IR 203 Current ıssues ın ınternatıonal relatıons (2)

Bezen Balamir Coskunoffice: 417

bezencoskun@zirve.edu.trbezenbalamir@gmail.com

IMPORTANT NOTE ON PLAGIARISM

Plagiarism is passing off the work of others as your own. This includes ‘hard’ plagiarism which is a quite conscious attempt to

deceive the reader or ‘soft’ plagiarism where students have forgotten that something in their

notes is not actually their own work but is a verbatim quote from a source. The University and the Department take plagiarism extremely seriously

and a range of sanctions may be imposed against offenders. For further information on how to avoid plagiarism see PLAGIARISM NOTE (INTIHAL NOTU) on our wiki link.

http://wiki.zirve.edu.tr/groups/economicsandadministrativesciences/wiki/ba2f7/IR_203_Current_Issues_in_International_Relations.html

• What do you remember from last week?

1. The New World Order –multilateralism and the effective use of the UN , George Bush I.

2. The liberal peace thesis – drawing upon liberalism and IR, amongst others the ideas of E. Kant: “a federation of free states”, liberal constitutions etc,

3. liberal democracies do not go to war against one another

IdeasIdeas

1. The end of history thesis – liberalism is the dominant ideology (Fukuyama)

2. It is viewed to offer superior ideas about the economy and democratic institutions and practices

3. does not mean that historical events have come to an end, rather that there is no real alternative to liberal ideology. TRUE OR FALSE, WHAT MIGHT THAT IDEOLOGY BE?

IDEASIDEAS

1. The end of history thesis – liberalism is the dominant ideology (Fukuyama)

2. Key assumption: liberalism offers superior ideas about the economy and democratic institutions and practices

3. Does not mean that historical events have come to an end

4. rather that there is no real alternative to liberal ideology.

5. TRUE or FALSE?

Francis Fukuyama Francis Fukuyama

A new international order – emphasis on the idealist principles of the inter-war period, multilateralism, co-operation, conflict prevention, free trade, opening up of markets, democratic principles

Liberal principles of international and domestic politics and economics become the dominant ideology ( the liberalisation of Central and Eastern Europe)

A new international orderA new international order

‘Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order. In the words of Winston Churchill, a "world order" in which "the principles of justice and fair play ... protect the weak against the strong ..." A world where the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfil the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations.

The Gulf war put this new world to its first test, and, my fellow Americans, we passed that test.’

President George Bush I’s speech to President George Bush I’s speech to Congress Congress March 6, 1991March 6, 1991

Basic idea, our Identity is rooted in nationality, ethnicity and culture.

There are different civilisations ( they are rooted in different cultures)

Civilisations differ in their offerings of ideas about how we should conduct our lives

The world is fragmented and disintegrated but on the basis of culture rather than sovereign statehood

The post-Cold War era - the West is at its height of power, others resent its dominance, its institutions, there will be continued divisions. (DISORDER?)

The Clash of Civilizations –Samuel The Clash of Civilizations –Samuel HuntingtonHuntington

Non-western states take issue with the West’s use of international institutions, military power and economic resources (military intervention, imposition of strict financial reforms for example)

“The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural” (Huntington). often taken to mean religious

Compare: Fukuyama argues that: “We remain at the end of history because there is only one system that will continue to dominate world politics”

The Clash of CivilizationsThe Clash of Civilizations

Central and Eastern Europe liberalised, the (prospect of enlargement of the EU and NATO powerful discourses)

The EU demanded states to observe liberal principles of the market economy and liberal democracy brought a sense of ORDER to Europe

International financial institutions have and continue to promote economic liberalism, developing countries have to comply with such principles, ORDER BUT NOT NECESSARILY JUSTICE

The 1990s- what happened – The 1990s- what happened – Order/DisorderOrder/Disorder

The liberal peace thesis can explain the lack of conflict in Western Europe

and also the motives behind the EU enlargement process,

one of the underpinning ideas was that European unity would lead to perpetual peace,

states need to comply to largely liberal entry criteria of the EU and NATO. PRODUCING ORDER

However there are many examples of DISORDER (civil wars and genocide) in the 1990s.

