Essential of International Relations - Free download as Word Doc .doc /.docx), Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd 5th Edition .. Proxy hot wars, such as the Six-Day War in , and the Yom Kippur War in 15 The Historical Context of Contemporary International Relations 17 The . This Second Edition of the book has been thoroughly updated and ex- panded. During the Six- Day War in , Israel crushed the Soviet-equipped Arabs in six . Essentials of International Relations: 6th Edition (Karen A. Mingst & Ivan M. Arreguin-Toft) Chapter 3 Notes: 4 forms of approach to state: Realist: nationalist state.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Portuguese|
|Genre:||Fiction & Literature|
|ePub File Size:||17.62 MB|
|PDF File Size:||10.82 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Regsitration Required]|
Essentials of international relations / Karen A. Mingst Mingst, Karen A., · View online 12 editions of this work. Find a specific Sixth edition. New York. Essentials of International Relations. Seventh Edition. Paperback. Karen A. Mingst (Author, University of Kentucky), Resource. Test Bank, PDF. (PDF, MB). Study Essentials of International Relations (Sixth Edition) discussion and chapter questions and find Essentials of International Relations (Sixth Edition) study.
A brief, teachable introduction to the core concepts and theories of international relations. Karen A. She holds a Ph. A specialist in international organization, international law, and international political economy, Professor Mingst has conducted research in Western Europe, West Africa, and Yugoslavia. She is the author or editor of seven books and numerous academic articles.
Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye describe the international system as interdependent. There are multiple channels connecting states, and multiple issues and agendas arise in the interdependent system. Actors share a common identity, a sense of we-ness; without such an identity, a society cannot exist.
This conception has normative implications: This is also called neoliberal institutionalism, a view that comes closer to realist thinking.
But, unlike many realists, they see the product of the interaction among actors as a potentially positive one, where institutions created out of self-interest serve to moderate state behavior. Liberals and International System Change o Changes come from several sources: Changes occur as the result of exogenous technological developmentsthat is, progress occurring independently.
Examples are communication and transportation systems. Change may occur because of changes in the relative importance of different issues areas. In the last decades of the twentieth century, economic issues replaced national security issues. Globalizing issues such as human rights may assume primacy in the twenty-first century. Change may occur as new actors, including multinational corporations and nongovernmental organizations, augment or replace state actors.
Radicals seek to describe and explain the structure of the system in terms of stratification: The system is stratified according to which states have vital resources. From the stratification of power and resources comes the division between the haves, characterized by the North, and have-nots, positioned in the South.
Economic disparities are built into the structure and all actions are constrained by this structure. The Implications for Stratification o When the dominant powers are challenged by those states just beneath them in terms of access to resources, the system may become highly unstable.
The rising powers seek first-tier status and are willing to fight wars to get it. Top powers may begin a war to quell the threat. Capitalism dominates international institutions whose rules are structured by capitalist states to facilitate capitalist processes, and MNCs whose headquarters are in capitalist states but whose loci of activity are in dependent states. They sought changes such as debt forgiveness, how commodities were priced, and controls on multinational corporations MNCs.
Constructivists argue that the whole concept of an international system is a European idea. Nothing can be explained by material structures alone. Martha Finnemore suggests that there have been different international orders with changing purposes.
Constructivists believe that what does change are social norms. Allows comparison and contrasts between systems 2. Systems theory is a holistic approach.
Although it cannot provide descriptions of events at the micro level, it does allow plausible explanations at the more general level. For realists, generalizations provide fodder for prediction. For liberals and radicals, these generalizations have normative implications. Disadvantages 1. The emphasis at the international system level means that the stuff of politics is often neglected, while the generalizations are broad and obvious. The testing of systems theories is very difficult.
Most theorists are constrained by a lack of historical information and thus the ability to test specific hypotheses over a long time period is restricted. The problem of boundaries: What factors lie outside the system? What shapes the system? The idea of a single international system is largely a creation of European thought. It may be better to think of multiple international systems over time 1.
Imperial China 2. The umma as a community of Muslims. Of all theoretical approaches, realists and radicals pay the most attention to the international system of analysis. For realists, the defining characteristic is polarity; for radicals, it is stratification.
Constructivists emphasize how changes in norms and ideas shape the system, seeing little differentiation between the international and domestic system and eschewing the importance attached to international system structure. Constraints are viewed by realists as positive, by radicals as negative, and by liberals as neutral as an arena and process for interaction.
For an entity to be considered a state, four fundamental conditions must be met although these legal criteria are not absolute: A nation is a group of people who share a set of characteristics. At the core of the concept of a nation is the notion that people having commonalities owe their allegiance to the nation and to its legal representative, the state. With improved methods of transportation and invention of the printing press, people could travel, witnessing firsthand similarities and differences among peoples.
