Foundations Of International Relations 1st

Edition Stephen Mcglinchey download

https://ebookbell.com/product/foundations-of-international-
relations-1st-edition-stephen-mcglinchey-51323052

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Foundations Of International Relations 1st Edition Robbie Shilliam

https://ebookbell.com/product/foundations-of-international-
relations-1st-edition-robbie-shilliam-56828464

Medieval Foundations Of International Relations William Bain

https://ebookbell.com/product/medieval-foundations-of-international-
relations-william-bain-6687396

Communitarian International Relations The Epistemic Foundations Of

International Relations The New Internationalrelations 1st Edition
Emanuel Adler

https://ebookbell.com/product/communitarian-international-relations-
the-epistemic-foundations-of-international-relations-the-new-
internationalrelations-1st-edition-emanuel-adler-1685732

Communitarian International Relations The Epistemic Foundations Of

International Relations New International Relations 1st Edition
Emanuel Adler

https://ebookbell.com/product/communitarian-international-relations-
the-epistemic-foundations-of-international-relations-new-
international-relations-1st-edition-emanuel-adler-1797030
The Grotian Theology Of International Law Hugo Grotius And The Moral
Foundations Of International Relations Christoph A Stumpf

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-grotian-theology-of-international-
law-hugo-grotius-and-the-moral-foundations-of-international-relations-
christoph-a-stumpf-42642636

The Religious Foundations Of Internationalism A Study In International

Relations Through The Ages 1st Edition Norman Bentwich

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-religious-foundations-of-
internationalism-a-study-in-international-relations-through-the-
ages-1st-edition-norman-bentwich-42872792

The Realist Tradition In International Relations 4 Volumes The

Foundations Of Western Order Praeger Security International Barry
Scott Zellen

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-realist-tradition-in-international-
relations-4-volumes-the-foundations-of-western-order-praeger-security-
international-barry-scott-zellen-43717370

The Economy Of Salvation Ethical And Anthropological Foundations Of

Market Relations In The First Two Books Of The Bible 1st Ed Luigino
Bruni

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-economy-of-salvation-ethical-and-
anthropological-foundations-of-market-relations-in-the-first-two-
books-of-the-bible-1st-ed-luigino-bruni-9962240

The Invention Of International Relations Theory Realism The

Rockefeller Foundation And The 1954 Conference On Theory Nicolas
Guilhot Editor

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-invention-of-international-
relations-theory-realism-the-rockefeller-foundation-and-
the-1954-conference-on-theory-nicolas-guilhot-editor-4181682
‘An immensely user-friendly introduction to International Relations, replete with diagrams,
maps, illustrations and helpful summaries of the material covered. Such care for a student
text has not been taken for a very long time.’ – Stephen Chan OBE, Professor of World
Politics, SOAS University of London, UK

‘Foundations of International Relations delivers a comprehensive explanation of

International Relations that includes a thorough introduction to critical theories
and non-western viewpoints alongside established IR theories and narratives. The
approachability of the text and relevant case studies will leave students with the tools
needed to understand and analyse international events.’ – Jessica Neafie, Assistant
Professor of International Relations, Nazarbayev University, Kazakhstan

‘The core strength of this textbook is the clarity it brings to explaining the many concepts
and theories that make up International Relations – it introduces students to the nuance
and complexity of the field in an exciting and accessible way. An excellent educational
resource.’ – Zoë Jay, Lecturer in Politics and International Relations, University of
Tasmania, Australia

‘This introduction to International Relations is one of the most original and interesting to
come to the market in a long while. Moving away from a purely European perspective,
students will gain an understanding of traditional ideas about international organisation,
whilst also appreciating how issues such as COVID and food security are truly international
in scope.’ – Anthony F Lang, Professor of International Political Theory, University of St
Andrews, UK

‘Stephen McGlinchey has brought together a fantastic collection of authors who together
present a wide-ranging, critical and accessible introduction to International Relations.
Supported by helpful case studies, key insights and key term features, the book will enable
its readers to navigate the complexities of global politics.’ – Peter Sutch, Professor of
Political and International Theory, Cardiff University, UK

‘Foundations of International Relations is a wonderfully rich, yet highly accessible,

introduction to International Relations, both as a subject and as a discipline. Students are
brought on an engaging intellectual journey through a range of contending perspectives
and issues, whilst being encouraged to think critically throughout. They will find it
challenging and rewarding in equal measure.’ – Stephen Hill, Lecturer in Politics and
International Relations, University of Edinburgh, UK

‘This innovative and well-written textbook takes students on an exciting historical,

theoretical, geographical and thematic journey of International Relations. It is truly
attentive to the multiplicity of (state and non-state) actors in global politics, as well as
non-Western approaches. The book presents an impressive and well-thought pedagogical
outline leaving students critically engaged and encouraged to apply their new knowledge
of IR to specific, concrete cases. I highly recommend this unique book to both beginner
and more advanced students.’ – Andréas Litsegård, Senior Lecturer in Peace and
Development Research, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
 FOUNDATIONS
OF INTERNATIONAL
RELATIONS

Edited by
Stephen McGlinchey
BLOOMSBURY ACADEMIC
Bloomsbury Publishing Plc
50 Bedford Square, London, WC1B 3DP, UK
1385 Broadway, New York, NY 10018, USA
­29 Earlsfort Terrace, Dublin 2, Ireland

BLOOMSBURY, BLOOMSBURY ACADEMIC and the Diana logo are

trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

First published in Great Britain 2022

Copyright © Stephen McGlinchey, 2022

Stephen McGlinchey has asserted his right to be identified as the author of

this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

For legal purposes the Acknowledgements on p. xvii constitute an extension

of this copyright page.

Cover design: Louise Dugdale

Cover image © Mr.IIkin / Adobe Stock

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or

transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval
system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers.

