introduction to international relations mulungushi university Kabwe Zambia

1. Unit 1
Actors in international relations
Realism
SIR221 - Introduction to International Relations
BIRD II, Mulungushi University (2016)
Lecturer: T. Reinke - torbenrr@gmail.com

2. Actors in international relations
Theory: Realism
Classical Realism
Neo-realism
The Prisoner’s dilemma

3. IR is the discipline of studying how mainly states interact
No country can isolate themselves completely from the outside world
No country can successfully give away all their autonomy to foreign
actors
 must be a balance for the optimal outcome
Zambia as example
Very dependent on the global economy (e.g. copper prices)
Poverty and indebtedness has to varying degrees compromised
Zambia’s autonomy
Debt crisis (1980s and 90s)  IMF and World Bank
conditionalities
2016 - new IMF programme about to be agreed upon

4. Level of analysis: Characteristics: Suitable to explain:
The systemic level
• Distribution of power
among states
• Their economic and
political
interdependence
• Wars, conflicts, peace
• Cold war stability
• International
cooperation
The nation-state
level
• Strength of state
• Type of government
• Relations to groups in
society
• Bureaucracy - agency
interests
• Why powerful nations
do not always use force
if society is strongly
against
• Domestic instability
• Humanitarian
intervention
The level of the
decisionmaker
• Way of thinking
• Beliefs
• Personal priorities
• Rationality?
• Crisis events
• Cuban Missile crisis
• 9/11
• Syria
Inspired by Waltz
1959, p. 228 in
Jackson & Sørensen,
2007

5. Aristotle: ”People are social animals”
It’s part of acquiring skills to interact
A group provides security
A group provides a sense of belonging and self esteem
We / them
Separated through barriers of social communication
such as language, distance, religion, education etc.
World politics is like that with alliance formation:
“Either you are with us or you are against us” (George W. Bush as he initiated
the War on terror after 9/11)

6. Nationalism created in Europe out of a “we-feeling”
Loyalty to a group – an imagined community
The intention to separate from larger empires
Multiple loyalties
Fragmented geographically
Diffuse authority
International relations were between royal families
Manufacturing, trade and communication expands
Economic development and a merchant class develops
A demand for security and order
Monarchs need to raise taxes to provide
Bureaucracies created
Mobilise military to get more land to extract from

7. 1517 – Martin Luther challenges the spiritual authority of the
Pope
Lutheranism spreads across Northern Europe —>
Protestant reformation
Religious wars including the Thirty Years War beginning in 1618
Ends in 1648 without real winner
 Peace of Westphalia 1648
“He who rules a region, determines its religion”
Rule of law
The King supported by his bureaucracy had the sovereignty of the
region
Monopoly of the use of force
No other authority has the right to intervene = sovereignty

8. European states became strong and through its ability
to generate wealth it had a comparative advantage
From 7% of the world’s territory in 1500 to 84% in
1914
European powers tried to balance each others
Too little military force could induce attack
19th century very limited wars
The peace of Westphalia established the norm of
today where a country’s sovereignty must be
respected

9. The creation of “The League of Nations” in 1920 to
avoid wars and protect sovereignty
An IGO aiming at establishing collective security
The ambition to transform international relations
“from a jungle to a zoo” (American President 1913-1921, Woodrow Wilson)
Failed with the outbreak of the 2nd World War
The United Nations was instead created at the end of the 2nd
World war, which has been the global peacekeeping
institution since.

11. Composed of states
Delegates serves the interest of their government
Also “neutral” employees accountable to the IGO
Universal
membership
Restricted
membership

12. Unlike IGOs states are not represented in NGOs.
NGOs often operate in many countries
NGOs providing aid - mobilise funds in developed countries and then target
developing countries
Often functions as pressure groups on governments
Specific purposes - Save the Children, The Red Cross, Amnesty International
Terrorist organisations?
Al Qaeda, Islamic State, Hezbollah, Boko Haram
Normally not considered NGOs but worth to have in mind that they share features of NGOs
Many of the contemporary threats against nations comes from cross-border terrorist groups
rather than states

13. Very powerful actors because of their economic capabilities
Countries cannot ignore the interests of MNCs because of
dependency on FDI
Are often involved in domestic politics recognising the
importance of lobbyism and gaining influence on policies
MNCs do not play a large role according to the classical IR
theories realism and liberalism, but they do according to
International Political Economy approaches (unit 4)
Who are in control in Zambia?
GRZ or mining companies?