Some nations, liked Denmark and Italy, formed their own states. This coincidence between state and nation, the nation-state, is the foundation for national self-determination, the idea that peoples sharing nationhood have a right to determine how and under what conditions they should live. Other nations are spread among several states; in these cases, the state and the nation do not coincide. Not all ethnonationalists aspire to the same goals.
The Realist View of the State o Realists hold a state-centric view: As a sovereign entity, the state has a consistent set of goalsthat is, a national interestdefined in terms of power. Once the state acts, it does so as an autonomous, unitary actor. The Liberal View of the State o The state enjoys sovereignty but is not an autonomous actor. The state is a pluralist arena whose function is to maintain the basic rules of the game. These interests often change and compete against each other within a pluralistic framework.
The Radical View of the State o The instrumental Marxist view sees the state as the executing agent of the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie reacts to direct societal pressures, especially to pressures from the capitalist class.
Within that system, the state is driven to expand, because of the imperatives of the capitalist system. The Constructivist View of the State o National interests are neither material nor given.
They are ideational and continually changing and evolving, both in response to domestic factors and in response to international norms and ideas. Contrasting the Various Views of the State: The Example of Oil o A realist interpretation posits a uniform national interest that is articulated by the state. Oil is vital for national security; thus, the state desires stability in oils availability and price.
The state itself has no consistent viewpoint about the oil; its task is to ensure that the playing field is level and the rules are the same for all players. There is also no single or consistent national interest. The negotiating process is exploitative for the advancement of capitalist states. States are critical actors because they have power, which is the ability not only to influence others but to control outcomes so as to produce results that would not have occurred naturally. Power itself is multi-dimensional; there are different kinds of power.
Natural Sources of Power. Whether power is effective at influencing outcomes depends on the power potential of each party. A states power potential depends on its natural sources of power. The three most important natural sources of power are: Geographic size and position: Alfred Mahan argued that the state that controls the ocean routes controls the world.
Sir Halford Mackinder argued that the state that had the most power was the one that controlled the heartland. Petroleum-exporting states like Kuwait and Qatar, which are geographically small but have greater power than their sizes would suggest.
Having a sought-after resource may prove a liability making states targets for aggressive actions. The absence of natural resources does not mean that a state has no power potential; Japan is not rich in resources but is still an economic powerhouse. However, states with small, highly educated, skilled populations such as Switzerland can fill large political and economic niches.
Tangible Sources of Power. Industrial development: With industrialization, the importance of population is modified: Radicals believe that differences in who has access to the source of tangible power lead to the creation of different classes, some more powerful than others. National image: Public support: For example, Chinas power was magnified under Mao Zedong because there was unprecedented public support for the communist leadership.
Likewise, poor leaders diminish the states power capacity. Joseph S. Nye has labeled intangible power soft power: Liberals would more than likely place greater importance on these intangible ingredients, since several are characteristics of domestic processes. Constructivists argue that power includes not only the tangible and intangible sources but also the power of ideas and language.
It is through the power of ideas and norms that state identities and nationalism are forged and changed. The Art of Diplomacy o Traditional diplomacy entails states trying to influence the behavior of other actors by negotiating. Wellintentioned parties have a higher probability of successful negotiations. Although states seldom enter diplomatic bargaining as equals, each has information and goals of its own.
The outcome is almost always mutually beneficial, but the outcome may not please each of the parties equally. Most states carry out two levels of bargaining simultaneously: Robert Putnam refers to this as a two-level game. Trade negotiations with the World Trade Organization are often conducted as two-level games. Bargaining and negotiating are a culture-bound activity. Approaches to bargaining vary across cultures.
Two styles of negotiations have been identified: Deductive style: The use of public diplomacy is an increasingly popular technique. It involves targeting both foreign publics and elites, attempting to create an overall image that enhances a countrys ability to achieve its objectives. It was used before and during the Iraq war. Diplomacy may need to include more than negotiations, making other forms of diplomacy necessary.
Some states may choose niche diplomacy, concentrating their efforts on in a few areas. States may use both positive and negative economic sanctions to try to influence other states. Positive sanctions involve offering a carrot, enticing the target state to act in the desired way by rewarding moves made in the desired direction.
Negative sanctions may be more the norm: A states ability to use these instruments of economic statecraft depends on its power potential. While radicals deny it, liberals argue that developing states do have some leverage in economic statecraft if they control a key resource of which there is limited production. In general, economic sanctions have not been very successful. They appear to work in the short term, but in the long term, it is difficult to maintain international cohesion.
The international community has tried to affect specific individuals and avoid the high humanitarian costs of general sanctions. Force may be used either to get a target state to do something or to undo something it has donecalled compellenceor to keep an adversary from doing something called deterrence.