Bloomsbury Publishing Plc does not have any control over, or responsibility
for, any third-party websites referred to or in this book. All internet
addresses given in this book were correct at the time of going to press. The
author and publisher regret any inconvenience caused if addresses have
changed or sites have ceased to exist, but can accept no responsibility for
any such changes.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: McGlinchey, Stephen, editor.
Title: Foundations of international relations / Edited by Stephen McGlinchey.
Description: New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2022. | Includes
bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2021051690 (print) | LCCN 2021051691 (ebook) |
ISBN 9781350932579 (hardback) | ISBN 9781350932586 (paperback) |
ISBN 9781350932609 (pdf) | ISBN 9781350932593 (epub) | ISBN
9781350932616 (XML)
Subjects: LCSH: International relations. | International organizations. |
Global politics.
Classification: LCC JZ1242 .S544 2021 (print) | LCC JZ1242 (ebook) |
DDC 327–dc23/eng/20211202
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021051690
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021051691

ISBN: HB: 978-1-3509-3257-9

PB: 978-1-3509-3258-6
ePDF: 978-1-3509-3260-9
eBook: 978-1-3509-3259-3

Typeset by Integra Software Services Pvt. Ltd.

To find out more about our authors and books visit www.bloomsbury.com
and sign up for our newsletters.
BRIEF CONTENTS

List of Figures, Maps, Tables and Photographs xi

List of Boxes xiv
About the Authors xvi
Acknowledgements xvii
Tour of the Book xviii
Digital Resources xx

GETTING STARTED xxii

1 Introduction to International Relations 1

PART ONE: HISTORY AND THEORY 7

2 International Relations and the Global System 8
3 Discovery, Conquest and Colonialism 25
4 Towards Global International Relations 42
5 Levels of Analysis 56
6 Traditional and Middle Ground Theories 70
7 Critical Theories 85

PART TWO: GLOBAL STRUCTURES 101

8 International Organisations 102

9 ­Global Civil Society 116

10 International Political Economy 131

11 International Law 146

12 ­Religion and Culture 160

13 Gender and Sexuality 174

PART THREE: GLOBAL ISSUES 187

14 International Security 188

15 Transnational Terrorism 203

16 Migration 219

17 Poverty and Wealth 233

v
vi Brief Contents

18 Global Health 247

19 Environment and Climate 261

20 Connectivity and Exploitation in the Digital Age 275

REFLECTING ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 290

21 Crossings and Candles 291

References 305
Index 318
LONG CONTENTS

List of Figures, Maps, Tables and Photographs xi

List of Boxes xiv
About the Authors xvi
Acknowledgements xvii
Tour of the Book xviii
Digital Resources xx

GETTING STARTED xxii

1 Introduction to International Relations 1
Introducing International Relations 1
Establishing good academic practice 4

PART ONE: HISTORY AND THEORY 7

2 International Relations and the Global System 8
The foundations of International Relations 9
The making of the modern world 11
Beyond a world of warfare? 15
Conclusion 23
3 Discovery, Conquest and Colonialism 25
The 1492 map of the world 26
Conquest and conversion 29
Discovery and the apocalypse 32
1492 as a map of the present 35
Conclusion 41
4 Towards Global International Relations 42
Unpacking Western-dominated understandings of International Relations 43
The international relations of Southern civilisations 45
Towards ‘Global International Relations’ 46
A multiplex world order 49
Conclusion 54
5 Levels of Analysis 56
Establishing the four levels of analysis 57
Applying levels of analysis to the Covid-19 pandemic 61
The added value of a levels of analysis framework 63
Conclusion 69
6 Traditional and Middle Ground Theories 70
Making sense of theory 71
Liberalism and realism 72

vii
viii Long Contents

The English school and constructivism 77

Conclusion 84
7 Critical Theories 85
The evolution of theory 86
Marxism 87
Postcolonialism 89
Feminism 92
Poststructuralism 94
Conclusion 99

PART TWO: GLOBAL STRUCTURES 101

8 International Organisations 102
Intergovernmental organisations 103
The diverse types of international organisation 107
How international organisations add to our map of the world 109
Conclusion 115
9 ­Global Civil Society 116
Conditions for transnational activism 117
Global civil society as a response to transnational exclusion 118
Values promotion and creating change 120
Contested legitimacy 122
Civil society organisations and intergovernmental organisations 124
Conclusion 130
10 International Political Economy 131
Actors and interests 132
Trade 134
Production 136
Finance 138
Between global governance and deglobalisation 138
Conclusion 145
11 International Law 146
What law is international law? 147
The contents of international law 149
The functioning of international law 153
Conclusion 159
12 ­Religion and Culture 160
Elements of religion 161
Elements of culture 164
Religio-cultural identity: The both/and approach 167
Conclusion 173
13 Gender and Sexuality 174
Gender, sexuality and International Relations 175
 Long Contents ix

Political representation 177

Human rights 178
Gender and the global economy 181
Conclusion 186

PART THREE: GLOBAL ISSUES 187

14 International Security 188
Traditional approaches to security 189
Moving beyond the state 191
Elements of human security 192
Protecting people 195
Conclusion 202
15 ­Transnational Terrorism 203
What is transnational terrorism? 204
Motivation and goals 205
Terrorist activities 207
Organisation and resources 211
Countering transnational terrorism 212
Conclusion 218
16 Migration 219
The International Relations of people’s mobility 220
Structuring and categorising mobility 221
Controlling migration 224
Governing forced migration 226
Conclusion 232
17 Poverty and Wealth 233
Defining poverty 234
Reducing poverty 237
Globalisation and the wealth–poverty dynamic 240
Conclusion 245
18 Global Health 247
The values underpinning global health 248
Distribution and determinants of global health 249
Setting goals for health 250
Global health law 253
Health in waging war and peace 254
Conclusion 260
19 Environment and Climate 261
Towards a global consensus 262
The environment as a global commons 265
Global and domestic policy responses 268
Conclusion 274
x Long Contents

20 Connectivity and Exploitation in the Digital Age 275

The internet and digital commerce 276
Digital communications 279
Reliance and vulnerability 282
Conclusion 289

REFLECTING ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 290

21 Crossings and Candles 291
The four-minute mile 292
World-making 296
Conclusion 304

References 305
Index 318
LIST OF FIGURES, MAPS,
TABLES AND PHOTOGRAPHS

Figures
1.1 The global system 2 7.1 Charting International Relations theory
5.1 The four levels of analysis 57 through a critical lens 86

