International and global security

in the post-cold war era

By Choi, jin young

Introduction(1/2)

Is international security possible to achieve or not?

Who is right ? Realists or Liberalists ?

How can we prevent a war for ever?

The end of cold war was a major turning point

which would bring cooperation between

individuals and other collectives or not?

Do you agree that the war and violent conflict are

seen as perennial features of inter-state relations?

Then what is the main cause of a war?

that is human nature or internal organization of

states or international anarchy which one??

Introduction(2/2)
Kenneth Waltz considers the three images of
war-man, the state, and international system
wars occur because there is nothing to stop
them from occurring, the third image
describes the framework of world politics, but
without the first and second images there can
be no knowledge of the force that determine
policy, the first and second images describe
the forces in world politics, without the third
image it is impossible to assess their
importance or predict their result
A comprehensive explanation for cause of war
requires an understanding of all three images

What is meant by security?(1/2)

Security is a contested concept
There is a consensus that it implies freedom from
threats to core values
Focus on man, national, or international security?
During the cold war period, the idea of national
security was dominant

But too ethnocentric and narrow definition

Security need to be defined as broader international

terms-not only military but political, economic, social,
environmental aspects (Barry Buzan, People, states and Fear)
Can national and international security considerations
be compatible and cooperative in anarchy system?

What is meant by security?(2/2)

The dual processes of integration and fragmentation,

characterize the contemporary world, stress societal
security
The emergence of an embryonic global society in the
post-cold war era means national and international
security is less appropriate
One of the most important contemporary trends is
the globalization which brings new risks and dangers
-international terrorism, a breakdown of global
monetary system, global warming, and nuclear
accidents-only the global community can deal with
these adequately

The traditional approach to national

security
International environment
anarchy system
Self-help

Realists

Neo-Realists

struggle for power

survival first

BoP

security dilemma

state-centered

structural Realists

Permanent instability and conflict

The security dilemma

John Herz, a structural notion in which the self-help
attempts of states to look after their security needs,
tend regardless of intention to lead to rising insecurity
for others as each interprets its own measures as
defensive and the measures of others as potentially
threatening
Do they design for their own defence or not?
thats why the unsolvable uncertainty
A action-reaction cycle

war

war

war

war
war

Difficulties of cooperation between

states
Does the end of cold war make the better world?
More cooperation occurs but not enough, much
more complicated security environment
In reality, Gulf war, violent disintegration of SU and
Yugoslavia, conflict of Middle East, and Iraq war

What are the main causes of the difficulties

The problem of cheating

distrust between states
The problem of relative gains
more attraction of relative gains than cooperation

The opportunities for cooperation

between states(1/4)

Contingent Realism

they see the cooperation between states as possible

through criticizing Neo-Realism assumptions

1. emphasis on the competition biasstates preferred to
cooperate in anarchy system

2. emphasis on relative gainsstates know dangers of

seeking relative advantages
3. emphasis on cheatingthough states recognize some

cheating, prefer risks of arms control to risks of arms races

each states know about consequence of security dilemma well

The opportunities for cooperation

between states(2/4)

Mature anarchy

Barry Buzan
the understanding that national securities are interdependent
and that excessively self-referenced security policies,

whatever their jingoistic attractions, are ultimately selfdefeating

States are not stupid enough to die together honorably!

Interdependency makes states to focus on neighboring

states security along with its own national security
overcome a security dilemma, at least mitigate

ex) Western Europe over the past 50 years

The opportunities for cooperation

between states(3/4)

Liberal institution

International institutions play a core role to prevent a war

institutions are not only created for states interests but
for states cooperation. It is working now than it was!

there is no state that decide their policies without concern

of contemporary international institutions

As time goes by institutionalized cooperation give us

opportunities to achieve better international security.
Which state want to attack against other state in current
international institutions, which do not allow to do aggressive

actions without their own permission? Maybe US..???

ex) EU and NATO at the end of cold war

The opportunities for cooperation

between states(4/4)

Democratic peace theory

Democratic states tend not to fight other democratic states

Democracy is a major source of peace

ex) US-Canada / NK-SK

Democratic states also have the conflicts of interests but

they try to solve it with diplomacy, not military forces
through shared norms and institutional constraints

Collective security

Overcome self-help system!!!

