International Relations

A. Introduction
I. Definition and scope of I.R
1. Introduction – IR became a separate discipline in the early 20th century
Def: A branch of political science concerned with relations between nations and primarily with foreign
policies of nations.
2. History – Peace treaty of Westphalia 1648 + Emergence of Nation-State + Colonization and WWI +
Post-WWII scenario and Cold War = Decolonization and emergence of new States
3. Nature of I.R (Two views)
i. Conservative view - Only limited to official relations between States
ii. Broad view – Not only official relations but all other matters that affect relations among States
4. I.R as a discipline (Three views)
i. Not a perfect discipline (amalgamation of various social sciences)
ii. A complete discipline
iii. Not a perfect but it’s going towards perfection
5. I.R and Int. Politics
i. Conservatives – both are identical
ii. Broad viewers – I.P is only limited to diplomacy and official dealings but I.R has a broader
region such as economic, cultural, educational relations, etc.
6. Scope of I.R
It has been increasing since the creation of Nation-States. Before WWs it was limited to States
only but after them Int. Organizations, bi-polarization, Human rights, nuclearism, increasing economic
independence, cold war, free trade etc have also become a scope of I.R
7. Levels of Analysis – Individual level; domestic nation-state level; international level of transitional and
intergovernmental affairs; and the global level
8. Concepts in I.R
i. Conjecture
ii. Systemic Level concept (based on levels of analysis)
iii. Power (Types = Hard – coercive/use of force and soft – economic/diplomatic)
iv. Polarity (Concept emerged in Cold war as bipolarity was prevailing at that time)
Theory of BOP+ Hegemonic stability theory+ Power transition theory (Organski) were a product
of this mechanism of polarity
v. Interdependency (mutual responsibilities) = Advocates of this point support growing
globalization and international economic interaction
vi. Dependency (related to Marxism) = A set of core states exploit weaker periphery states for
their own prosperity
9. Systemic tools of I.R
i. Diplomacy = Practice of communication and negotiation between representatives of States
(All other tools can be said to be failure of diplomacy)
ii. Sanctions = 1st resort after failure of diplomacy; main tool to enforce treaties
iii. War = “The continuation of politics by other means.” ~ Clausewitz
iv. The mobilization of Int. Shame = To expose State’s Human rights violations - Mostly done by
human rights NGOs such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch
v. The allotment of economic/diplomatic benefits. E.g: EU’s enlargement policy
10. Nature of I.R – a multidisciplinary field gathering together the international aspects of politics,
economics, geography, history, law, sociology, psychology, philosophy and cultural studies.
11. Scope of I.R
Core concept = Int. org; Int. Law; Foreign policy; International conflict; International economic
relations and military thought and strategy. Int. Regional security; strategic studies; Int. political
economy; conflict/war and peace studies; globalization; Int. regimes.
Moreover it covers state sovereignty, ecological sustainability, nuclear proliferation, nationalism,
economic development, terrorism, organized crime, human security, foreign interventionism and human
rights.
The developmental phase has observed various changes in the scope of I.R. Initially it was only
State oriented but after WWI the LoN was formed and Int. organizations came into focus. Then post-
WWII observed bipolarity, decolonization, nuclear proliferation etc.
12. Conclusion
II. Nation-State (nation in a State)
1. Definition
Nation-State is a main actor of International system as people lean their loyalties towards their Nations.
Nation = Certain similarities+ feelings of community + desire to separate (remain politically independent)
State = Population + territory + independent government + sovereignty
Nation-State = “A nation-state means a political unit that is sovereign and whose inhabitants identify
politically with it and support it.” ~ John T. Rourk
2. Origin and evolution
Roman Empire (beginning point) – Political loyalties with emperor.
Fall of Roman Empire = Feudalism + Catholic Christian religion (Loyalties distributed)
Decline of Feudalism = 12th century (Rise of Kings) – Changed political scenario and peoples’ loyalties
shifted towards kings.
Renaissance (1350-1550) = Clashes between Kings and Religion – Inception of secular views.
Movements against religion and loyalties were leaned only towards political sphere thus the Kings
became sovereign in a definite territory and organized government. Thus State came into existence.
Due to some changes in economic and political fields i.e representative governments, industrial
revolution, change in population, growth of I.L, development of diplomacy, growing interdependence of
state in economic spheres, evolution of methods for peaceful settlements, etc the concept of Nation-State
came into being.
The land marks in changing political philosophies was nationalism whose glaring examples are
American and French revolutions in which people realized that the State belonged to people not to the
Kings or any religious authorities.
3. Expansion of Nation-State
Decolonization after WWII, due to the rise of nationalism in Asia and Africa, changed the global
scenario and an expansion of Nation-States was observed.
4. Future of Nation-State
Two Views:
 i. Threat - Disappearing due to globalization and internationalism
ii. No threat - Peoples’ loyalties are still with their nation and state

