. Peace treaties usually end a particular war, but the kind of
constitution that he talks about would create a sort of a pacific federation and
would ensure peace throughout the world
(c) III Definitive Article: cosmopolitan right shall be limited to conditions of universal
hospitality. People of the earth have entered into a universal community as a result
of which violation of rights in one part of the world is felt everywhere and
therefore the idea of cosmopolitan right, which is a necessary compliment to the
code of political and international rights, transforming it into a universal right of
humanity.
4. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)
 Principle of utility.
 He does believe in the sanctity of institutions.
 He believed that the major institutions have to be arranged and have to be ordered,
only then the greatest satisfaction or the greatest good of the greatest number can be
achieved.
 Example of German Diet
 19th Century Political and Economic Liberalism
 Democracy over aristocracy and Free trade
 Man is rational and also has the capacity to fulfil all his desires and reach the zenith of his
persona, provided there is minimal state intervention.
 ‘Harm Principle by J.S. Mill’ State has no right to encroach upon self-regarding behaviour.
 This idea of liberalism was also known as ‘commercial liberalism’ as it attributed freedom to free
trade. The proponents of the concept of commercial liberalism are Richard Cobden (1804-1865)
and John Bright (1811-1889).
  The inspiration behind commercial liberalism came from ‘Manchester Liberals’ and their idea of
economic liberalism. Theories of Ricardo and Adam Smith.
 The key theme of Commercial liberalism was free trade and this could be achieved only in
capitalist states where human beings could improve their own conditions, thereby maximising
both individual and collective economic growth. For this government must permit free markets
and free flow of trade and commerce
 One should not be forced to produce certain goods and services (harm principle). They must have
the comparative advantage of producing what they are good at. It leads not only to economic
benefits but also leads to, what Cobden calls, ‘bonds of eternal peace’ which results from inter-
dependence and inter-connectedness. There occurs movement from high political factors to low
political factors.
 Cobden: “The progress of freedom depends more upon the maintenance of peace, the spread of
commerce and the diffusion of education, than upon the labour of cabinets and foreign officers.”
 Britain vocally supported this. Criticism: Britain benefits disproportionately.
 Aggression and expansionism are best deterred by the spirit of commerce.
 Public opinion should also be incorporated. Public opinion at domestic level must be extended to
the domain of international relations.
 They conclude their idea by saying that there is a natural harmony of interest.
 Commercial liberalism not only enable negative reinforcements but also because of positive
reasons such as interconnectedness, etc.

NOTE: High political factors (self- interest, survival and security-what realists propose) and low political
factors (environmental issues, human rights, justice, welfare, etc.)

 20th Century Wilsonian Idealism

 They challenged the previous school of thought. Peace does not come naturally it has to be
constructed.
 Woodrow Wilson is the main proponent
 Leonard Woolf: “Peace and prosperity is a consciously devised machinery”
 Wilson supported Woolf’s stance by saying that “peace could only be secured with the creation if
international organization to regulate international anarchy. Security could not be left to secret
bilateral deals and a blind faith in balance of power.”
 League of Nations
 “Collective Security” – central theme: If there is a threat to any of the nations, it should be
considered as a threat to all the nations and steps should be taken to prevent harm.
 “Collective Defence”: Alliance of system of security. T is usually a response to a
particular threat and you have a body having signatories who would collectively work to
 solve the problem, if need be. Bodes like NATO and WARSAW believe in collective
defence system. Collective interests only of the close-knit group are considered.
 Article 6 of LoN Charter: In the even to of war, all member nations must cease normal
relations with the offending state, impose sanctions and if necessary commit their armed
forces to the disposable of the lease council.
 America itself wasn’t a part of the LoN.
 LoN collapsed and this collapse was a fatal blow to liberalism.
 There was a realisation that the language of liberalism had to be changed. Moral rhetoric
and the central theme will continue to be the same.
 Thus emerged the UNO. There has to be consensual opinion of the States for ensuring its
effective functioning and for effective enforcement. They came up with the idea of “Veto
System”. A bi-polar world dominated the international regime. The world, at that time,
was living in a “stillborn collective security”- there was balance of power because of veto
power.
 They realised that the concept of realism was unable to answer the problems of
modernisation.
 David Mitrany was one of the pioneers in the integrative model theory. His response to
the queries of modernisation was the core principle was “ramifications”. Ramifications
meaning the likelihood that cooperation in one sector would lead governments to extend
the range of collaboration cross other sectors. As states become more embedded in an
integration process, the cost of withdrawing from cooperative ventures increases. In the
modernisation process, some kind of ramification is required, wherein “transnational
actors” play an important role in the integration process.
 This led to the emergence of a new generation of scholars who were known as
“Pluralists”.
 Pluralism
 A new dimension to liberalism: idea of transnational actors which questioned the idea of
sovereignty of states given by Realists.
 Pluralism as concept gained importance
 The centrality of other actors such as the interest groups, transnational corporations and
international non-governmental organizations had to be taken into consideration.