Compellence was used in the prelude to the Gulf War as the international community tried to get Saddam Hussein to change his actions. During each step of the compellent strategy of escalation, one message was communicated to Iraq: Compellence was also used when the Western alliance sought to get Serbia to stop abusing the human rights of Kosovar Albanians, and before the Iraq war.
With deterrence, states commit themselves to punishing a target state if the target state takes an undesired action. Threats of actual war are used to dissuade a state from pursuing certain courses of action. Deterrence has taken on a special meaning since the advent of nuclear weapons in States that recognize the destructive capability of nuclear weapons and know that others have a second-strike capabilitythe ability to retaliate even after an attack has been launched by an opponentwill refrain from taking aggressive action, using its first-strike capability.
Deterrence is then successful. For either compellence or deterrence to be effective, states must clearly and openly communicate their objectives and capabilities, be willing to make good on the threats, and have the credibility to follow through with their commitments. Compellence and deterrence can fail.
Even if states go to war, they have choices. They choose the type of weaponry, the kind of targets, the geographic locus, and to respond in kind, to escalate, or de-escalate. Is the foreign policy behavior of democratic states any different from the behavior of nondemocratic or authoritarian states? In Perpetual Peace , Immanuel Kant argued that the spread of democracy would change international politics by eliminating war. The public would be very cautious in supporting war since they are apt to suffer the most devastating effects.
Other explanations have been added to the democratic peace hypothesis. Perhaps some are more satisfied with the status quo or more likely to be allies of each other since they share similar values. Despite a plethora of studies by political scientists, the evidence is not that clear-cut and explanations are partial.
Even within a single research program, there may be serious differences in conclusions based on the assumptions made and methods used. Yet the basic finding is that democracies do not engage in militarized disputes against each other. Democracies are not more pacific than nondemocracies; democracies just do not fight each other. The Rational Model o Foreign policy is conceived of as actions chosen by the national government that maximize its strategic goals and objectives.
Decisions depend heavily on precedents; major changes in policy are unlikely. Decisions flow from the tug-of-war among these departments and individuals. When time is no real constraint, informal groups and departments have time to mobilize. The model is relevant in large, democratic countries, where responsibility it divided among a number of different units.
The Pluralist Model o The pluralist model attributes decisions to bargaining conducted among domestic sourcesthe public, interest groups, and multinational corporations MNCs. Societal groups have a variety of ways of forcing decisions in their favor or constraining decisions. The movement to ban land mines in the s is an example of a pluralist foreign policy decision. Globalization o Externally, the state is buffeted by globalization, growing integration of the world in terms of politics, economics, communications, and culture.
It is a process that undermines traditional state sovereignty. The internationalization of production and consumption make it ever more difficult for states to regulate their own economic policies.
Culturally, new and intrusive technologiese-mail, fax machines, worldwide TV networksincreasingly undermine the states control over information and hence its control over its citizenry. Transnational Crime o Transnational crime has led to the accelerating movement of illegal drugs, counterfeit goods, smuggled weapons, laundered money, and trafficking in poor and exploited people.
States and government are incapable of responding because of rigid bureaucracies and corrupt officials undermine the states efforts. Transnational Movements o Transnational movements, particularly religious and ideological movements, are now political forces that have challenged the state.
They see a long-standing discrepancy between the political and economic aspirations of states and the actual conditions of corrupt rule and economic inequality.
Ethnonational Movements o Ethnonational movements identify more with a particular culture than with a state. Having experienced discrimination or persecution, many of these groups are now taking collective action in support of national self-determination. It is also tied to the larger conflict between India and Pakistan. For example, China has been confronted by Uighur uprisings. Liberals are adamant that leaders do make a difference.
Whenever there is a leadership change in a major power, speculation always arises about possible changes in the countrys foreign policy. Ample empirical proof has been offered that individual leadership matters. From Nicolae Ceauescu to Mikhail Gorbachev, leadership made a difference in starting and sustaining foreign policy reforms in their respective countries. Constructivists attribute policy shifts in the Soviet Union only to Gorbachev, but also to the networks of reformists and international affairs specialists who promoted new ideas.
For realists, individuals are of little importance. States are not differentiated by their government type or personalities of leaders, but by the relative power they hold in the international system. The Impact of Elites: External Conditions o When political institutions are unstable, young, in crisis, or collapsed, leaders are able to provide powerful influences.
In dictatorial regimes, top leaders are free from constraints such as societal inputs and political opposition and thus can change policy unfettered. Decision makers personal characteristics have more influence on outcomes when the issue is peripheral rather than central, when the issue is not routine, or when the situation is ambiguous and information us unclear.