1. give up the use of military forces to alter the status quo

2. expansion of view to national interests

3. to overcome fear and trust each other

Alternative view of international

and global security (1/5)

Social Constructivist theory

Their ideas based on two assumptions

1. the fundamental structures of international politics are
socially constructed
2. changing the way what we think of international relations
can help to bring about better international security

They focus on the importance social structure defined in

terms of shared knowledge and practices as well as
material capabilities

ex) inter-subjective understandings of security dilemma

1. distrustful statesworst-case assumptionself-help

2. trustful statesat least no warsecurity community

Alternative view of international

and global security (2/5)

Critical security studies(1/2)

Critical theory and emancipation

1. problem-solving theoriescritical theories
2. states was too much focused by analysis of security, it
need to shift main concern to individual
states are so diverse in character and part of the
problem of security in the international system

ex) Is Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea provider of

security or provider of threat to its own people?
Even in US, in terms of 911 victims
3. emancipation is key to better international security

Alternative view of international

and global security (3/5)

Critical security studies(2/2)

Feminist approaches
1. its also for a fundamentally different view of the nature
of international security like other critical theories
through overcoming a discrimination of gender

Post-modernist view
1. they emphasize the importance of ideas and discourse
about international security

2. they want to shift realist software to cooperative software

Alternative view of international

and global security (4/5)

Globalist views of international security(1/2)

The emergence of a global economic system, global

communications, and a global culture have helped to provide

a wide network of social relationships which transcend
state frontiers and encompass people all over the world
new threat : the environment, poverty, terror, WMD, and
nationalistic, ethnic, and religious rivalries within and

across state boundaries

The fracture of statehood is giving rise to new kinds of

conflict within states rather than between states

Alternative view of international

and global security (5/5)

Globalist views of international security(2/2)

Should international community intervene in the domestic

affairs of sovereign states to protect minority rights and
individual human rights?
thinking in globalist will lead to more effective action
to deal with the risks to security, rather than national

or international thinking
the expansion of the regional security communities

States are not withering away but are being transformed

States struggle to deal with the new threat

Conclusion(1/2)

Are we living in safe or not?

Safe more democratic states, collective security,

interconnectedness with economic, political, social, and
ecological interdependence

Unsafe WMD, terror, rapid social change, fragmentation

increased economic inequality, cultural identity

May be it depends on your thought

My idea about that??

Conclusion(2/2)
Imagine there's no heaven It's easy if you try

No hell below us Above us only sky

Imagine all the people living for today aha
Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do

Nothing to kill or die for No religion too

Imagine all the people living life in peace yuhuh
You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us And the world will be one
Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people sharing all the world yuhuh

Chapter 14

International
Political Economy (IPE)

What is IPE?
How IPE is related to Globalization?

IPE: International Political

Economy

About the interplay of economics and

politics in world affairs

Tries to explain what creates and

perpetuates institutions and what impact
institutions have on the world economy

IPE and Institutions

The institutions and framework of the

world economy have their roots in the
planning for a new economic order
A Bretton Woods three institutions were
planned: IMF, the World Bank, GATT
The breakdown of Bretton Woods system
Due to heavy spending on Vietnam war
and Great Society Programs

The rise of IPE in the study of IR

In academic study, economic

interdependence of countries started to
analyze and be covered by scholars

IR could no longer be focused on a

geostrategic competition among states

since the 1970s IPE has continued to

advance as a core subject of IR

Comparison Between Traditional

and New approaches to IPE
Traditional

New

Highlights different
actors, different
processes, and different
levels of analysis in the
study of IPE

Methodological debate
about how scholars
might best explain
policies and outcomes in
IPE
(what, how, and whypreferences and
interests)

Traditional Approaches to IPE

Liberal

Open market and free trade are good

Order would be achieved by the visible
hand in the global market place

Mercantilist an arena of competition among states

Marxist

seeking to maximize power

Order will only be achieved by where
one state can play the role of hegemon
World economic relations, as a class
struggle between capitalists and
working class
Order reflects the interests of those
who own the means of production

New Approaches to IPE

Decision Makers are
Rational
State or decision
makers preferences
reflect rational
choices within given
constraints and
opportunities