NEO-LIBERALISM

 Neo-Liberalism and Neo Realism- Similarities This marked the closure of the divide between the two
or the end of the Neo-Neo debate
1. Anarchical international structure
2. Centrality of states
 3. Rationalist Approach to Social Scientific Enquiry: moving away from traditionalist approach and
towards rationalist approach to social scientific enquiry
 Neo Liberalism and Neo Realism- Differences
1. Anarchy does not mean that durable patterns of cooperation are impossible.
2. The creation of international regimes matter because they facilitate cooperation by reducing
information asymmetry, reinforcing reciprocity and making defection from norms easier to punish.
3. Neo liberals argued that actors would enter into cooperative agreements if the gains were evenly
shared. Neo Realists believe in mutual gains and Neo Liberalists believe in relative gains.
 Traditional Liberalism and Neo Liberalism- Differences
1. Fact-Theory Separation, that is, Positivism : Classical liberalists believed more in normative,
utopian thoughts and idealism while Neo Liberalists had adopted the positivist scientific approach.
Neo-Liberalism maintains that academic enquiry should be guided by a commitment to the
scientific approach to theory building. It should not be influenced by the personal values of the
scholars, rather their task must be to observe regularities to formulate hypothesis as to why these
relationships exist and hold them to critical scrutiny
2. Commerce breeds Peace: Neo realists were critical of the 19 th century liberals’ naïve assumption
that commerce breeds peace. A free trading system according to neo-liberals can provide incentives
for cooperation but not guarantee it because cooperation is not automatic, it requires planning and
negotiation.
 Definition of Liberalism
1. Doyle (1997)
a. All citizens are juridically equal and possess certain basic rights to education, access to free
press and religious toleration.
b. The legislative assembly of the state possesses only the authority invested in it by the people
whose basic rights it is not permitted to abuse.
c. A key dimension of the liberty of the individual is the right to own property including
productive forces.
d. Liberalism contends that the most effective system of economic exchange is one that it is largely
market-driven and not one that is subordinate to bureaucratic regulation and control, either
domestically or internationally.
2. Francis Fukuyama- “End of History and the Last Man” (1992):
This was written at the time of the fall of berlin wall and the end of SU- How democracy is the only
form of government which eventually prevails- Victory of Liberal Democracy.

MARXIST THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

End of cold war  victory of liberal democracy and capitalist economy It was said that the Marxist
theory had failed. Countries like China and Cuba had succumbed to the central idea of the capitalist system.
They did not continue to exist as purely socialist economies. Despite this, the Marxist theory has not
vanished completely.

KARL MARX (1818-1883)

 Marxism has been both evolutionary and revolutionary in nature. The real development started only
after his death.
 Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels are the founders of Scientific Socialism of Workingmen’s Movement.
 Important works:
1. Communist Manifesto
2. Critique of Political Economy
3. Das Capital
4. Poverty of Philosophy
 Communalism is sort of a radical version of socialism and what socialism would eventually lead to.
 The age in which Karl Marx was living was the age of Industrial Development. He was apprehensive
this age which he called the “Age of Industrial Slavery”.
 The message of Karl Marx: he asks the proletariats of the world to unite “the workers have nothing to
lose but your chains and you have a world to win”- it was a call to all the workingmen to unite against
the bourgeoisie of the world.
 Basic ideas:
1. Economic Determinism:
 The economic forces determine, shape and define all political, social, cultural, intellectual and
intellectual aspects of civilisation.
2. Surplus Value
 This is equal to the new value created by workers in excess of their own labour cost which is
appropriated by the capitalists as profits when products are sold.
3. Class Struggle or Class Conflict
 In the struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie which was intrinsic to the capitalist
industrial society, the bourgeoisie control the capital and means of production while the
proletariat provide the labour and the struggle between the two is known as the class conflict.
4. Dialectical Materialism
 Karl Marx was influenced by Hegelian Dialectics
 A Thesis: proposition or argument giving rise to a reaction. Idea that results out of the
discourse- negates the existing discourse.
 Antithesis: counter proposition which negates the thesis- negating the negation
 Synthesis: tension resolved between the two or combination of opposing assertions-
qualitative improvement of the dialogue.
 Primitive Communism: Initially there was a classless society (common ownership)
  Historical Society (Industrialised Society): antithesis
 Higher Communism: oppressive capitalists would be overthrown.
 Conclusion: 3 features of Marxian State:
1. The State is an instrument of exploitation and coercion. It is manipulated by the
bourgeoisie to exploit the wage earners. Its form is determined by the exigencies of
class struggle and the demands of the underlying material situation.
2. Through revolutionary spirit and organisation, the workers establish a socialist
commonwealth. It is the transitional stage and the workers use the State for two
purposes- the destruction of capitalism and the construction of socialism.
3. Once this task of destruction and construction is complete, there would be no need for
a State. The final ideal of the Marxian State is the established of a classless, stateless
society.