The 1990s- what happened – The 1990s- what happened – Order/DisorderOrder/Disorder

Genocide in Rwanda 1994 Genocide in Rwanda 1994

Mass graves in Srebrenica, Bosnia Mass graves in Srebrenica, Bosnia 1995, 1995, 8000 men and boys killed 8000 men and boys killed

A Bosnian concentration A Bosnian concentration camp camp

Liberal peace theory – less successful in terms of explaining conflict in the former Yugoslavia

Also difficult to apply to conflict in Africa (often intra-state war/ethnic conflict rather than war between liberal states).

Rwanda was completely ignored –a genocide that the international community ignored DISORDER

Towards the 1990s a strict interpretation of sovereignty started to give way to humanitarian intervention discourses, the right to intervene for humanitarian purposes. Kosovo a good example (more recently Chad, Sudan) ORDER AND DISORDER

Liberal Peace Theory Liberal Peace Theory

The New World Order severely challenged by September 11, away from multilateralism to the coalition of the willing against the axis of evil.

American Foreign Policy ( George W Bush), emphasis on the threat that terrorism constitutes to individual freedom and points to US leadership (at times unilateral),

Post-September 11 (2001), a Post-September 11 (2001), a period period of disorder? of disorder?

American ideas are universally applicable (emphasis on liberal freedoms for all)

“When it comes to the common rights and needs of men and women, there is no clash of civilisations” “The peoples of the Islamic nations want and deserve the same freedoms” (Bush, 2002, Remarks by the President at the 2002 Graduation of the United States Military Academy, West Point)

Post-September 11 (2001) Post-September 11 (2001)

Since 9/11, we have taken the fight to these terrorists and extremists. We will stay on the offense … we will deliver justice to our enemies. (Applause.)

We are engaged in the defining ideological struggle of the 21st century. The terrorists oppose every principle of humanity and decency that we hold dear.

In Afghanistan, America, our 25 NATO allies, and 15 partner nations are helping the Afghan people defend their freedom and rebuild their country

George Bush State of the Union Speech January George Bush State of the Union Speech January 28, 200828, 2008

Events post -September 11 pose great challenges to the theory

Global terrorism is not necessarily state bound but trans-national, it does not constitute a war in the traditional sense, thus the theory can offer little explanatory value.

The US led interventions into Afghanistan and Iraq both fit and do not fit the Liberal Peace Theory,

these conflicts are not fought between Western liberal states but between the “West and the Rest”

The Liberal Peace Theory post-The Liberal Peace Theory post-September 11September 11

However, it is in line with the democratisation objective of US and other Western states’ foreign policy(ies)

The idea that spread of liberal freedom across the globe will bring order, peace and stability to IR, this is part of the “official” explanation for recent US led interventions.

At the same time the theory cannot provide much insight into the “real” reasons for intervention?

What about oil and other economic gains? Were the US and its allies forces for good spreading their democratic message or disguising their thirst for power and influence?

The Liberal Peace Theory post-The Liberal Peace Theory post-September 11September 11

Is liberalism the only dominant ideology? Is it supported across the international system? To what extent does global terrorism constitute a threat to liberal democracy?

Are we moving away from one ideology and one world order to multiple regional orders and insecurity/ies?

Has warfare changed in character? Has order been replaced by disorder? Are interventions damaging to the international order?

The End of History Thesis post-The End of History Thesis post-September 11September 11

Is Huntington correct in talking about several co-existent civilisations/cultures?

Against the backdrop of his ideas how might we assess Fukuyama? Is there a global international ideology embracing all states?

Is there some reason for optimism, which is a central theme in liberalism.

Are democratically held elections in Iraq and elsewhere a sign of the success of liberal political principles?

The End of History Thesis post-The End of History Thesis post-September 11September 11

How successful are international institutions, organisations and the conduct of multilateralism in bringing order to international relations?

Are we moving away from a New World Order based upon multilateralism to unilateralism (NOT THE SAME THING AS ISOLATIONISM) (SEE THE US NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGIES of the US, 2002, 06)

How damaging have September 11, unilateral interventions and a weak UN been to the New International Order, as it emerged in the early 1990s?

Concluding remarks for you to Concluding remarks for you to consider consider