Decision Makers are

Influenced by Social
Factors
The belief, roles,
traditions, ideologies,
and patterns of
influence shape
preferences, behavior
and outcomes

Globalization and the role of the

state in the world economy
Governments and
states are losing
their capacity to
control economic
interactions

States and
governments still
have a very
important and
substantial role to
play in a successful
economy

The Debate about Institutions in

IPE
Institutionalists
Realists

Constructivist

International

institutions will play

an important and positive role
Institutions

and organizations will

always reflect the interests of
dominant states within the system
The

belief, ideas and

conceptions of interest in
international relations change and
this can shift the attention, nature
and functions of international
institutions

Impact on Globalization
Strong States: rule makers?
Shape the rules and institutions

Weak States: rule takers?

Suffer from a lack of choice
Little or no influence in creation and
enforcement of rules and system

Conclusion: Globalization and

world economy

Globalization increases the challenges

faced by all actors in the world economy
Strong states try to shape the institution
and Weak states try to survive
Common to all states is the search for
greater stability and predictability but how
and where?

Chapter 16

International Regimes

Presented by Lucas

Outline

Introduction

The nature of regimes

Competing theories of regime

formation

Conclusion

Introduction

Establishment of Worldwide regimes is an

important dimension of globalization. Regimes
started to be regarded as global phenomenon in
the 20th century when the states started
becoming enmeshed in increasingly complex set
of rules/institutions which regulate IRs around the
world.
Many regimes are so firmly embedded in the
system that they are almost taken for granted.
The concept of regimes is relatively recent,
coming into parlance in the 1970s. But Reus-Smit
in his work on International Law indicates that
there has been a long established interest in the
rules that regulate states behavior, he also noted
that law can only be established and enforced
within the centralized structure provided by the
state.

Introduction contd.

The argument in this presentation is based on the

Liberals and Realists schools of thoughts.
The two schools of thoughts have both common
and individual assumption about regimes.

The Nature of Regimes

Definition:

Regimes are sets of implicit or explicit

principles, norms, rules and decision
making procedures around which actors
expectations converge in a given area of
international relations (Krasner, 1993:2)
Example of a regime: GATT (1947) regulation on
international trade
Defining elements of a regime

Principles
Norms
Rules
Decision making procedures

Classifications
Using a topology of regimes, regime can be classify
along two(2) dimensions:
Vertical dimension
Horizontal dimension
Geographical
Bilateral
Regional
Global

Security Regime
(C20th phenomenon)

The concert of Europe- Post Napoleonic Europe

Rush-Bagot Agreement 1817- (British and Americansdemilitarization the Great Lakes)

SALT 1 (1972) SALT 2 (1979) (control of arm race between

US/USSR) Jervis (1983b) argues that the Strategic Arms
Limitation Talks were effectively dead-letter regimes.

The Partial Test Ban Agreement of 1963

1968-Nonproliferation Agreement (Signed by 187 states in

2004.) With India, Pakistan, Israel and Cuba as non-party
members.

Environmental Regime

Oil pollution, global warming and damage to the ozone

layer are issues that attracted attention.

International Conventions to save some endangered plants

and animals (1970s). This led to the comprehensive
Convention on Biological Diversity (enforced in 1993)

Mid 1980s attempts to regulate the international movements

of hazardous waste material. Leading to the Basle
Convention 1993.

1977- (UNEP) co ordinating Committee to deal with ozone

layer, leading to the concerned states agreement to
implement the Montral Protocol in 1987

Communication Regimes

Shipping (16th Century)

UNCLOS-(United Nations Conference on the Law of the
Sea) 1973-1982

Universal Postal Union 1874

International Telegraph Union 1865 (Later became

International Telecommunications Union in 1932)

International Maritime Organization (shipping)

International Civil Aviation Organization (air craft)

Economic Regime

GATT
WTO
IMF
IBRD

The last two were established after1945 to promote

environment where trade could flourish.

Competing theories of
Regime Formation

The Liberal Institutional approach- Regime are needed to overcome

the problems generated by the anarchize structure of institutional
system.