The Personality Factor o Political psychologist Margaret Hermann has found a number of personality characteristics that affect foreign-policy behaviors. Leaders with high levels of nationalism, a strong need for power, and a high level of distrust of others, tend to develop an independent orientation to foreign affairs.
Leaders with low levels of nationalism, a high need for evaluation, and low levels of distrust of others, tended toward a participatory orientation in foreign affairs. Personality characteristics affect the leadership of dictators more than that of democratic leaders because leaders because of the absence of effective institutional checks. Betty Glad analyzed the personalities of tyrants like Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam Hussein and labeled them as having malignant narcissism syndrome-those who rule without attention to law, capitalize on self-presentations, and utilize cruel tactics.
Individuals are not perfectly rational decision makers. The individual selects, organizes, and evaluates incoming information about the surrounding world. In perceiving and interpreting new and oftentimes contradictory information, individuals rely on existing perceptions.
If those perceptions form a relatively integrated set of images, then they are called a belief system. Political scientists have conducted a number of empirical elite mindset studies of those individuals who left behind extensive written records. Since few leaders leave such as record, our ability to reconstruct elite images and perceptions is limited, as is our ability to state their influence on a specific decision.
Individual elites utilize, usually unconsciously, a number of psychological mechanisms to process the information that forms their general perceptions of the world: Individuals strive to be cognitively consistent, ensuring that images hang together consistently within their belief systems.
Elites in power look for those details of a present episode that look like a past one, perhaps ignoring the important differences. This is referred to as the evoked set.
Perceptions are often shaped in terms of mirror images: Small groups also have psychologically based dynamics that undermine the rational model.
The psychologist Irving Janis called this dynamic groupthink. The dynamics of the group include: The illusion of invulnerability and unanimity 2. Excessive optimism 3.
Belief in their own morality and the enemys evil 4. Pressure placed on dissenters to change their views Small groups have additional distorting tendencies than individuals, such as the pressure for group conformity and searching for a good-enough solution rather than an optimal one.
Top leaders do influence foreign policy, which is made, not just by tyrants, but also by visionaries like Julius Nyerere and Nelson Mandela and by political pragmatists like Vladimir Putin and Margaret Thatcher. Less bound by the rules of the game or the rules of the game or by institutional norms, private individuals engage in activities in which official representatives are either unable or unwilling to participate.
Private individuals increasingly play a role in track-two diplomacy. Track-two diplomacy utilizes individuals outside governments to carry out the task of conflict resolution. Jimmy Carters eleventh-hour dash to meet North Koreas Kim Il Sing in to discuss the latters nuclear buildup was met by questions such as: Was the U.
For whom did Carter speak? Armand Hammer, a U. Jane Fonda illegally visited North Vietnam during the s, Olympic athletes who defect from their countries, Kenyas Wangari Maathai, who promoted that countrys Green Belt Movement, and countless Nobel Prizewinners who have significantly influenced international relations.
Alternative critical and postmodern approaches are attempting to draw mainstream theorists attention to these other stories. Feminist writers have sought to bring attention to the role of private individuals and especially women. Khan confessed to selling nuclear technology and components to Libya, Iran, and North Korea; this made the world a less secure place o Aung San Suu Kyi became the face of the opposition movement in Myanmar Burma.
Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in , she is an international symbol of her movement. Mass publics have the same psychological tendencies as elite individuals and small groups. They think in terms of perceptions and images, they see mirror images, and they use similar information-processing strategies. The influence that mass publics do have on foreign policy can be explained in three ways: Elites and masses act the same because they share common psychological and biological characteristics.
The masses have opinions and attitudes about foreign policy and international relations that are different from those of the elites. The masses, uncontrolled by institutions, may occasionally act in ways that have a profound impact on international relations, regardless of anything that the elites do.
Elites and Masses: Common Traits o Some scholars argue that there are psychological and biological traits common to every man, woman, and child and that societies reflect those characteristics. Individuals and masses are said to have an innate drive to gain, protect, and defend territorythe territorial imperative. The problem with the territorial imperative and the frustrationaggression notion is that even if all individuals and societies share these innate predispositions, not all leaders and all peoples act on these predispositions.
Another possibility is that elites and masses share common traits differentiated by Male elites and masses possess characteristics common to each other, while female elites and masses share different traits from the males.
The Impact of Public Opinion on Elites o Publics do have general foreign-policy orientations and specific attitudes that can be revealed by public-opinion polls. For example, some European states used popular referendums to ratify the Maastricht Treaty. Evidence from the U. Presidents care about their popularity, but mass attitudes may not always be directly translated into policy. Mass Actions by a Leaderless Public o At times, the masses, essentially leaderless, take collective actions that have significant effects on the course of world politics.