B. Theories and approaches

1. Realism (power politics)
A school of thought that considers States as the main actors, with human nature selfish, and
international system anarchic. Where power is the ultimate aim of the States. Example: Power of
States in international system like the US and South Korea.
I. Definition
Int. relations are based on power politics and the foreign policy should be conducted with the sole
purpose to acquire maximum power.
It prioritizes national interest and security over ideology. It is of the view that world politics is
driven by competitive self-interest.
II. Proponents
i. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)
ii. Nicolo Machiavelli (The prince – Book)
iii. Hans Morgenthau (Father of power politics – Politics among Nations (book))
iv. Henry Kissinger
III. Basic assumptions
i. Man in order to achieve self-interest do not hesitate to destroy others
ii. Countries follow their national interests in I.R
iii. National interests of various countries sometimes conflict (leading to War)
iv. Every country tries to increase its power (fixed doctrine)
v. Continuous contest of power – can neither be controlled nor regulated
vi. Int. politics is aimed at increasing power, keeping power or demonstrating it
IV. Realist approach to world politics
A country should always try to increase its power and practice balance of power politics.
This means that international system should be structured in such a way that there is equilibrium of power
so that no country is able to dominate the system.
V. Merits
i. Evident through history
ii. Wherever conflict of interests take place those countries which are more powerful
prevail
iii. BoP theory also support this approach
VI. Criticism
i. Theory is based on power but power itself is not a defined term
ii. It assumes national interest can only be protected by acquiring power
iii. Int. system after WWII suggest that interests could be safeguarded through mutual
 cooperation and understanding
iv. Critics believe the assumption of this theory and to conduct I.R under its influence is a
dangerous game.
v. The theory limits the scope of I.R solely on power whereas various other non-political
activities regulate int. relations
Classical versus neorealism – Neo Realsim (Proposed by Kenneth Waltz)
It can be seen that while classical and neorealism agree on some fundamental points, i.e. the
existence of a state of anarchy and the important role played by the balance of power in the international
system, they tend to disagree on the reason for the origin or continued existence of these factors.
Neorealists continue to view power as a “means to an end” while classical realists will see power as an
end in its own right. Classical realists will continue to view “the search for power not made for the
achievement of moral values; moral values used to facilitate the attainment of power”. Neorealists
however continue to maintain their opposition to a role for morality, values or justice in realist theory and
they similarly continue to advocate the place of scientific methodology.

2. Idealism
Idealists reject the idea that international affairs should be conducted according to the dictates of
power politics. They recognize the power politics but regard it as the passing phase of history. They say
that when this phase will pass, the international system will be free from power politics, immorality and
violence.
The contents of Idealist theory can be found in the Declaration of American War of Independence
of 1776, and the French revolution.
Proponents
i. Rousseau
ii. Immanuel Kant
iii. Woodrow Wilson
Basic Assumptions
i. The current int. system is based upon power politics
ii. It is a temporary and passing phase of history
iii. When this phase will pass, a new future society will emerge
iv. The new society will be based on morality, non-violence, harmony and
brotherhood.
v. In emerging societies the interest of various groups are likely to be adjusted in the
larger interest of mankind as a whole
Merit
i. It rejects power politics
ii. It predicts for int. peace, co-operation and harmony
Demerit
 i. The theory believes on universal morality but history gives an averse view
ii. Critics warns that rigid adherence to idealism would lead to frustration