Maps
2.1 Illustrating sovereignty 11 14.1 Rwanda196
3.1 Cape Bojador’s location 29 14.2 Gulf War no-fly zones 199
3.2 The voyages of Columbus 32 15.1 The ambitions of Islamic State 206
4.1 The international relations of Southern 16.1 Ceuta and Melilla, Spanish
civilisations44 territories in the African continent 230
5.1 The Arab Spring 65 19.1 The Amazon rainforest 267
8.1 The dissolution of Yugoslavia 113 20.1 The geography and penetration
9.1 The Nile 129 of the internet 277
10.1 The Silk Road 140 21.1 The countries never invaded
11.1 China’s claims on territorial waters 154 by the British 292
12.1 Huntington’s civilisations 169

Tables
3.1 Comparing images of 1648 and 1492 26 15.2 The four theoretical models of
12.1 Religion and culture’s overlapping counterterrorism213
themes168 17.1 The UN Sustainable Development
15.1 Types of terrorism 208 Goals240

Photographs
2.1 The BRICS leaders in 2019. Left to right: 3.2 Portrait, said to be of Christopher
Xi, Putin, Bolsonaro, Modi and Columbus33
Ramaphosa15 3.3 George Floyd protest in Times Square,
2.2 Carter, Sadat and Begin after the Camp New York, 26 July 2020 34
David Accords, 18 September 1978 16 3.4 George Floyd mural in Minneapolis,
2.3 Atomic cloud formation from the Baker Minnesota34
Day explosion over Bikini Lagoon, 1946 19 3.5 Monument dedicated to Bartolomé
2.4 Kennedy and Khrushchev in Vienna, de las Casas, Seville 37
April 1961 21 3.6 Members of CONAIE march in Quito
2.5 Eleanor Roosevelt holding a poster of against the 2002 summit of the Free
the Universal Declaration of Human Trade Area of the Americas
Rights, New York, November 1949 21 (FTAA/ALCA)39
2.6 Protesters hold signs relating to ‘R2P’ 4.1 The UN-Habitat offices in Nairobi 52
as they take part in a demonstration 4.2 Xi Jinping delivers his speech on the
against the military coup in Yangon, opening day of the World Economic
Myanmar on 12 April 2021 22 Forum, Davos, 17 January 2017 53
3.1 Diagrammatic zonal world map, 5.1 Osama bin Laden in Kabul,
eleventh century 28 November 2001 60

xi
xii List of Figures, Maps, Tables and Photographs

5.2 Julian Assange in London, August 2014 60 on the Global Compact for Migration
5.3 Jacinda Ardern in Wellington, in Marrakech, 11 December 2018 142
November 2020 61 10.2 President Donald Trump and President
5.4 Greta Thunberg addresses climate Xi Jinping at the G20 Japan Summit in
strikers at Civic Center Park in Denver, Osaka, 28 June 2019 143
11 October 2019 67 11.1 Roman goddess Justitia 149
6.1 Section of Singapore’s MRT 72 11.2 Exterior view of the International
6.2 Iran nuclear talks in Vienna, Criminal Court building in The Hague 155
14 July 2015 80 11.3 President Donald Trump, accompanied
6.3 Secretary Kerry shakes hands with by Vice President Mike Pence, signs an
Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif at the Iran Executive Order sanctioning Iran,
nuclear talks in Vienna, 14 July 2015 81 24 June 2019 157
6.4 Mahmoud Abbas (centre), President of 12.1 Peshmerga throw away the ISIS
the Palestinian Authority, with his flag and hang up the Kurdish flag,
delegation in the General Assembly, 11 September 2014 165
29 November 2012 82 12.2 Taiwan Pride March,
7.1 Karl Marx (1818–83) 88 29 October 2011 165
7.2 Edward Said (1935–2003) 91 12.3 Malala Yousafzai at the first Girl
7.3 Leaders pose for a photo at the G20 Summit, 22 July 2014 166
Summit in Osaka, 28 June 2019 92 12.4 Bethel Church community
7.4 Female soldiers from Rapid Action undertaking a non-stop 96-day vigil,
Force on 18 January 2007, ahead of December 2018 170
their departure to Liberia on a UN 12.5 US President Donald Trump with
Peacekeeping mission – the first UN- North Korea’s leader Kim Jong-un at
deployed all-female unit 96 the Sofitel Legend Metropole hotel in
7.5 The logo of the Support Women to Hanoi, 27 February 2019 172
Drive movement 97 13.1 Notice to epicene women, 1902 176
7.6 South Korean conservative activists 13.2 Partners of the G20 leaders pose for
during a rally denouncing North a photo at the G20 summit in Kyoto,
Korea’s hydrogen bomb test, Seoul, 28 June 2019 179
7 January 2016 98 13.3 UK Foreign Secretary William Hague
8.1 The Headquarters of the United and Special Envoy to the UN High
Nations, New York 103 Commissioner on Refugees Angelina
8.2 The UN General Assembly 103 Jolie at the launch of the Preventing
Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative
8.3 The UN Security Council 103
(PSVI), 29 May 2012 182
8.4 The EU flag 106
13.4 Two asylum seekers pose with
8.5 The European Parliament 106
placards during the ’Not Gay Enough’
8.6 Euro currency 106 demonstration in The Hague,
8.7 Henry Dunant, founder of the 26 November 2019 184
International Red Cross Committee 107 14.1 Saddam Hussein in Amman, Jordan,
8.8 ASEAN leaders pose during the 11 November 1987 198
opening ceremony, 35th ASEAN 14.2 Student lie-in at the White House to
Summit, Thailand, 3 November 2019 108 protest gun laws, Washington DC,
8.9 Dr Tom Frieden, Director of the US 20 February 2018 200
Centers for Disease Control and 15.1 People march to a vigil for the victims
Prevention, exits the ELWA 3 Ebola of Alek Minassian’s van attack in
treatment unit, 27 August 2014 112 Toronto that left ten dead,
9.1 Nelson Mandela in 2008 122 29 April 2018 214
9.2 Yasser Arafat in 1987 122 15.2 Iraqi refugees and displaced Syrian
9.3 Paris Die-in, 2 July 2008. A die-in women, living in al-Hol camp, which
is a form of protest in which houses relatives of Islamic State
participants simulate being dead 127 group members, 28 March 2019 216
9.4 Sardar Sarovar Dam on the Narmada 16.1 Irish naval personnel rescuing migrants
River, Gujarat 128 as part of Operation Triton,
10.1 Silhouettes of migrants above the 15 June 2015 225
entrance to the international conference
 List of Figures, Maps, Tables and Photographs xiii