Individuals act to improve their own political and economic welfare: It was the individual acts of thousands fleeing East Germany that led to the construction of the Berlin Wall in , and it was the exodus of East Germans through Austria led to the tearing down of the wall in During the peoples putsch Bulldozer Revolution of October , people from all walks of Serbian life crippled the economic system, blocked transportation routes, drove tractors into the city, attacked Parliament, and crippled Milosevic radio and TV stations.
Intergovernmental Organizations. The response is found in liberalism 1. Within the framework of institutions, cooperation is possible Functionalism o Simple problems, often with technical not political solutions are common starting points for IOs o David Mitrany argues that states bind together those interests which are common, where they are common, and to the extent to which they are common. Eventually, those habits will spill over into cooperation in political and military affairs.
Collective Goods o Collective goods are available to all members of the group regardless of individual contributions.
Decisions by one states have effects for other states; that is,. Use coercion: Restructure the preferences of states through rewards and punishments. Alter the size of the group. Such regular interactions occur between states in the United Nations. Some establish regularized processes of information gathering, analysis, and surveillance. Some IGOs, such as the World Trade Organization, develop procedures to make rules, settle disputes, and punish those who fail to follow the rules.
Other IGOs conduct operational activities that help to resolve major substantive problems 4. IGOs also play key roles in bargaining, serving as arenas for negotiating and developing coalitions. They establish expectations about their behavior of other states.
These are known as international regimes. IGOs help to reduce the incentive to cheat and enhance the value of a good reputation. For states, IGOs enlarge the possibilities for foreign policy making and add to the constraints under which states operate and especially implement foreign policy. States join IGOs to use them as instruments of foreign policy. IGOs also constrain states. They set agendas and force governments to make decisions; encourage states to develop processes to facilitate IGO participation, and create norms of behavior with which states must align their policies if they wish to benefit from their membership.
IGOs affect individuals by providing opportunities for leadership. As individuals work with or in IGOs, they, like states, may become socialized to cooperate internationally. The UN is based on the notion of the sovereign equality of member states. Each state is legally equivalent of every other state. Only international problems are within the jurisdiction of the UN. Such problems include human rights, global telecommunications, and environmental regulation.
The UN is designed primarily to maintain international peace and security. States should refrain from the threat or use of force and settle disputes through peaceful means. Security has broadened from the classical protection of national territory to human securityproviding humanitarian relief for refugees or the starving.
Structure 1. Security Council: Decisions must be unanimous and each of the five permanent members has a veto. General Assembly: Since the end of the Cold War, the GAs work has been marginalized, and power has shifted back to the Security Council, much to the dismay of the Group of 77, a coalition of developing states, regional groups, and the Group of The secretary-general is the chief spokesperson and administrative officer.
Trusteeship Council: International Court of Justice: The United Nations played a key role in the decolonization of Africa and Asia. The UN Charter endorsed the principle of self-determination for colonial peoples. The emergence of new states transformed the United Nations because of the formation of the Group of 77, pitting the North against the South.
This conflict continues to be a central feature of the United Nations. In traditional peacekeeping, multilateral institutions such as the United Nations seek to contain conflicts between two states through third-party military forces.
These military units are drawn from small, neutral member states, invited by the disputants, and primarily address interstate conflict. Complex peacekeeping activities respond also to civil war and ethnonationalist conflicts in states that have not requested UN assistance.
UN peacekeepers have tried to maintain law and order in failing societies by aiding in civil administration, policing, and rehabilitating infrastructure. This is referred to as peacebuilding. Complex peacekeeping has had successes and failures. Namibias transition from war to cease-fire and then to independence is seen as a success; Rwandas genocide and need for humanitarian protection is seen as a failure. In the wake of the Oil for Food scandal, new financial accountability mechanisms have been put in place and internal oversight has been established.
In a Peacebuilding Commission was formed to address postconflict recovery. Most states agree that the council membership should be increased, but many disagree over how it should be done, Europe is overrepresented, and Germany and Japan contribute the most financially.
China is the only developing country. Contending proposals have been discussed but no agreement reached. There are nineteen specialized agencies formally affiliated with the United Nations.
These organizations have separate charters, budgets, memberships, and secretariats. They also focus on different issues. Historical Evolution 1. After World War II, an economically strong Europe made possible by a reduction of trade barriers and help from the United States knew it would be better equipped to counter the threat of the Soviet Union if it integrated. The European Coal and Steel Community represented the first step toward realizing the idea.
This became so successful that states agreed to expand cooperation.
Under the European Economic Community, six states agreed to create a common marketremoving restrictions on internal trade, reducing barriers to movement of people, services, and capital, and establishing a common agricultural policy.