TRADITIONAL MARXISM- KARL MARX & ENGELS

 Materialistic conception of history: economic factors or forces are responsible for all that happens.
 There will be internal contradictions leading to class struggle. Class struggle culminates into a social-
political-economic revolution leading to the emergence of a new form of state-less regime.
 Base: means of production; Super structure: political institution

ORTHODOX COMMUNISM- LENIN & STALIN

 It deals with Seizing of power, leadership, politics, economic management

 Lenin, while trying to explain world affairs, said that capitalism could not be understood in the way Karl
Marx had anticipated. He wrote “Imperialism- the Highest State of Capitalism” in 1917.
 He came up with the idea of Monopoly Capitalism. The hole idea of capitalism had changed. It now
dived the world economy into:
1. Core nations: developed dominating nations
2. Periphery nations: exploited by developed nations
 The profits earned by exploiting the periphery nations are used by the core nations for the benefit of the
periphery nations.
 With the development of a core and periphery, there was no longer an automatic harmony of interest
between all workers of the world. The bourgeoisie in the core countries could use profits derived from
exploiting the periphery to improve the lot of their own proletariat. The capitalists of the core could
pacify their own working class through the further exploitation of the periphery.
 This idea of core and periphery was taken up by Dependency School
 Latin American school
 Major proponents: Raul Prebish, Galtung & Wallerstein, Andre Gunder Frank
  The countries in the periphery were suffering because they were completely dependent on the
poor countries. This resulted in “declining terms of trade”. Price of manufactured goods (given
by core states) is rising at a much higher pace than the raw materials (given by periphery states).
 The price of manufactured goods increased more rapidly than that of raw materials which was a
result of their economy’s reliance on raw material production, countries of the periphery became
poorer relative to the poor.

NEO-MARXISM/MODERN MARXISM- ANTONIO GRAMSCI

NEO-GRAMSCIANS- ROBERT COX, STEPHEN GILL, MARK RUPERT

MARXISM, REALISM AND LIBERALISM

Marxism Realism
Oppressive Capitalism International Anarchy- no world government- and
therefore international conflicts are bound to happen.
Determining forces were economic in nature At least the Ne- Liberalists had diluted the factors
and other factors were also taken into account
They did not consider state as the key actor They strongly believe in sovereignty of state- state as
key actor

Marxism Liberalism
They say that the idea of free trade leading to liberty Free trade leading to liberty.
is a farce. The benefits are enjoyed only by a select
few- bourgeoisie
Class conflict is natural and inevitable Eventually, there will be harmony of interest
Socialism will lead to social tyranny (excessive state
intervention) which will be an impediment to growth,
development, actualization and self-realization. Socialism
is a transitional stage between capitalism and overthrow
of capitalism.

WORLD SYSTEM THEORY- A TRIPARTITE INTER REGIONAL AND TRANSNATIONAL

DIVISION OF LABOUR

 Immanuel Wallerstein- ‘Modern World System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European
World Economy in the Eighteenth Century’ (1974)
  It seeks to undo the theory of modernisation. It says that the theory of modernisation understands the
world system by taking into consideration only the nation states as the units of analysis.
 It understands the economy of the whole world.
 World system divided into Core, Semi Periphery and Periphery.
1. Core developed dominant countries which are highly skilled and capital-intensive companies.
2. Periphery low skilled and labour intensive countries that are largely committed to extraction of
raw materials and eventually providing them to the core countries.
3. Semi-Periphery hybrid of the above two.
 Core dominates the periphery and the semi periphery
 Periphery is dominated by both.
 Semi Periphery is dominated by core and dominates periphery.

Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa

Flow of high profit consumption goods.

Semi Periphery
Core Periphery

Flow of Cheap labour and raw materials

North Western Europe, USA, Canada, Australia

India, China, Brazil, South Korea, Israel, etc.

 Core Nations
 Largely own the means of production
 Chirot in 1986 identified 5 most important benefits to core nations-
1. Access to a large quantity of raw material
2. Cheap labour
3. Benefits from direct capital investments
4. A market for exports
5. Migration of skilled professional labour from the non-core to the core.
 Characteristics:
(Productivity dominance, trade
1. Economically diversified, wealthy and powerful- industrialised.
dominance and financial
2. Have strong central governments and institutions
dominance)
3. Specialise in information, finance and service technologies.
4. Strong bourgeoisie and proletariat. Both the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are affluent.
5. Relatively independent of outside world
 6. Control global market.
 Peripheral
 Characteristics
1. Hardly own the means of production.
2. Least economically diversified, unskilled, weak government and institutions.
3. Often targets for investments (exploitation)
4. Having a small bourgeoisie and a larger proletariat.
5. Poverty, illiteracy, inequality.
6. Highly influenced by the core countries and forced to follow them.
 Semi-Peripheral
 Characteristics:
1. Share characteristics of core and periphery.
2. Mostly capitalist diversified economies but not dominant in international trade.
3. Protectionist policies- aggressively follow these policies in the sense that they try to protect their
domestic trade against international trade by imposing tariffs and using subsides
4. Stabilizing the system- buffers
5. Can come into existence by either declining cores or developing peripheries.