3. Liberalism (related to Idealism) – Focuses on supra-natural organization to control State affairs.

A school of thought with an optimistic view of human nature, considering non-state actors important
as well with a world system guided by norms and institutions. Example: The UNO and WTO.
The nature of international relations includes both conflict and co-operation. Liberals believe that because
states are connected by trade and finance, they have an incentive not to alienate one another. This
rationale is a good reason for nations to reduce tariffs and other trade barriers. A second part of this
assumption is the democratic stability theory which rests on the observation that no two democratic states
have ever gone to war with one another, and that democratic states rarely strike first. Liberals argue that
democracies identify with one another because of their shared norms and values the United States doesn’t
want to take-over (Canada and vice versa) partly because each country believes that citizens have the
right to choose their own government and consequently believe that conquering another country and
enslaving its citizens is wrong. Moreover, democracies are not dominated by the military and the decision
to go to war does not lie in the hands of an individual or a small group> leaders are accountable to their
people, who are often reluctant to see their children go to war.
The state is not necessarily a unitary and rational actor. This assumptions recognizes that leaders
must play bi-level games in which they must simultaneously negotiate with foreign leaders but also make
choices that keep their own constituents happy. An example of this is the United States ongoing refusal to
pay UN dues. Foreign aid and contributions to the United Nations would total less than 1% of America’s
budget, but a popular campaign strategy of (Congressmen is to argue that the United States sends
too much of our tax dollars abroad. (Congressmen therefore would compromise their promises to their
constituents by paying out dues and hence will not authorize the president to do so. (Consequently, what
might be rational (in our best interest) paying our dues in order to reduce the wrath of our fellow UN
members cannot come to be.
Both state and non-state actors are important in international relations. Liberalism directly
contrasts realism because it places a great deal of value on sub-state actors, like individuals or multi-
national corporations. Microsoft, a company that earns as much as the 86% as the 9th largest country in
the world, can affect global politics by controlling how and what kind of information people can access.
Jesse Jackson influenced global politics when he negotiated the release of American fighter pilot Scott
O’Grady from the Bosnian government.
Beside democracy, liberalism claims that economics, social, ecological and other non-military
issues promote cooperation among states. Liberalism particularly emphasizes the pacifying effects of free
trade. As Angell suggests, war can become obsolete if trade flourishes between countries because trade
brings mutual gains to all the actors, irrespective of how powerful they are. Moreover, free trade mitigates
barriers and tensions between countries and propels interaction, friendship and understanding

Transnational cooperation is considered as a requirement for resolving common problems. This argument
particularly corresponds to the idea that the risk of conflicts between states is reduced by creating a
common interest in trade and cooperation for the state’s mutual benefits. On the other hand, this refers to
the claim of 3eohane and 6ye that the modern international system is marked by interdependence, creating
a cobweb of diverse actors that are linked through interaction. Therefore, the centrality of international
institutions and regimes, international non-governmental organizations and other interest groups needs to
be taken into account as they broaden the states’ “conception of self-interest" and wide “the scope for
cooperation" .Moreover, liberalism argues that international institutions play an important role in
implementing, monitoring and adjudicating disputes arising from decisions made by constituent states of
the organization.
Strengths and Weakness of Liberalism

4. Marxism
The economic system is at the foundation of every society. Thus to understand I.R, we will have
to understand its economic relations.
Basic assumptions
i. There is a class struggle between haves and have not’s and all other social interactions
are based on this phenomenon.
ii. To replace this capitalist society, a revolution of communist society will take place,
which will be classless and stateless (no governing authority – all equal) in nature.
iii. This revolution will be first observed in advanced society of West.
Criticism
 i. The communist revolution first took place in less developed countries
ii. Wherever such revolution took place, the government and State took more authority
then before – (this is contradictory to classless and stateless as predicted)
iii. Theory says int. wars take place due to capitalist imperialism however various clashes
between communist countries have been observed in the history
5. Neo-Realism – Not the human nature, but international system makes the states to go for power
politics.
6. Neo-Liberalism – The role of international organizations as the guiding norms of international system.
7. Post-modernism
8. Critical theory
9. Feminism – It highlights the absence of women from the international politics and what is importance
of incorporating the women. Women are peaceful in nature and if they are allowed to rule the world there
would be peace rather than conflict in the world.
10. Social Constructivism – The international relations is the sum of the ideas we assign to different
actions. Example: border is what we all agree to understand. It is an abstract concept.
11. Scientific behavioral approach
It became popular with the introduction of behaviourism in social science. According to this
approach, all human actions could be explained by stimulus and response, if full knowledge were
available.
Basic assumption
i. Int. politics can be explained by analyzing and explaining the behaviour of the people –
(int. politics as any other social activity involves people)
ii. It takes cause and effect approach in I.R
iii. It helps in deducing how an event occurred, what are its impacts and under what
circumstances they might occur again
iv. Scientists analyze I.R objectively
Critical analysis
i. Severe criticism as I.R is a social science not a physical phenomenon – It deals with
people and they are not objects
ii. Behaviour of people is governed by subjectivity tool, hence it cannot be analyzed
objectively with modern scientific tools
C. International Political Security
1. Conceptualization of security in the Twenty-First century
These include terrorism, extremism, natural disasters, economic hardships, power outages, and resultant
social discontent to name a few. * Future threats = Nuclear proliferation+ Terrorism+ Cyber threat