16.2 Ilhan Omar speaking at a campaign 19.1 Christiana Figueres (second from
event, 4 October 2016 226 left) at the Paris Climate Change
16.3 A nurse holds a sign against President Conference, November 2015 264
Nicolas Maduro during a protest to 19.2 Members of the US Democratic Party
demand better salaries and working campaign for the Green New Deal,
conditions for teachers, Caracas, 7 February 2019 269
5 October 2020 228 19.3 Donald Trump holding ‘Trump Digs
17.1 UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon Coal’ sign while campaigning for
on the CTBT20 Panel, president at the Mohegan Sun
27 April 2016 240 Arena in Wilkes-Barre,
17.2 Gift of the Givers donate food 10 October 2016 270
hampers, blankets, and Covid-19 19.4 Example of open pit mining 272
and baby-care packs to a group of 20.1 Martin Luther posting the
families at Mesco Farm in Ninety-five Theses in 1517 280
Stellenbosch, 7 July 2021 242 20.2 Hundreds of thousands of Egyptians
17.3 Workers of a Chinese construction gather in Tahrir Square to topple
company and stewardesses of the President Hosni Mubarak,
Addis Ababa–Djibouti Railway after 8 February 2011 280
the arrival of the first commercial train 20.3 Screenshot of a WannaCry
from Addis Ababa at Nagad railway ransomware attack on Windows 8 284
station in Djibouti, 3 January 2018 244
20.4 Mark Zuckerberg, co-founder and
18.1 Dr Jane Elizabeth Waterston CEO of Meta, testifies at a joint
1843–1932252 Senate commerce/judiciary hearing
18.2 Army Specialist Angel Laureano holds in Washington, DC, 10 April 2018 286
a vial of the COVID-19 vaccine, Walter 20.5 President Putin chairs a meeting of
Reed National Military Medical Center, Russia’s Council for Strategic
14 December 2020 256 Development and National
18.3 Man gets photographed after Projects, 13 July 2020 287
being vaccinated against Covid-19 at 21.1 Blue plaque at Iffley Road Track,
LNJP Hospital in New Delhi, Oxford, UK 293
10 April 2021 257
21.2 Graça Machel, November 2014 294
18.4 Former French Minister of Health,
21.3 Headquarters of RAND Corporation,
Bernard Kouchner, talks with soldiers
a US non-profit global policy
in front of an ambulance outside the
think tank 300
Hotel Dieu de France Hospital,
21.4 ‘Sophia’ at the AI for Good
1 February 1990 258
Global Summit, Geneva 2018 302
LIST OF BOXES

Key Insights
1.3 Reading academically 4 12.6 Samuel P. Huntington’s ‘Clash of
2.1 Landmark eras for International Civilizations’ and Francis Fukuyama’s
Relations9 ‘End of History’ 168
3.2 Black Lives Matter 34 13.2 Disparities in politics 177
4.1 Bretton Woods institutions 43 13.3 HIV/AIDS and PrEP 180
5.4 Jacinda Ardern and Covid-19 61 14.3 ‘New wars’ 191
6.1 Theory families 71 14.4 Emerging norms of human protection 194
6.3 Statism, survival and self-help 75 14.5 The Rwandan genocide 196
6.5 Anarchy is what states make of it 78 15.1 Defining terrorism 204
8.1 The six main organs of the 15.2 Islamic State 206
United Nations 103 15.3 The leaderless jihad 211
8.5 International organisations and 15.4 Counterterrorism212
International Relations theory 111 16.1 The Syrian Civil War 220
9.6 UNAIDS and the Committee on 16.4 The European migrant crisis 225
World Food Security 125 17.3 Aid and loans 237
10.5 China’s Belt and Road Initiative 140 17.4 Globalisation as ‘Americanisation’
11.1 Reflections on international law 148 and ‘hybridisation’ 241
11.4 Torture and international law 151 18.2 Vaccines250
11.5 Non-state actors and soft law 152 19.4 Forests267
11.6 Interpreting the United Nations 20.2 The ‘Twitter Revolution’ 280
Convention on the Law of the Sea 20.3 Everyone is a publisher 281
(UNCLOS)154
20.4 Contact tracing Covid-19 283
12.4 Flags165
21.1 The British Empire 292
21.5 Global ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ 299

Key Terms
1.1 The global system 2 8.2 Supranationalism106
1.2 The nation-state 3 8.4 ASEAN108
2.2 Sovereignty11 9.1 Civil society 117
2.3 Diplomacy16 9.2 Transnational advocacy networks 118
2.4 Polarity18 9.3 The G20 119
3.1 The Crusades 30 9.4 Multistakeholder governance 121
4.2 Freedom of the seas 45 10.1 Transnational and multinational
4.3 Non-intervention47 corporations132
4.4 Exceptionalism48 10.2 The Global Financial Crisis 133
4.5 Multiplexity49 10.3 Tariff and non-tariff barriers 135
5.1 Levels of analysis 57 10.4 Foreign direct investment 136
5.5 Methods64 11.2 International legal order 149
6.2 Positivism74 11.3 The laws of war 150
6.4 Isolationism76 12.1 Secularisation theory 161
7.1 Postpositivism and interpretivism 87 12.2 Religion162
7.3 Neocolonialism90 12.3 Culture and tradition 164
7.5 Discourse95 13.1 Gender, sex and LGBTQ+ 175

xiv
 List of Boxes xv

13.4 Queer theory 182 18.5 Gavi255

14.1 The Declaration of Principles of 19.1 Climate change, biodiversity and
International Law 189 sustainable development 262
14.2 ‘National’ and ‘human’ security 190 19.3 The resource curse 266
16.2 ‘Voluntary’ and ‘forced’ migration 222 19.5 The Green New Deal 269
16.3 Ethnography223 20.1 Cyber warfare, hybrid warfare
16.5 The UN Refugee Convention 226 and cyber security 278
17.1 Extreme poverty 234 20.5 WannaCry284
17.2 Failed and fragile states 235 21.3 Soft, hard and smart power 295
18.1 Global health 248 21.4 International Relations (again) 298
18.4 PHEIC254

