◼◼ INTERNATIONAL UNPLUGGED◼◼

International Relations of Emerging Powers

Winter 2020

Dr. Amaia Sanchez Cacicedo

asc@faculty.ie.edu
 Introduction to the course
> Syllabus review: key course objectives

> Understanding ‘global governance’ and ’good

governance’. Why relevant?

> How do we conceptualize emerging powers?

> Means of influence of emerging powers?

> Concept of minilateralism

> Debate: are emerging powers revisionist or

moderate reformers of the current world order?
 Course objectives

• Unpack key concepts:

o global and ‘good’ governance

o emerging powers

o global South vs. the global North

• Understand the material and normative aspects of

power, with an emphasis on global norms
• Understand how emerging countries engage with
international multilateralism
• Understanding how emerging countries are challenging
international regimes along different issue areas:
▪◼ international finance & trade ▪ ◼ climate change ▪◼
international development assistance ▪◼ human rights and liberal
internationalism
 Defining governance
> Different definitions by different international organizations

> Basic traits of governance - management of a country’s

economic and social resources shaped by:
• nature of the political regime
• degree of political authority:
• capacity to control/enforce compliance
• link to legitimacy?*

> Gradual enlargement of the liberal definition to include…

• respect for human rights and the rule of law
• strengthening of democracy
• promoting transparency and capacity of public delivery
*Legitimacy: subjective belief by an actor that a rule or institution ought to be obeyed. It is a
subjective quality, relational between actor and institution and defined by the actor’s perception
(Hurd 1999:381)
 Defining global governance
> Rosenau (1995:13) defines ‘global governance’ as
‘systems of rule at all levels of human activity – from the
family to the international organization – in which the pursuit
of goals through the exercise of control has transnational
repercussions.’

> According to Baylis et al. (2017:536), global governance is

the loose framework of global regulation, both institutional
and normative, that constraints conduct
 international organizations & law
 transnational organizations & frameworks
 elements of global civil society
 shared normative principles
 Global governance complex

UN System Chart
https://www.un.org/en/pdfs/un
_system_chart.pdf

A. McGrew, ‘Globalization and Global Politics’, in Baylis et al., The Globalization of World
Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, Oxford University Press, 2017, p. 26
 Implications of global governance
> Post-1945, a vast nexus of global and regional institutions
has evolved and is associated with a proliferation of
agencies and networks seeking to influence the governance
of global affairs

> The concept of a global governance complex embraces

states, international institutions, transnational networks and
agencies (both public and private)

> This is embedded in post-WW II internationalism that led

to the creation of the Bretton Woods institutions –
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank

> Post-1989, with the end of the Cold War and collapse of
the Soviet Union, a ‘liberal order’ gained prominence
 Complying with ‘good governance’

> Good governance embedded in liberalism in order

to encourage capitalism and democratic rights:

• economic liberalization - free trade

• political liberalization - democratization
• emphasis on human rights, rule of law,
accountability,...

> Against the background of the U.S. as global

hegemon post-Cold War - implications?

> Emphasis on collective security and non-traditional

security issues
Who are the emerging powers?
 CIVETS

Next 11 (N11)
Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria,
Pakistan, Philippines, Turkey, South Korea, and
Vietnam
 Conceptualizing emerging powers

> Emphasis on economic growth – implications?

> Material and non-material power: issues of

legitimacy and authority

> Collective identity of emerging powers:

• Similarities: uncertainty, vulnerability, quest for global
influence
• Differences: geopolitics, history, culture, political
regimes, macroeconomic parameters & potential

> Do they comply as responsible powers?

 Why do emerging powers interest us?

> Growing material power: economic, military,..

> Growing international normative status

> Growing counterbalance to traditional great

powers

> Growing international agenda setters

Actual influence...?
 Means of influence: economic growth
> Higher economic power and integration in the global
economy does not necessarily translate into political
liberalism, e.g. China or Russia

> Wide diversity of non-state actors: multinational

corporations (MNCs), non-state armed actors, civil
society organizations,…

> Emerging powers have become emerging donors

outside the OECD DAC regime

> International Financial Institutions (IFIs) – IMF,

World Bank – continue to favour the traditional powers
 IMF Quotas and Voting Power *
(also the reference for the World Bank)
United States 17.46 %
Japan 6.48 %
China 6.41 %
Germany 5.60 %
India 2.76 %
Russian Federation 2.71 %
Brazil 2.32 %
South Africa 0.64 %
* IMF Quotas and Voting Power, IMF, revised in 2010, online;
available at http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/memdir/members.aspx
https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/iDgdUgR2BcYY/v2/-1x-
1.png
https://www.imf.org/en/About/Factsheets/Sheets/2016/07/14/12/21/IMF-Quotas
 Means of influence: the region

> Is the emerging power also the regional power?

> Does the emerging power have or seek to have a

leadership and institutional role for the region at
international fora?

> Does the emerging power seek regional

institutionalism, e.g. through regional integration?

> Regional-global nexus: does the region project or

weaken the emerging power?
 Regional Groups
United Nations General Assembly

https://www.un.org/Depts/DGACM/RegionalGroups.shtml
 Means of influence: international hierarchy

> Acquiring international status and prestige, joining the

‘power club’, e.g. G20

> Creation of new minilateral groupings, e.g. BRICS, BASIC,

Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), New
Development Bank,…

> Launching of global connectivity and trade initiatives, e.g.

Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Regional
Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) - ASEAN
members, China, Japan, S. Korea, India, Australia & NZ
Means of influence: positioning vis-à-vis the U.S.

> Fluctuates between productive bargaining and

bandwagoning with the hegemonic power

> Contention vs. confrontation, using economic

means and indirect penetration via sensitive
technologies that pose a national security challenge,
examples?

> Thus far, direct military confrontation hasn’t

happened but it is epitomized in proxy settings, such
as….?
 Reaction by the traditional powers
> Need to accommodate the parameters of global
governance to a multipolar normative reality

> Need to accept that changes in the distribution of

material power imply reforms in the multilateral arena,
e.g. reform of post-WW II institutions such as the UN
Security Council, IMF, World Bank…

> Need for the powerful [Global North] to become

accountable to the less powerful [Global South]

> Need to create new multilateral fora and minilateral

initiatives – new multilateralism on the way?
 ‘New multilateralism’ = minilateralism?

‘Multilateralism centers on the collectively agreed norms,

rules, and principles that guide and govern interstate
behavior. Multilateral institutions are all based on the
principles of generalized reciprocity, in which states make
common undertakings and agree to act cooperatively.’
Hampson & Heinbecker (2011:300)

‘Minilateralism is characterized by bringing to the table the

smallest number of countries needed to have the largest
possible impact on solving a particular problem.’
Naim (2009:135-6)

Minilateralism is advanced through group interactions that

involve the most powerful actors in the international system –
coalitions of the willing or club of the powerful- implications?
 Debate

Are emerging powers revisionists or

moderate reformers of the current world order?