Concept Time Frame Catalyst Main National,

Institutional and
epistemic
 advocates in
Asia
National 1940s Technological US, SEATO, Five
Security change/New Power Defence
warfare Arrangements
Comprehensive 1960s Domestic Japan, Malaysia,
Security politics and Indonesia,
regime ASEAN, ASEAN-
legitimation ISIS
Common/ 1970s/1980s Ideational prior, ARF, CSCAP
Cooperative institutions
Security
Human Security 1990s-2000s Ideational prior, Canada,
institutions, Norway, Japan,
domestic Thailand, ASEAN
political change Secretariat(since
Surin Pisuwan)
Non-Traditional 1990s-2000s New Threats China, ASEAN
Security Plus Three,
NEAT

2. Power: Elements of National Power

“The capacity to impose one’s will on the other by reliance on effective sanctions in case of
noncompliance.” ~ Schawazenberger
“Power may comprise anything that establishes and maintains the power of man over man …. from
physical violence to the most subtle psychological ties by which one mind controls another”
~ Morgenthau
“Size of population and territory, resource endowment, economic capability, military strength, political
stability and competence collectively form power.” – Kenneth Waltz (limited to tangible variables only)
I. Tangible elements
i. Physical character (Geography) – Location; Topography; Size; climate
ii. Population
iii. Natural resources
iv. Agriculture and industrial output
v. Military capabilities
vi. Information and communication capabilities
II. Intangible elements
i. Administrative competence
ii Leadership
iii. National Morale
iv. Reputation
III. Characteristics of Power
 i. Power is relative not absolute
ii. Power depends upon situations
iii. Power is dynamic (passes from country to country)
iv. Power is multi-dimensional
IV. Difficulties in evaluation of power
i. Tangible elements can be measured easily but intangible cannot
ii. Power does not only depends on elements but also on situation
iii. Dynamic nature of elements – not permanent but transitional and changing
“A country goes to war because it either over estimate its own power or under-estimate the power of the opponent.”

3. Balance of Power
I. Introduction and background
“Through shifting alliances and countervailing pressure no one power or combination of
powers will be allowed to grow so stronger as to threaten the security of the rest.” ~ Palmer and Perkins
II. Theories
i. Conscious efforts theory – Mortan A. Kaplan
ii. Automatic process theory
iii. Semi-automatic process theory
III. Characteristics of BoP
i. Not a constant phenomenon (equilibrium to disequilibrium)
ii. Not an automatic phenomenon (achieved by active intervention of man)
iii. Real BoP seldom exist
iv. Objective approach by historians and subjective approach by statesmen
v. Sometimes identified as policy making process
vi. Played by big powers – smaller powers have nothing to do in it (rather they are
utilized by big powers)
IV. Techniques of Balance
i. Alliance
ii. Compensation (Territorial compensation after war between victors)
iii. Partition
iv. Armament and Disarmament
v. Intervention and war (last resort)
vi. Divide and rule
vii. Creation of Buffer States
viii. Neutralization
V. Merits
i. Preserved peace in absence of collective security in Europe (history)
ii. Guaranteed the independence of smaller states (preservation of modern state system)
iii. Compel States to observe I.L (including non-aggression and non-interference–Art.2(7)
 VI. Demerits
i. Theory does not necessarily bring peace in the world (WWI – miscalculation; thus
theory sometimes bringing peace, encourages war)
ii. Power may be major goal but not the sole aim of States as theory dictates
iii. It only considers one element of national power i.e military capabilities
iv. It attach more importance to self-interest bypassing morality, justice and fair play
v. Various factors motivate foreign policy of a state not only BoP
4. Foreign Policy: Determinants, Decision Making and Analysis
I. Definition and evolution
“The process, dealing and interaction of a state with other states in international relations.”
II. Motivating factors
i. Nationalism ii. Ideology iii. National interests
III. Influencing factors
a. Internal factors
i. Size
ii. Geography
iii. National capacities
iv. Political system
v. Social structure
vi. Public mood
vii. Leadership
b. External factors
i. Structure of international system
ii. Regional structure
iii. International organizations
iv. Alliances
v. World public opinion
IV. Decision making and Analysis
It is a complex process in which all the above stated parameters are to be taken into
consideration.
5. Sovereignty (Cover it up from Sarfaraz Akhund – before paper 22.02.16)
6. National Interest
The national interest, often referred to by the French expression raison d'État ("reason of State"), is
a country's goals and ambitions whether economic, military, or cultural.