Key People
5.2 Kenneth Waltz 58 9.5 Nelson Mandela and Yasser Arafat 122
5.3 Osama bin Laden and Julian Assange 60 12.5 Malala Yousafzai 166
7.2 Karl Marx 88 18.3 Jane Elizabeth Waterston 252
7.4 Edward Said 91 19.2 Christiana Figueres 264
8.3 Henry Dunant 107 21.2 Graça Machel 294

Case Studies
2.1 Regulating nuclear weapons 19 12.1 96-day church service to protect a
2.2 Human rights and sovereignty 21 refugee family 170
3.1 The Valladolid Debate 37 12.2 Reading Kim Jong-un’s face 172
3.2 The First Continental Conference 13.1 Sexual violence and war 182
on Five Hundred Years of Indigenous 13.2 Sexuality and borders 184
Resistance39 14.1 The Gulf War 198
4.1 The United Nations Environment 14.2 Gun violence in the United States 200
Programme in Nairobi, Kenya 51 15.1 InCels as transnational terrorists?  214
4.2 Xi Jinping at Davos 52 15.2 Women and children returning
5.1 Social media and the Arab Spring 65 home from Islamic State 216
5.2 Greta Thunberg and climate activism 67 16.1 The Venezuelan exodus 228
6.1 Warfare – a bug or a feature?  80 16.2 Morocco230
6.2 Theorising the United Nations 82 17.1 South Africa’s cycle of poverty 242
7.1 Postcolonialism, feminism and the 17.2 Views of China’s Belt and
United Nations  96 Road Initiative 244
7.2 Marxism, poststructuralism and warfare 98 18.1 Covid-19256
8.1 The 2014–16 West African Ebola 18.2 Health as a bridge for peace 258
pandemic112 19.1 Donald Trump and climate denial 270
8.2 The question of Kosovo’s sovereignty 113 19.2 Governing extraction 272
9.1 The moratorium on the death penalty 126 20.1 Harnessing information for
9.2 Mega dams and the Narmada River 128 different ends 285
10.1 The Global Compact for Migration 141 20.2 ‘Cyber warfare’ or conflict?  287
10.2 The US–China trade war 143 21.1 Think tanks 300
11.1 From war crimes to the International 21.2 Technology 302
Criminal Court 155
11.2 The Trump administration’s withdrawal
from the JCPOA 157
ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Editor
Stephen McGlinchey is a Senior Lecturer in International Relations at the University of the West
of England, Bristol (UWE Bristol). He is Editor-in-Chief and Publisher of E-International Relations.

Authors
Shazelina Z. Abidin is the Director General of the Institute of Diplomacy and Foreign Relations
of Malaysia. She received her PhD from the University of Sheffield.
Amitav Acharya is Distinguished Professor in the School of International Service, American
University.
James Arvanitakis is the Executive Director of the Australian American Fulbright Commission
and an Adjunct Professor at the Institute for Culture and Society at Western Sydney University.
Katherine E. Brown is a Senior Lecturer in Islamic Studies at the University of Birmingham.
Carmen Gebhard is a Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations at the University
of Edinburgh.
Dana Gold works in regulatory strategy and research for the Ontario Public Service. She was a
PhD candidate in Political Science at the Western University between 2012 and 2018.
Andreas Haggman is Head of Cyber Advocacy at the United Kingdom’s Department for
Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. He holds a PhD in Cyber Security from Royal Holloway,
University of London.
David J. Hornsby is Associate Vice-President (Teaching and Learning) and Professor at the
Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University.
Natalie Jester is a Lecturer in Sociology and Criminology at the University of Gloucestershire.
Mukesh Kapila CBE is Professor Emeritus of Global Health and Humanitarian Affairs at the
University of Manchester. He is a former Director at the World Health Organization and the
United Nations.
Anitta Kynsilehto is a Senior Research Fellow at Tampere Peace Research Institute, Tampere
University.
Raffaele Marchetti is a Professor of International Relations at LUISS.
Sahil Mathur is a PhD candidate in International Relations and an adjunct instructor at the
School of International Service, American University.
Raul Pacheco-Vega is an Associate Professor at the Methods Lab of the Facultad
Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (FLACSO) Sede Mexico.
John A. Rees is a Professor of Politics and International Relations at the University of Notre
Dame Australia.
Robbie Shilliam is a Professor of International Relations at Johns Hopkins University.
Clare Stevens is a Teaching Fellow in International Security with the Portsmouth Military
Education team at the University of Portsmouth.
Knut Traisbach is Adjunct Professor of International Law and Human Rights at the University
of Barcelona and at ESADE, University Ramon Llull.
Peter Vale is a Senior Fellow at the Centre for the Advancement of Scholarship, University of
Pretoria, and Nelson Mandela Professor of Politics Emeritus at Rhodes University.
Rosie Walters is a Lecturer in International Relations at Cardiff University.
Günter Walzenbach is a Senior Lecturer in European Politics at the University of the West of
England, Bristol (UWE Bristol).

xvi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This book owes a debt of gratitude to Bill Kakenmaster who offered extensive editorial
assistance across the full manuscript and also to Andrew Malvern who was instrumental
in getting the book off the ground. The following members of the E-International Relations
editorial team gave valuable feedback and assistance: Jane Kirkpatrick, Tomek Najdyhor,
Majer Ma, Christian Scheinpflug, Farah Saleem Düzakman, Clotilde Asanga, Anjasi Shah,
Pedro Diniz Rocha, Marianna Karakoulaki, Akshaya Jose, Assad Asil Companioni, Kieran
O’Meara, Marcelle Trote Martins, Mathias Gjesdal Hammer, Bárbara Campos Diniz,
Alessandro Burrone, Benjamin Cherry-Smith, Bernhardt Fourie, Rodrigo Ventura De Marco,
Taylor Knecht-Woytsek, Zachary Hadley, Natalie Alfred, Rainer Ricardo, Jakob R. Avgustin,
Max Nurnus, Christy Davidson-Stearn and Jason Reynado. Lloyd Langman, Peter Atkinson,
Milly Weaver, Becky Mutton and the anonymous reviewers were all generous with their
time and expertise. Finally, and most importantly, I would like to thank the authors of each
of the chapters for working so hard through the disruptions and hardships of the Covid-19
pandemic to help this book come together.
Stephen McGlinchey

John A. Rees thanks Ms Jasmine Robertson for research assistance in the writing of the
Tamrazyan case study in Chapter twelve.

xvii
TOUR OF THE BOOK

The chapters are arranged in three parts, bookended by introduction and reflection
chapters. Together they offer a broad sweep of history and theory (Part one), outline
important global structures (Part two) and identify the key global issues that concern
the discipline (Part three). All of the book’s chapters, with the exception of the
introduction, are structured in a unified format as follows:

Question: Within the vastness of the global system can one person’s voice
have an impact?