New areas were gradually brought under the umbrella of the community, including health, safety, and consumer standards. In , the most important step was taken in deepening the integration processthe signing of the Single European Act SEA , which established the goal of completing a single market by Members committed themselves to a political union, including the establishment of common foreign policies, a single currency, and regional central bank. The Amsterdam Treaty put more emphasis on the rights of individuals, citizenship, and justice.
The increased power of the EU has not been without its opponents. The United Kingdom opted out of the monetary union, and some Europeans fear a diminution of national sovereignty and are reluctant to surrender their democratic rights to nonelected bureaucrats.
In , the proposed European Constitution was signed by members of the heads of state, but both the French and Dutch electorate rejected the document.
Power initially resided in the Commission, which is designed to represent the interests of the community as a whole. Increasingly, the Council of Ministers, with a weighted voting system, has assumed more power. The increasing power of the European Parliament is one area of change.
Since the s it has gained a greater legislative role. The growing power of the European Court of Justice is another change. The court has the responsibility for interpreting and enforcing EU law. Policies and Problems 1.
Among the many controversial issues has been the failed effort to develop a common European foreign and security policy.
The split between who supported the Iraq war and those who opposed it is suggestive. Issues surrounding widening are equally as problematic. Should the EU continue to expand its membership by reaching out to Eastern European states and the former Soviet Union? Can Turkey eventually meet the criteria for membership?
Other regions have sought to follow the EU model, while still others have sought a different role for integration The Organization of American States OAS has followed a different path from that of the EU.
In the OAS adopted wide ranging goals: The OAS not has rules for the protection of democratic government in the form of rules prohibiting members from supporting coups in member states. The OAU had been a weak organization as its members were newly independent states and thus deeply concerned about questions of sovereignty The AU is an attempt to give African states an increased ability to respond to the issues of economic globalization and democratization affecting the continent.
NGOs are generally private, voluntary organizations whose members are individuals or associations that come together to achieve a common purpose. They are diverse entities, ranging from grassroots organizations to those recognized transnationally.
Some are funded solely through private sources, while others rely on partial government funds. Some are open to mass memberships and some are closed member groups. The issues seized on have been viewed as interdependent, or globalizing, issuesissues states cannot solve alone and whose solutions require transnational cooperation.
Global conferences became a key venue for international activity beginning in the s, each designed to address the environment, population, women, and food. NGOs organized separate but parallel conferences on the same issues. The end of the Cold War and the expansion of democracy have provided political opening for NGOs into parts of the world before untouched by NGO activity.
The communications revolutionfirst fax, then the Web and e-mail has enabled NGOs to communicate more efficiently. Functions and Roles of NGOs: NGOs act as advocates for specific policies and offer alternative channels of political participation, as Amnesty International has done.
They mobilize mass publics, as Greenpeace did in saving the whales. They distribute critical assistance in disaster relief and to refugees, as Oxfam has done. They are the principal monitors of human rights norms and environmental regulations and provide warnings of violations, as Human Rights Watch has done.
NGOs are the primary actors at the grassroots level in mobilizing individuals to act. For the first time, they made statements from the floor during official meetings, drafted information materials, and scrutinized UN documents. At the national level, NGOs have occasionally taken the place of states, either performing services that are inept or corrupt government is not stepping in for a failed state. NGOs seldom work alone.
The communications revolution has served to link NGOs with each other, formally and informally. NGOs may also be formed for malevolent purposes, the Mafia, international drug cartels, and even Al Qaeda. The Power of NGOs 1. NGOs rely on soft power, meaning credible information, expertise, and moral authority that attracts the attention and admiration of governments and the public. NGOs have distinct advantages over individuals, states, and intergovernmental organizations. They are usually politically independent, participate at all levels, and can make policy with less risk to national sensitivities.
The International Campaign to Ban Landmines demonstrates the power of the network. The Limits of NGOs 1. Most NGOs have very limited economic resources since they do not collect taxes. The competition for funding is fierce. There is a continuous need to raise money, and some NGOs increasingly rely on governments. If NGOs choose to accept state. Success is hard to measure; there is no single agenda, and NGOs are often working at cross-purposes.
Some people question whether certain activities undertaken by NGOs, which have traditionally been viewed as supportive of the common good, may result in prolonging conflicts. International Law and Functions o International law consists of a body of both rules and norms regulating interactions among states, between states and IGOs, and among IGOs, states, and individuals.
Established structures exist for both making law and enforcing law, and law binds individuals and groups within the state. There is widespread compliance with the law because it is in the interest of everyone that order be maintained.
Nonetheless, liberals acknowledge that international law exists and has an effect in daily life, such as airspace, trade, and shipping regulations. The Sources of International Law o Custom. But customary law is limited because it develops slowly. Not all states participate in customary law, and its uncodified nature leads to ambiguity in interpretation.