History - In early human history the national interest was usually viewed as secondary to that
of religion or morality. To engage in a war rulers needed to justify the action in these contexts. The
first thinker to advocate for the primacy of the national interest is usually considered to be Niccolò
Machiavelli.

The practice is first seen as being employed by France under the direction of its Chief
Minister Cardinal Richelieu in the Thirty Years' War when it intervened on the Protestant side,
despite its own Catholicism, to block the increasing power of the Holy Roman Emperor. At
Richelieu's prompting, Jean de Silhon defended the concept of reason of state as "a mean between
what conscience permits and affairs require."[1] The notion of the national interest soon came to
dominate European politics that became fiercely competitive over the next centuries.

States could now openly embark on wars purely out of self-interest. Mercantilism can be seen as the
economic justification of the aggressive pursuit of the national interest.

A foreign policy geared towards pursuing the national interest is the foundation of the realist school
of international relations. The realist school reached its greatest heights at the Congress of
Vienna with the practice of the balance of powers, which amounted to balancing the national interest
of several great and lesser powers.

These notions became much criticized after the bloody debacle of the First World War, and some
sought to replace the concept of the balance of power with the idea of collective security, whereby all
members of the League of Nations would "consider an attack upon one as an attack upon all," thus
deterring the use of violence for ever more. The League of Nations did not work, partially because
the United States refused to join and partially because, in practice, nations did not always find it "in
the national interest" to deter each other from the use of force.

The events of World War II led to a rebirth of Realist and then Neo-realist thought, as international
relations theorists re-emphasized the role of power in global governance. Many IR theorists blamed
the weakness of the League of Nations for its idealism (contrasted with Realism) and ineffectiveness
at preventing war, even as they blamed mercantilist beggar thy neighbor - policies for the creation
of fascist states in Germany and Italy. (In economics, a beggar-thy-neighbour policy is an
economic policy through which one country attempts to remedy its economic problems by means
that tend to worsen the economic problems of other countries). With hegemonic stability theory, the
concept of the U.S. national interest was expanded to include the maintenance of open sea lanes
and the maintenance and expansion of free trade. The majority of the jurists consider that the
"national interest" is incompatible with the "rule of law". Regarding this, Antonino Troianiello has said
that national interest and a state subject to the rule of law are not absolutely incompatible.
Methods of promotion of N.I
i. Alliance ii. Diplomatic negotiations iii. Coercive measures
D. Strategic Approach to International Relation.