14. International Relations (IR) is predominantly the
studies of how states interact.
States have developed to be the preferred unit of
belonging
A unit that provides national security to its citizens
Peace of Westphalia recognised as the birth of the current
system of nations
Globalisation has however led to the increased
importance of non-state actors

16. The systemic level
Our focus today is on the distribution of power among
states
Realism ignores the nation-state and decision making
level
Realism ignores non-state actors
They serve the interest of the most dominant states
The dominant countries have more power in the UN
Security Council, while small countries can’t influence
much

17. The assumptions of realisms are based on
assumptions about human nature
People are selfish and preoccupied with their own
well being
People desire power
“The human lust for power” (Morgenthau 1965:
192)
People cannot be trusted because of their selfish
desires

18. World politics unfolds in international
anarchy
No authority above states, hence strong
states can do as they wish = anarchy
As the realist assumption of human
nature is that nobody can be trusted, all
states must be alert and protect
themselves in a condition of anarchy

19. In the world of anarchy the goal is state survival and
domination
Essential goals to provide the good life to its
citizens
Just as people can’t be trusted, states cant be
trusted either
No moral obligations between states
National security is essential for a state to be able to
provide the good life to its people
Even a moral obligation

20. Classical realism is founded on the work of classical
political philosophers
Thucydides - (460- 395 BC)
Competition between ancient greek city states
No equality “…the strong do what they they
have the power to do and the weak accept
what they have to accept”
A leaders responsibility to act according to
its capabilities

21. Machiavelli (1469-1527)
National freedom the ultimate goal
Statesmen must be both lions (exercise strength and
create fear) an foxes (astute and crafty)
The world is a dangerous place with opportunities
”Do not wait for things to happen. Anticipate the motives
and actions of others. Do not wait for others to act. Act
before they do”.
Foreign policy is an instrumental activity based on intelligent
calculations
Be prepared to engage in pre-emptive wars

22. Hobbes (1588-1679)
Permanent state of war among people
The constant risk for people made them collaborate
Creating states for protection
Personal security dilemma can thus be solved, but the
international one cannot
International anarchy, as no “World government”
States create the best possible protection and freedom
for its citizens
But there will always be a risk of war (state of nature)

23. Contemporary realism mostly influenced by Hans
Morgenthau (1904 - 1980)
We are born as political animals - born to pursue power
Freedom from foreign interventions can only be achieved if
a state mobilises power
The state should only be responsible to its own people
Even a superpower should refrain from trying to spread its
ideology to other countries
US interventions in countries not posing an immediate
threat, would be considered unwise as it is a dangerous
activity threatening peace and security

24. We cannot compare human ethics with the ethics
of states:
”A political leader does not have the same freedom to do
the right thing that a private citizen has. That is because a
political leader has far heavier responsibilities than a
private citizen: The leader is responsible to the people
who depend on him or her”
It is a moral obligation of a state leader to go to war when it
serves the national interest
Personal morality does not count and sacrifices and
suffering along the way is acceptable

26. Classical realist such as Thucydides,
Machiavelli, Hobbes and Morgenthau have
the focus on state leaders
Their tasks to secure the national interest
In neo-realism the ambition is to explain
international relations scientifically where
the structure of the system is in focus
The relative distribution of power important

27. States share the same foundation and have the same
tasks to serve their people
But they differ in capabilities
States are “distinguished primarily by their greater or
lesser capabilities for performing similar tasks”
(Waltz, 1979:97)
Change in international relations occurs when great
powers rise and fall and the balance of power shifts
accordingly

28. Neo-realism does not consider human nature and
the ethical dimension much - unlike classical
realism
It’s a theory based on the structure of the
international system
There is however still a core value of the
sovereignty of states in his writing
“None is entitled to command; none is required
to obey” (Waltz, 1979: 88)

29. Polarity in IR describes the way power is distributed within the
international system
Distinction between unipolarity, bipolarity and
multipolarity according to how many power centres exist in
the world
Economic and military capabilities essential in determining
how power is distributed and which of these types of
polarity exist.
For neo-realists polarity can explain how peace and security
is maintained in the world through a balance of power

30. The Neo-realist assumption of Balance of
Power (BOP) dominant during Cold War
Waltz (1979) – ”Theory of International Politics”
Alliances are outcome of the international
system
Power is distributed according to capabilities
States form alliances to balance the
states/coalitions for two reasons:
They avoid a hegemon dominating IR
The strongest state is the biggest threat to a country
By joining a weaker coalition a state increases it’s relative
influence in the coalition

31. Alliances according to Waltz are defensive in
nature
Not aggressive as according to classical realism
Balancing happens:
Internally: arms build up
Externally: allying with other countries
In Cold War internal balancing most important due
to two major powers