Treaties are the dominant source of law today, and are legally binding: The International Court of Justice ICJ has been responsible for some significant decisions, but it is a weak institution for several reasons: The court actually hears very few cases.
Since , only cases have been brought before it. When cases are heard, they rarely deal with the major controversies of the day because such controversies are outside of the courts reach. Only states may initiate proceedings; individuals and nongovernmental actors like multinational corporations cannot.
National and even local courts. They may hear cases occurring on their territory in which international law is invoked or cases involving their own citizens.
Under universal jurisdiction, states may claim jurisdiction if the conduct of a defendant is sufficiently heinous to violate the laws of all states. A key trend in the new millennium has been the expansion of the international judiciary, motivated by the idea of individual responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Because of the need to establish procedures and the difficulty of finding those accused, the trials have been subject to criticism In light of the difficulties with the ad hoc tribunals, in , states concluded the statute for the International Criminal Court ICC , an innovative court having both compulsory jurisdiction and jurisdiction over individuals.
ICC work began in , and pending cases all concern crimes committed in African countries. The ICC is controversial. Supporters see the court as essential for establishing international law and enforcing individual accountability. Others, including the U. Why do states obey international law most of the time? The liberal response is that they obey because it is right to do so. Individual states benefit from living in an ordered world where there are general expectations about other states behavior.
Should states choose not to obey, other members of the international system do have recourse: Self-help mechanisms of enforcement from one state alone are apt to be ineffective. To be most effective, states must use collective action against the violator. They are skeptical about international law o International law creates some order, and states comply because it is in the states self-interest to comply.
It is in the self-interest of states to have their airspace and territory respected, and to enjoy secure procedures for international trade.
Radicals see contemporary international law as the product of a specific time and historical process, emerging out of eighteenth-century economic liberalism and nineteenth-century political liberalism. Those institutions have succeeded in sustaining the powerful elite against the powerless mass of weaker states.
Most radicals see the world of NGOs based in the North as dominated. NGOs are captive to the dominant interests of that system. Contemporary law and international organizations are not the agents of the political and economic changes that radicals desire,. They place critical importance on institutions and norms.
These new norms may influence state behavior. Law plays a key role in constructivist thinking because it reflects changing norms. Norms are internalized by states themselves, they change state preferences, and shape behavior. Realists remain skeptical; all are reflections of state power and have no independent identity or role.
Radicals view them skeptically as well. They see them as mere reflections of political and economic hegemony.
Liberals believe that international law and organizations do not replace states as the primary actors, but they do provide alternative venues for states themselves to engage in collective action and for individuals to join with other like-minded individuals in pursuit of their goals. War and Strife I. Introduction This chapter introduces prominent approaches to mitigating the effects of the security dilemma as well as how insecurity can be managed short of war.
War is the oldest, most prevalent, and most salient issue in international relations. Attention to war and security is warranted: Although 3. International relations theorists disagree over the inevitability of war. Classical realists and neorealists argue that war is inevitable.
They view states as victims of the prisoners dilemma during times of conflict: The inevitability of war also creates a security dilemma: Liberals argue that war can be eliminated with sufficient effort and effective institutions that can reduce the chances of conflict.
Liberals also argue that the way in which a state is governed domestically can change its attitude toward war.
The democratic peace concept demonstrates this by arguing that democracies virtually never fight one another. Radicals argue that war can be eliminated, but only through a revolutionary change in the character of the system. Constructivists argue that war is the result of a process of socialization in which conflict is assumed to exist. If this construction is changed, then war can potentially be eliminated. Historically, states have sought security by balancing realist and liberal policies.
When states face more serious threats, they tend to look toward realism. Both the characteristics of individual leaders and the general attributes of people have been blamed for war. Realist interpretation: Characteristics of the masses lead to the outbreak of war. Aggressive behavior is adopted by virtually all species to ensure survival. War is the product of biologically innate human characteristics or flawed human nature.
Liberal interpretation: Misperceptions by leaders, such as seeing aggressiveness where it may not be intended, or attributing the actions of one person to an entire group, can lead to the outbreak of war. Liberal explanations: Some types of economic systems are more war-prone than others, such as aristocratic states. Democratic regimes are least likely to wage war because democratic norms and culture inhibit the leadership from taking actions leading to war.
Radical explanations: Conflict and war are attributed to the internal dynamics of capitalist economic systems: This struggle leads to war. One manifestation of this is diversionary war: The international system is equivalent to a state of war; it is anarchic and governed only by a weak and overarching rule of law. War breaks out because there is nothing to stop it.