Impediments to Regime Formation:-Anarchize structure of

international system
Microeconomics market failure
No global body to enact legislation compelling sovereign states to
subscribe to a common policy.
Game theory: Interaction between two actors with two possible
strategies competitive and collaborative . There are chosen based on
internal calculations : ratinal actions 1) evaluation outcome 2) produce
a preference raking 3) chosen the best option available.

Facilitation of regime
formation (prisoners Dilemma)
Dominant or hegemonic actor e.g.
Regime that outlawed slave trade led by Britain
Economic regime after WW II USA

Movement from mutually competitive strategies leads

to mutually corporative strategies. Keohane (1984)
maintained that even in the absence of Legion, regimes
will survive.

Prisoners Dilemma- If played over and

over the shadows of future over the
players affecting their strategic
calculations (collaborative strategic)
Reciprocity (tit for tat)

 Realism has little to contribute to the understanding of

regimes
Inherent competitive nature of international system
The growth of regimes will seen to confirm that the
Realist perspective is becoming increase
anachronistic
Problems identified with Liberals approach.
The Realist attack on the Liberals assumption that
the activities of a hegemon in the international
system can be compared to the role of the state
when dealing with cases of market failure
Realist deny that regime emerge as the result of state
endeavouring to overcome the pressure to compete
under-condition of anarchy.
Realists argued that regimes are form due to the
interaction of uncoordinated strategies to produce
sub-optimum outcome and
that the influence of microeconomics has encouraged
liberal institutionalists to advanced an unsound
assessment of regime formation.

Power and Regimes

In the 1970s and 1980s both Realists and Liberal

Institutionalists were aware of the decline hegemonic
status of US, this led to the focus on third world demands
for a new set of principles and norms to underpin the
regimes associated with the world economy.
Existing regimes were seen to work against the interest of
the third world states (unfair competition and malign
economic forces).
The realists argued that the principles and norms
demanded by the Third World would only come into
operation if the balance of power moved against the West
(Tueker 1977, Krasner 1985)
The liberal institutionalists presented USA as a benign
benefactor.

US as a hegemon using its power to sustain a

regime which promoted its own long term interests.
Liberal Institutionalist position reveals tacit support
for the way that public goods are defined by
government in the West.
To the liberal, states should wish to promote
economic regime built on liberal norms and
principles. Also the promotion of human rights,
elimination of pollution and all other goals.
From the Realist perspective, US help to ensure that
regimes were underpinned by a particular set of
principles and norms.

Regimes and coordination

Realists account of regimes is incomplete because it

fails to explain why states adhere to the principles
and norms underlying a regime that they opposed.

States wishing to form a regime confront the problem

of coordination.

Coordination problems are very familiar to strategic

thinkers. (Schelling(1960) illustration of a couple
getting separated in a departmental store).

Absence of communication make the solving of

coordination problem difficult and even impossible.

Language selection (English in Aviation regimes).

States observe regimes because they are operating in a

coordination situation, and a failure to coordinate would
move them into a less advantageous situation.

It is not possible for states to operate alone under

communication regime.

Use of electromagnetic spectrum that are emitted along an

electromagnetic spectrum.
The electromagnetic spectrum is a limited resource,
principles and rules for partitioning the resource had to be
determined. (bases of need).

In 1980 the principle resulted US and Soviet claiming half

of the available frequencies and 90% of the spectrum was
allocated to provide benefits for 10% of the world
population (Krasner 1985)

Conclusion

Both Liberal Institutionalists and Realists

acknowledged that regimes are important features of
international system and draw identical tools of
analysis, but with different conclusion about the
circumstances in which regimes emerge

The need for regimes: Liberals danger in anarchic international system

leading to completive strategies trumping cooperative
strategies. The focus here is on deterring completive
strategies
Realist mutual desire to cooperate. Anarchy
generate problem of coordination Assumption that
there is no incentive to defect once coordination has
taken place.

Power

Liberals
Power could be use by hegemon to pressure other states
to collaborate and conform to a regime.
State can establish and maintain regimes to the absence of
hegemonic power.
Realist
Power plays a crucial role not as a threat to discipline
states defecting from collaboration but in the bargaining
process.
The rich and powerful states in the North that have
primarily determine the shape of economic regimes. The
Third World States have had not alternative but to accept
the regimes.
There have been massive violation of human rights regimes.
Dead letter regimes failing to become full blown regimes.
Stein (1983)