Opening and closing questions

Each chapter begins with a question that primes you to think critically about
the subject before you read the chapter. This question will be recalled
directly in the conclusion of each chapter, which will remind you of some of
the ways the chapter addressed that question. Each chapter ends with a set
of discussion questions that you can try to answer yourself and/or discuss
with others, to think over and apply what you have learned.

Main body
This is the longest section of each chapter where all the
central information is given. It starts by introducing the
subject matter at hand and is split into several headed
sections to allow you to navigate the range of information on
display. Each chapter assumes no prior knowledge (other
than the content covered in the previous chapters). So, the
main body of each chapter is built to take you from no
knowledge to competency on each issue, and to gradually
build momentum as you advance through the book.

: Regulating nuclear weapons

Case studies Photo 2.3 Atomic cloud formation from the Baker
Day explosion over Bikini Lagoon, 1946
the United Kingdom (1952), France (1960) and
China (1964). As the number of nations
Each chapter, with the exception of possessing nuclear weapons increased from
one to five, there were fears that these weapons
the introduction chapter, has two case would proliferate (spread rapidly). This was not
only a numbers issue. As the weapons
studies following the main body developed, they became many orders of
magnitude more destructive. By the early
section. The case studies focus on 1960s, nuclear weapons had been built that
could cause devastation across over one
something specific – such as a real- hundred square kilometres. Recognising the
danger, the United Nations attempted in vain to
world event – to help unpack the outlaw nuclear weapons in the late 1940s.
Following that failure, a series of less absolute
more abstract and complex issues Credit: National Archives/Hulton Archive/Getty Images
goals were advanced, most notably to regulate

explored in each chapter. The case a glimpse of interactions between states that
the testing of nuclear weapons. Weapons that
were being developed required test detonations
studies are followed by the chapter’s were sworn enemies and had little in common
due to incompatible economic and political
– each releasing large amounts of radiation into
the atmosphere, endangering ecosystems and
conclusion. systems. Yet, through diplomacy and the human health. By the late 1950s, diplomacy
influence of the United Nations, they were under a United Nations framework had

xviii
xviii
 Tour of the Book xix

Pedagogical resources
Pedagogy is a term teaching professionals and authors use to describe tools used to help students
learn. The pedagogical resources this book uses are found in the boxes and images that are set apart
from the text throughout each chapter. These are arranged in four groupings:

Osama bin Laden and Julian Assange

Photo 5.1 Osama bin Laden in Kabul, November Photo 5.2 Julian Assange in London, August
2001 2014

Key people – a short profile of a

figure of importance to
International Relations.

Credit: Hamid Mir/Wikimedia Commons Credit: David G. Silvers/Cancillería del Ecuador/Flickr

Osama bin Laden led a global terrorist network, al-Qaeda, based on his own religious and political
visions and masterminded the 9/11 attacks on the United States. Julian Assange spearheaded a
whistleblowing campaign leaking government secrets via the website WikiLeaks – most notably

Methods

Methods are specific ways of doing things. If the methods are both within the reach/means of the
researcher, and used correctly so they are likely to provide the information or insight needed to Key terms – concise
answer a research question, then this would be what academics call a valid research
methodology. Levels of analysis is a vital component of any good methodology. When used to descriptions unpacking terms
help shape other valid research methods, such as interviews, fieldwork, surveys – and even the
central to International Relations,
articles, books and other documents) – it will help to produce answers that are both self-aware
(of their limits) and persuasive. As a student, then, persuasion is the key. It is not your job to find
each of which is essential to
correct answers as these rarely exist in the questions that International Relations generates.
Rather, the key to a successful research strategy is to gather relevant information and use
understanding the discipline.
appropriate methods in order to reach a well-crafted analysis. In this sense, it is not just what you
say or write that is important in academic work, but also how you express it.

: Reading academically

Key insights – brief explorations By making notes you will form a reading strategy that will allow you to retain the most important
information and compress it into a smaller set of notes integral to revision for examinations and
of a real-world event and/or an preparation for discussions and assignments. You should also note down the citation information
for each set of notes so that you can identify the source if you need to reference something later
intellectual development that in any written work. You should adopt this approach with everything you read during your studies.
It’s best to use digital means (laptop/tablet) so you can create backups and not risk losing valuable
offer targeted insights to the paper notes. If you do prefer handwritten notes, use your phone to take pictures of them to back

themes in the book. them up. There will be times in the year when panic sets in as deadlines approach or unexpected
life events occur, but if you have already developed a good reading strategy you will find you have
built up a good momentum and can better overcome obstacles and regain your footing.

Table 3.1 Comparing images of 1648 and 1492

1648 1492

* Nation-states face each other with no higher * Imperial powers colonise indigenous peoples
power to rule their conduct existing in a state of while claiming that they are doing God’s work. Figures, maps, tables
international anarchy. * Humanity is divided by religious authorities into
* The practice of diplomacy and the principle of those whose Christian faith compels them to and photographs
conquer and enslave and those non-Christians
rulers, regardless of denomination, mitigate whose idolatry allows them to be conquered – to help you learn
against war. and enslaved.
* Although some are strong and some weak, * The world is comprised of a hierarchy of these
visually.
all are the same kind of unit – a sovereign, qualitatively entities.
territorially bound state.
DIGITAL RESOURCES

xx
 Digital Resources xxi

This book has been developed in partnership with E-International Relations. Beyond
signposting E-International Relations (www.E-IR.info) for the extensive resources it
offers – from dozens of academic books to thousands of in-depth articles and shorter
expert reflections on current events – it also hosts a dedicated online area to accompany
this book. Everything on E-International Relations is free to view, ensuring you will never
run out of accessible material to explore.
The online area features multimedia resources for each chapter that have been curated
to accompany the book. This includes articles, audio and video content, and learning aids
to help you work with – and reach beyond – the content within this book.
Link: https://www.e-ir.info/resources/foundations/

The online area is arranged visually around the book’s chapters, allowing you to navigate
it effectively. You will find, amongst other things:
• Multimedia resources on the case studies for each chapter.
• Extensive links to further reading to deepen and widen your subject knowledge.
• More information to accompany the pedagogical resources in each chapter (key
people, key terms, key insights, etc.).
• Extended profiles of all the authors of each chapter, allowing you to find out more
about their work and other publications.