32. Great powers are crucial for world peace
Bi-polar systems most stable (Cold War)
Both superpowers act to maintain the system and the balance of power
The balance of power is the ability for the poles to reach an equilibrium between their
capabilities
If equilibrium is not reached, the more dominant pole will use its power to impose its
will upon the rest
Unipolarity will make the hegemon dominate other countries
For that reason unipolarity is not likely to last as countries will aim at balancing.
The unipolar world from the end of Cold War is gradually developing into a multi-
polar world.
Multi-polarity less secure than a bi-polar world (Waltz / Mearsheimer)
Existing from the Peace of Westphalia - 1648 until end of 2nd World war
Deterrence more complicated with more actors
Miscalculations are more likely

33. The realist assumption of a dominant
country’s interest to use its dominance
against countries with less capabilities
If a country or a group of countries (an
alliance) is at risk, they are better of getting
more allies to achieve a balance of power to
deter the opponent pole

34. Classical realism is normative
Focus on political values of national security and state survival
Not just a fact of political life but a matter of political responsibility
Neo-realism
Scientific approach which focus on the structure of IR
The relative distribution of power leads to predictions of the
structure of IR
The structure compels states to act in certain ways

35. Waltz (and most realist) would argue NO.
“More nuclear weapons may be better” (Waltz,
1981)
Balance of power
Currently 9 nuclear equipped countries
Used as deterrence towards superpowers
George W. Bush identified the “axis of evil”
Invaded Iraq
Has increased the interest in deterrence for countries
such as North Korea and Iran
Nuclear powers act responsible
It is self-destructive to engage in war

36. According to classical realists the use of aggression is generally seen as
advisable
Most contemporary realists do however not agree with this (Morgenthau,
Mearsheimer and Waltz)
States must seek power, but excessive use of power can be
counterproductive
An example can be the discussion if it was correct according to a neo-
realist logic for the US to invade Iraq after 9-11
Mearsheimer, 2005 - “Hans Morgenthau and the Iraq War: realism versus neo-
conservatism”
Link: https://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy-
americanpower/morgenthau_2522.jsp

38. In situations of conflict, cooperation can be hard
to reach because it would not be rational for the
one part to trust the other.
This is despite both parts would be better off to
cooperate
Game theory, such as the prisoner’s dilemma,
provides us with the insight into understanding
why other actors cannot be trusted as suggested
by realism
(Russet et.al. (2013), p.206 – 214 )

39. Two people are arrested for armed robbery
They are separated and asked if they can
confess:
Confess the robbery and testify against partner
If the buddy keeps quiet:
0 years prison for the confessor
10 years prison for the buddy
The buddy is presented with same options
If you both confess:
7 years prison each
If both keep quiet:
Both gets 1 year, just for arm possession

40. Keep quiet Confess
Keep quiet 3,3 1,4
Confess 4,1 2,2
Robber 1
Robber 2
• For robber 1 confessing is better than keeping quiet when robber 2 confesses (2 > 1)
• It is also better for robber 1 to confess if robber 2 keeps quiet (4 > 3)
• —> The dominant strategy for robber 1 becomes to confess
• The same logic applies to robber 2, so he will also confess = 2,2
• The social optimal outcome would have been that both kept quiet= 3,3
• As robber 2 would face the same dominant strategy, we will end in the outcome
where both confess, and reach outcome, 2,2

41. The prisoner’s dilemma can be used for many
conflicts where there is lack of trust among the
involved.
The US and Soviet Union’s arms race during The
Cold War
Two options: Arm or disarm
The social optimal outcome would be a balance of
power with no arms, as money could be spent for other
purposes
But dominant strategy becomes “arm”

42. Not according to realism!
We need two elements:
Communication to agree on the social optimal outcome
(possible)
Trust (NOT possible according to realism)
In the US - Soviet arms race, communication was available but
the trust was not existing
Repeated encounters
Makes optimal outcomes more likely
Incentives for the parties to build trust for future cooperation

43. Does realism describe the world as you see it?
Are countries so eager for power as realism describes
it or what drives countries when they intervene in
other countries’ affairs?
Is it really states we need to be afraid of in the 21st
century or non-state actors?

44. States continue to be the most relevant actors in international relations
but non-state actors have been of increased importance in recent
decades
As there is no authority above states the world is anarchical which make
the powerful nations do as they wish
We distinguish between classical realism (aggressive) vs. neorealism
(defensive)
Realism suggest states can never trust each other - this leads to a
prisoner’s dilemma logic where more arms are acquired
This is where our next theory (unit 2) - liberalism - suggest we are able
to cooperate to overcome the dilemma