1. War: Causation of War, Total War, Limited War, Asymmetric Warfare, Civil War,
Guerilla Warfare
 Causation of War
i. State-ism (political – E.g: Nazism and Fascism)
ii. Collectivism (ideological)
iii. Altruism (moral – selflessly serve others rather than to selfishly protect ourselves;
E.g: American involvement in Vietnam War)
iv. Mysticism (Philosophic cause E.g: Jihadist extremism)
v. Evasion (psychological cause – E.g: No response of European powers against
intervening intentions of Nazis’ in 1930s)

Effects of the Outbreak of War

a. General Effects (Not all but peaceful relations of the belligerent states end, Oppenheim)
b. Diplomatic & Consular Relations end with the outbreak of war
c. Treaties depend on the agreements and intentions of the belligerent States
d. Trading and Intercourse in Commerce terminate
e. Enemy Property
All movable public enemy property is seized, however, immovable property cannot be permanently
seized.
All private enemy property is temporary seized and its fate is decided in accordance with the peace
treaty concluded between the belligerent States.
f. Combatant and Non-Combatants (Combatants can be killed or grievously hurt during war but non-
combatants enjoy certain facilities and concessions that must be provided to them even during war)

Total War:
In the modern time, war not only affects the armed forces but also the civilians and the nature of
war is such that observance of the rules of war becomes impossible. Such, a war has, therefore,
been called ‘total war’. The term was first used by Grotius. In his view, thirty year’s war of Europe
was a total war.
Limited War:
A war in which the weapons used, the nations or territory involved, or the objectives pursued are
restricted in some way, in particular one in which the use of nuclear weapons is avoided.

For example in Crimean War Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Lord Palmerston decided to
fight a limited war against Russia, since waging a total war would have required massive reform
of the armed forces. The concept of limited war was also used in the Vietnam War by the United
States under Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson as part of a strategy to contain
the spread of Communism without provoking a wider confrontation with the Soviet Union.

Asymmetrical Warfare:

Warfare in which opposing groups or nations have unequal military resources, and the weaker
opponent uses unconventional weapons and tactics, as terrorism, to exploit the vulnerabilities of
the enemy. The term is also frequently used to describe what is also called "guerrilla warfare",
"insurgency", "terrorism", "counterinsurgency", and "counterterrorism", essentially violent
conflict between a formal military and an informal, less equipped and supported, undermanned but
resilient opponent. Examples of asymmetrical Warfare are The Sri Lankan Civil War, which raged
on and off from 1983 to 2009, between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of
Tamil Eelam (LTTE) saw large-scale asymmetric warfare, Pakistan claims territorial rights to the
region of Kashmir, where it has been engaged in a proxy war with India since 1988, Syrian civil
war has been fought asymmetrically, US-Afghan war after 9/11 all these are glaring examples of
asymmetrical warfare.

Guerrilla Warfare:

Guerrilla warfare (the word guerrilla comes from the Spanish meaning “little war”) is often the
means used by weaker nations or military organizations against a larger, stronger foe. Fought
largely by independent, irregular bands, sometimes linked to regular forces, it is a warfare of
harassment through surprise. It is a form of irregular warfare in which a small group of combatants
such as armed civilians or irregulars use military tactics including ambushes, sabotage, raids, petty
warfare, hit-and-run tactics, and mobility to fight a larger and less-mobile traditional military.

The most prominent practitioner of this type is the Muslim group al-Qaeda, which has attracted
religious fanatics from various countries to carry out vicious terrorist attacks, the most famous
being the September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001.

The strategy and tactics of guerrilla warfare tend to involve the use of a small, mobile force against
a large, unwieldy one.
Modes of Termination of War:
Under International Law following are the modes of termination of war:
a. Simple cessation of hostilities without any definite understanding being reached
b. Conquest followed by annexation
c. By a Peace Treaty
d. By Armistice Agreement
e. By Unilateral Declaration of one or more of the victorious powers
For example Indo-Pak War of 1971 came to an end in consequence of unilateral declaration
of India to end the war. Pakistan also respected the declaration and ceased hostilities.

Doctrine of Postiliminium:
Incorporated in International Law from Roman Law. According to it, persons and things
released from the occupation of the belligerent State come to their original position after the end
of war. This principle is applied in the context of war. This principle, however, cannot be applied
in matters of neutral States.

2. Strategic Culture: Determinants of Pakistani Strategic Culture.

 i. Opposition to Indian hegemony
ii. Primacy of defence requirements
iii. Nuclear deterrence
iv. Acceptance, but not reliance, on outside assistance
v. Stability of Pakistan’s western borders – Durand line
vi. Identification with conservative Islamic causes - While Islam remains a major part of
Pakistan’s political identity, it generally is not a dominant theme in Pakistan’s foreign and
defense policies.