Instructor resources
The freely accessible website bloomsbury.pub/foundations-of-international-relations
contains a selection of resources to help instructors plan and deliver their courses. These
include:
• A test bank containing 500 multiple-choice questions organised by chapter
• Essay style questions for each chapter
• Lecture slides to aid teaching
GETTING STARTED

As the title on the cover instructs, this is a book that seeks to give you a foundational
understanding of International Relations, both in practice and in terms of how academics
understand it. International Relations examines just about everything that concerns how
we have organised our world. In addition, it reflects upon our fate by unpacking our
shared challenges and opportunities and opening those up to competing viewpoints.
Because of its breadth and depth, it is one of the most dynamic and important academic
disciplines in the world today. The book will hopefully encourage you to see International
Relations as something that is plugged into the real world, always adapting to events and
is therefore a never-ending journey of discovery.

xxii
INTRODUCTION TO CHAPTER

INTERNATIONAL 1
RELATIONS

This introductory chapter of the book gets you started in two ways. Firstly, it introduces
some of the basics of the discipline of International Relations to help give a flavour of
what is ahead in the rest of the chapters. Secondly, it offers some primers on how to
establish good academic practices so you get the most out of this book and build up the
skills that will serve you well throughout your studies.

Introducing International Relations

Each academic discipline has its own unique language, usually referred to as ‘jargon’.
This comprises a range of specific terms that have been developed by scholars to
describe certain things. Throughout this book, and throughout your studies, you will
come across terms such as nation-state, sovereignty, global system, anarchy,
development, globalisation, norms – and many more. As a result, a lot of the time you
spend learning a discipline is spent learning its jargon so that you can access and
understand the literature. In this book we have tried to ease you into the terminology
that International Relations scholars use so that you build up the proficiency to
understand the advanced literature that you will soon encounter – much of which is
signposted throughout the chapters.
Understanding key terms even applies to something as basic as how to express the
term ‘International Relations’. The convention is to capitalise it (International Relations,
often abbreviated as ‘IR’) when referring to the academic discipline – that is, the subject
taught in university campuses all over the world. International Relations does not
describe events; rather, it is a scholarly discipline that seeks to understand and analyse
the events, issues and actors within the global system (Box 1.1). Although the chapters
will progressively build up the picture of how the discipline sees the world, we will
briefly touch on some of the terms listed above to help you get a sense of the road
ahead.

1
2 GETTING STARTED

1.1 – KEY TERMS: The global system

The phrase ‘international relations’ – not capitalised – is used to describe relations between
nation-states, organisations and individuals at the global level. Lowercase ‘international relations’
is interchangeable with terms such as ‘global politics’, ‘world politics’ or ‘international politics’.
What all these commonly used terms refer to are activities within the global system that both
overlay, and undergird, life on planet earth. Traditionally, International Relations has understood
the system at its most basic level as a dynamic between three key actors: (1) nation-states, (2)
international organisations and (3) individuals. These key actors react to, are subject to, and
sometimes shape, the events and issues that drive international relations. In reality, the picture is
more complex than this and things will be unpacked further as the book progresses. Yet,
simplification devices such as this, illustrated in Figure 1.1, are helpful to orient yourself.
Figure 1.1 The global system

International
organisations

Events and
issues

Nation-states Individuals

We can start with the idea of political power, which has found its ultimate form (so far)
in the creation of the nation-state. Yet, ‘nation-state’, most commonly referred to in the
shorter form of ‘state’, is a jargon term that you might not often hear. Instead you may
hear people say ‘country’ or ‘nation’. But these terms, although widely recognised, are
technically incorrect at describing nation-states, which are one of the three key actors
within our global system. We will cover the importance of sovereignty and the state in
depth throughout the book – especially in Chapters two, three and four – but it is helpful
to begin to unpack this important term now with some examples.
France is a nation-state. It also happens to be a country and a nation, but then so is
Scotland. Yet, Scotland is not a nation-state. It is one of four different countries within the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Like France, the United Kingdom is
a nation-state because it possesses ‘sovereignty’ – which is yet another key term central
to International Relations (see Box 1.2). Scotland’s well-publicised quest for independence
is therefore a quest for sovereignty. For those familiar with federal systems the term ‘state’
is also used in that context, which can be confusing. For example, Texas is one of the
‘states’ within the nation-state of the United States of America. Another example, Penang
is a state that forms part of the nation-state of Malaysia. But, as will hopefully be clear by
now, although Penang and Texas are ‘states’ (perhaps unhelpfully for students of
International Relations), they are not nation-states.
 Introduction to International Relations 3

1.2 – KEY TERMS: The nation-state

‘Nation-state’ is a compound noun that joins two separate political entities together. A ‘nation’ is
a group of people who share many things in common, such as language, territory, ethnicity or
culture. Typically, a nation is forged over a longer period of history and shared experiences. When
that nation is ruled by one system of governance, a ‘state’, the two join and form a ‘nation-state’.
A state is a set of institutions, with a defined leadership, that has uncontested authority over the
nation (the people). This authority is superior to any local, federal or regional government
structures, which exist only through the consent of the state. A state’s power is typically expressed
in political, military and legal power – but it can also include other categories such as religion.
Historically, states came to rule over nations of people for many reasons, and they have taken
many forms through history – often through patterns of domination rather than consent. But,
taken broadly, it is most useful at this early stage to see establishing a state as a compromise that
allows a nation of people to live under defined shared rules and structures, and thereby achieve a
basic sense of security that allows their shared culture to endure in an insecure world.