States themselves are the final authorities and the ultimate arbiters of disputes; herein resides sovereignty. Realist variant: Power transition theory: Represented by the work of Organski, this theory argues that changes in state capabilities lead to war. War occurs when a dissatisfied challenger state begins to attain the same capabilities as the hegemon.
Modelski and Thompson find that there are regular cycles of power as old powers decline and new powers rise. Radical interpretation: Dominant capitalist states within the international system need to expand economically, leading to wars with developing regions over control of natural resources and labor markets.
At the individual level: Perhaps Saddam Husseins individual characteristics, including his basic insecurity and ruthless techniques, help to explain Iraqs actions. Hussein may have calculated that his actions would not elicit a military response from the international community.
At the state level: Iraq was just acting in its own national interest. Iraq felt that the land oil fields annexed had been illegally seized during the British occupation around the time of World War I. The war with Iran had also reduced Iraqs oil revenues. At the international system level: Several factors indicated that Iraqs actions would not be resisted: Saakashvilis efforts to restore Georgian pride and resist the Russian bully raised tensions.
The pressures of ethnic identity both raised tensions and provided a reason for Russian interest in South Ossetia. Saakashvili and Medvedev both wanted to look active and strong. Georgia was acting to promote its sovereignty over a breakaway region. Russia was acting to increase its influence in part of the former Soviet territory.
There was no impartial arbiter to deal with any of the questions at issue in the conflict. In a state of anarchy, both sides had to rely on their own strengths during the conflict. Interstate wars: In the past these were the focus of most research. They are the easiest to study and have caused the most damage. Intrastate wars: While the number of ongoing intrastate wars has declined, the decline has been less precipitous than the decline in interstate wars. Total war: Wars involving multiple great powers.
Total wars include significant destruction and loss of life. Since the end of World War II, total wars have become less frequent; the number of countries participating in total wars has fallen, and they tend to last for shorter lengths of time This has led some to argue that this type of war is obsolete.
Limited war: While interstate wars which can be called total wars have declined significantly, limited wars and particularly civil wars that are limited in nature have increased precipitously.
Two-thirds of all conflicts since World War II have been civil wars. Characteristics of limited wars: They last a long time, with periods of fighting punctuated by periods of relative calm. Human costs are high: Food supplies are interrupted. Diseases spread as health systems suffer. Money is diverted from constructive economic development to purchasing armaments.
Entire generations may grow up knowing only a state of war. Limited war has become the most common option for states contemplating violence against other states. How Wars are Fought Conventional war: Conventional war is conducted primarily with conventional weapons.
Conventional weapons: Weapons of mass destruction WMD: Debate over nuclear proliferation: Unconventional warfare: This can be expressed either in the conduct of the war itself or in the refusal to accept traditional outcomes of battle. Asymmetric conflict: The weaker party seeks to neutralize its opponents strengths by exploiting that opponents weaknesses. Guerilla warfare: Fighters rely on hit-and-run tactics until the enemy is worn down. Examples include the Algerians against the French in the s, and the Taliban against coalition forces in Afghanistan.
This involves four major elements: Since the s, terrorist acts have become more lethal. The infrastructure to support terrorism has become more sophisticated, and groups practicing terrorism are more wide-ranging. Responding to terrorism has become increasingly difficult; perpetrators have networks of supporters in the resident populations.
The international community has taken action against terrorism by creating a framework of rules and blocking the flow of financial resources to global networks. Piracy has surged in recent years, most notably as a result of state failure in Somalia. The Just War Tradition Jus ad bellum: Jus in bello: Just war tradition. Just war theory asserts that there are several criteria that can make the decision to go to war a just one: The cause must be just self defense or massive violation of human rights , with a declaration of intent.
Leader needs to have the correct intentions. Leader should desire to end abuses and establish a just peace. Nation should have exhausted all other possibilities for ending the abuse. Forces must be removed rapidly after the abuses have ended. Just war tradition also addresses conduct in war: Combatants and noncombatants must be differentiated. The violence used needs to be proportionate to the ends to be achieved.
Just war is an evolving practice, changing as broader ideas about war change. The Debate over Humanitarian Intervention. A specialist in international organization, international law, and international political economy, Professor Mingst has conducted research in Western Europe, West Africa, and Yugoslavia. She is the author or editor of seven books and numerous academic articles. She has frequently taught the introductory international relations course.
In addition, she has traveled and lectured extensively at universities around the globe. Ivan M. He holds a Ph. The IR theoretical approaches are skillfully and effectively integrated into the chapters. Great content, good presentation. Convert currency. Add to Basket. Compare all 4 new copies. Book Description W. Never used!. Seller Inventory P More information about this seller Contact this seller.
Brand New!. Seller Inventory VIB Seller Inventory M Ships with Tracking Number! Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!.