3. Deterrence: Theory and practice with special reference to India and Pakistan
“To frighten” – Persuading an enemy that attacking you will cost him more than any potential
gain.
Nuclear Deterrence = Policy of having nuclear weapons in order to make an enemy too
frightened to attack

Pre-requisites for successful deterrence

i. Communication = Adversaries should be given clear understanding through proper
communication system as to what is likely to happen if he disregards the prohibition.
ii. Capability = Adequate capacity to inflict severe punishment or to cause heavy damage
iii. Credibility = Adversaries should believe that not only capacity but opponent has will
to do it (punish)

E. International Political Economy.

1. Theories in IPE (Susan Strange):
“International Political Economy is a subject matter whose central focus is the
interrelationship between public and private power in the allocation of scarce resources’. - John
Ravenhill
i. Mercantilism (Visit the above hyperlink – Precisely explained all four theories)
ii. Economic Liberalism (Laissez Faire liberalism)
iii. Economic Nationalization (Neo-Mercantilism) to continue
iv. Neo- Marxism

2. Theories of Imperialism, Dependence and Interdependence discourse

I. Imperialism
“Policy of extending country’s power and influence in the world through diplomacy or
military force and especially acquiring colonies.” ~ Oxford dictionary
“The expansion of state power beyond its borders” ~ Morgenthau
Types of imperialism
i. Military imperialism (a historic phenomenon) – Ended after WWII

Reasons
a. Desire of self-sufficiency (acquiring raw material)
b. Need for new markets (to sell finished goods)
c. Investing surplus capital (The special risk of investment abroad often brought
demand for protection. In response govt. put pressure on native rulers or sent
troops which ultimately resulted in establishment of colonies)
d. Nationalism
e. Missionary motives (religious expansion tendencies caused M. imperialism)
f. White men’s burden theory (Westerners believe to civilize others)
 Negative impacts
i. The natives were subjected to several types of discrimination and were treated
as inferior creatures
ii. Imposition of culture of west on south and east
iii. Imperialistic policies generally resulted in continuous war
iv. M. imperialism led to economic exploitation of natives
Positive impacts
i. Exposed natives with the modern civilization techniques of science and tech
ii. Sense of nationalism emerged in colonies
iii. Spread of industrial and technological advancement in colonies
iv. The education of science and technology was brought into colonies
ii. Economic imperialism (modern phenomenon)
iii. Cultural imperialism (Through Media)

II. Dependence and interdependence discourse (Scroll down the hyperlinked document)

F. International political community

1. Nationalism
I. Definition
“Nationalism is the belief that the nation is the ultimate basis of political loyalty and
nations should have self-government.” ~ John T. Rourke
American and French revolutions are considered as the beginning point.
II. Historical development
Beginning = Fall of Roman Empire – Emergence of Feudalism and Catholic
Church religion.
Further, Renaissance converted the political philosophy of people, as they began to take
religion as a personal matter.
Power of feuds began to decline and Kings filled the vacuum. The strife
between religious authorities and Kings prevailed for a short but Kings took the lead.
17th century – State system emerged under powerful kings which became the
ultimate base of the people’s political authority.
Increase in economic activities and (to complete)

2. Internationalism (Lord Palmerston and Woodrow Wilson – Proponents)

Internationalism is a political movement which advocates a greater economic and political
cooperation among nations and peoples. Internationalism is an important component of socialist political
theory, based on the principle that working class people of all countries must unite across national
boundaries and actively oppose nationalism and war in order to overthrow capitalism.
I. Liberal internationalism/Interventionism
Liberal internationalism is a foreign policy doctrine that argues that liberal states should intervene in other
sovereign states in order to pursue liberal objectives. Such intervention can include both military invasion
and humanitarian aid. This view is contrasted to isolationist, realist, or non-interventionist foreign policy
doctrines; these critics characterize it as liberal interventionism.
a. Pros

i. Economic benefits - low costs and a global increase in business and trade.
Lower production costs mean lower price inflation
ii. Political benefits - Economic benefits invariably lead to political benefits. Any
two nations that promote trade amongst themselves want to ensure smooth
 political relationships to continue that trade.
iii. Educational benefits - Internationalism has also led to major changes in the
field of education, benefiting both students and Universities. Most of the major
universities, colleges, and technical institutions have opened their doors to
deserving foreign students enabling global education.
iv. Cultural benefits - Thus internationalism promotes a trend of global
brotherhood and peace. By learning the culture, language, and history of
another nation we also learn to tolerate each other’s views paving the way for
world peace and stronger ties.
v. Legal benefits - Better economic and political ties between nations also help
in undermining crime and international terrorism
vi. Peace and security - The UN provides a forum for discussing disputes and
airing the grievances and concerns of member states. Though the UN has not
prevented all armed conflict, there has also not been another world war.

b. Cons

1. Trade Deficit
2. Subsidies Prop up (Increased)
3. Deport jobs
4. Flight of Capital to Foreign Countries
5. Zero Sum Game (Promoting Capitalism)

3. Globalization
“The unity of labour, market and capital (money).” Or “The mobilization of people and their ideas”.
ISO = International organization of standards
Negative aspects of globalization
i. Transfer of skilled labour and technology do not take place from developed to
underdeveloped or developing countries.
ii. Duty (tax) should be decreased from 150% to 35% (ISO) - A loss to third world
countries when exporting to first world countries.
iii. Every country needs to follow ISO-9000 standards – Difficult for 3rd world countries
to maintain the standards
iv. Competition between trading blocs (ASEAN, SAARC, NATFA, ECO, SCO, ETC)
v. Foreign products highly affect domestic product of the third world countries =
(Internet, media and many more)
vi. Cultural differences – Jeans replacing shalwar kameez; everyone wants corolla, KFC,
McDonalds; These all need extra money which gives birth to corruption)
Positive aspects of globalization
i. Cultural integrity ii. Scholarship ii. Diminishes gender and racial discrimination
(black working with white) iv. Digital world v. Tourism vi. Education vii.
Employment

G. Approaches to Peace
1. Diplomacy (Art of negotiation)
I. Definition and Evolution
“The application of intelligence and tact to the conducts of official relations between
governments of independent states.” ~ Quincy Wright
II. Rules of Effective Diplomacy
 i. Realism
ii. Avoidance of dogmatism - (flexibility)
iii. Care of other side
iv. Search for common grounds
v. Compromise on the non-vital issues
vi. Patience
vii. Retreat avenue be left open
III. Conclusion

2. International Law

3. Arms Control, Disarmament and Nuclear Non-proliferation Regime

I. What is Arms-control
Arms control and disarmament are not identical
II. Does Arms race cause war?
i. Exponent’s view (Arms race causes war)
ii. Opponent’s view (war is caused due to human nature)
“Men do not fight because they have arms. The have arms because they fight.” ~ Morgenthau
iii. Synthetic view
III. Factors including arms control
i. Desire to limit
ii. To stabilize deterrence
iii. To prevent accidental or unauthorized use of weapons
iv. To limit nuclear proliferation
IV. Approaches to Arms control
A. Limits on arms transfer
a. Non-proliferation – NPT (5th Mar 1970)
Issues in implementation
i. Many non-nuclear countries refrained from acquiring nuclear
ii. Still there is continuation of transfer of nuclear material + tech
iii. Nuclear exporting countries fail to ensure that the importers
will not use them for military purposes
iv. Illegal acquisition of nuclear from nuclear states
v. Supply of nuclear material is a big business
b. Arms limitation
i. Nuclear freeze approach – immediate halt
ii. Impose ban on nuclear research and development
iii. Place ban on testing
iv. Imposition of ban on deployment – (ABM 1972 US v USSR)
c. Arms reduction
i. Absolute reduction – reduction while building no new weapon
ii. Build-down approach – dismantle two or more old weapons
for each new nuclear weapon
iii. Geographic reduction scaling down weapons and troops
from particular area
V. Approaches to disarmament – Extreme approach towards arms control
Types
i. General and complete disarmament (Idealistic approach) – can only
be achieved through unilateral or multi-lateral disarmament.
 ii. Unilateral disarmament (Idealistic approach) – A country to
dismantle its own arms irrespective of consideration that other are
willing to do it or not.
iii. Negotiated disarmament (logical approach)
H. International Political Institution
United Nations
International Monetary Fund (IMF)
World Bank
International Court of Justice