You may not be satisfied that International Relations is just reflections on politics
between or among nation-states. Economics is also involved, and this has evolved to the
extent that we are often said to be living in a ‘globalised’ world characterised by the
relatively free movement of people, goods, services and finance. Similarly, ideas can
rapidly spread and affect people in other places. This can be something that leads to
positive change, such as raising awareness of political corruption or environmental issues
– or negative, such as when criminals or terrorists use the internet and other elements of
global interconnectivity to operate more effectively. Understandably, this requires
International Relations to incorporate an understanding of international organisations
(both governmental and non-governmental) and businesses that operate internationally
(transnational corporations). Looking even wider, individual people – you and I – are also
important. After all, our global system at its root is essentially one of interaction between
human beings. International Relations is, then, appropriately described as ‘a broad church’
due to the extent of what it covers.
Most scholars consider such concepts as those explored above fundamental for
understanding International Relations. But, they often approach them in different and
interesting ways. So, simply learning the definition of a key term is just the first step and
you will quickly find each term is interpreted in different ways. For example, some scholars
think nation-states are a fixed element of the global system that we should not critique
too much, whilst others would like to see nation-states dissolved entirely and replaced
with a different way of organising the world’s people. Similarly, some regard the idea of a
globalised world (known as ‘globalisation’) as a tangible phenomenon to study. Yet, others
think it is no more than a trendy buzzword with no real substance. Previewing complexity
like this may make such a dense library of key terms appear as a dizzying prospect. But it
should become clear how unavoidable such terms are and why students need to use
them with due care and attention. Even making the simplest point about something
within the sphere of International Relations draws on specific terms, and taps into
sometimes intense debates, that need to be appreciated. As such issues arise, this book
aims to get you oriented by starting with the basics and then giving you sufficient context
to think for yourself and read more deeply and widely.
If you are feeling a little overwhelmed already, that’s okay. Everything covered in this
introductory chapter is carefully unpacked and explained again later in the book when it
next appears – and thereafter developed further through later chapters. You may also be
needing some tips about how to read academically, which is where we turn to next.
4 GETTING STARTED

Establishing good academic practice

As this is designed to be the very first book you will read in your International Relations
journey, it is also likely to coincide with the start of your university studies. So, before we
move on to the subject matter of the book, it is worth setting out some general advice
that will help you get the most out of the book and also help you establish a firm footing
academically. If you are coming to this book later in your studies, these tips are also worth
considering as a refresher.
Firstly, it is important to establish good basic study habits so you can read and think
without distractions. Smartphones are a fantastic feature of our world, but they can also
prove a source of distraction when considering their frequent alerts. For this reason, the first
step in establishing good academic practice is to put your devices on silent, out of view
(perhaps turned facing downwards) and find a good physical space in which to work. Some
students find that listening to music helps them concentrate, others prefer to work in
silence. It is also important not to overdo things. Arrange ten-minute mini breaks every hour
to do other things and make sure to eat a decent meal before, and at the midpoint, of your
study session. Finally, get a good night’s sleep and find time for sport and leisure activities as
your brain does not absorb or retain information very well when you are sleep deprived,
overworked or hungry. The key is to balance your study time with a healthy routine.
Secondly, reading for scholarly purposes is not the same as reading for pleasure. You
need to adopt a reading strategy. Everyone has their own way of doing this and there is
no single magic formula, but the basic element to scaffold everything else around is this:
take notes as you read. If you find that you don’t have many notes or your mind goes a
little blank, then you might be reading too quickly or not paying enough attention. If this
happens, don’t worry: just go back to the start of the paragraph, section or chapter
(wherever you started having difficulty) and begin again. Often, reading something a
second time is when it clicks. Best practice is to make rough notes as you read through
each chapter. When you get to the end of a chapter, compile your rough notes into a list
of ‘key points’ that you would like to remember. This will be useful when you come to
revise or recap an issue because you won’t necessarily have to read the entire chapter
again. Your notes should trigger your memory and remind you of the key information.

1.3 – KEY INSIGHTS: Reading academically

By making notes you will form a reading strategy that will allow you to retain the most important
information and compress it into a smaller set of notes integral to revision for examinations and
preparation for discussions and assignments. You should also note down the citation information
for each set of notes so that you can identify the source if you need to reference something later
in any written work. You should adopt this approach with everything you read during your studies.
It’s best to use digital means (laptop/tablet) so you can create backups and not risk losing valuable
paper notes. If you do prefer handwritten notes, use your phone to take pictures of them to back
them up. There will be times in the year when panic sets in as deadlines approach or unexpected
life events occur, but if you have already developed a good reading strategy you will find you have
built up a good momentum and can better overcome obstacles and regain your footing.
 Introduction to International Relations 5

Thirdly, referencing sources is very important. It is the way we attribute the work of
others, whether we use their exact words or not. For that reason, you will see numerous
such references in this book, pointing you to specific sources of information or ideas. It is
an important element of scholarly writing, and one that you must master during your
own studies. When we need to point you to more specialist literature, for example to invite
you to read a little deeper, we do so by inserting in-text citations that look like this:
(Ringmar 2017). These point you to a corresponding entry in the references section
towards the back of the book where you can find the full reference and follow it up if you
want to. Typically, these are books, academic journal articles or websites. In-text citations
always include the author’s surname and the year of publication. As the reference list is
organised alphabetically by surname, you can quickly locate the full reference. Sometimes
you will also find page numbers inside the parentheses (brackets). Page numbers are
added when referring to specific arguments, or a quotation, from a source. This
referencing system is known as the ‘Author-Date’ or ‘Harvard’ system. It is the most
common, but not the only, referencing system used in International Relations. Your own
institution will likely have detailed guidance on referencing which you should seek out.
When the time comes for you to prepare your own assignments, think of using sources
as if you were a lawyer preparing a court case. Your task there would be to convince a jury
that your argument is defensible, beyond reasonable doubt. You would have to present
clear, well-organised evidence based on facts and expertise. If you presented evidence
that was just someone’s uninformed opinion, the jury would not find it convincing and
you would lose the case. Similarly, in academic writing you have to make sure that the
sources you use are reputable. You can usually find this out by looking up the author and
the publisher. If the author is not an expert (academic, practitioner, etc.) and/or the
publisher is unknown/obscure, then the source is likely to be unreliable. It may have
interesting information, but it is not reputable by scholarly standards.
It should be safe to assume that you know what a book is (since you are reading one)
and that you understand what the internet is. However, one type of source that you will
find cited in this book and may not have encountered before is the journal article. Journal
articles are typically only accessible from your university library as they are expensive and
require a subscription. They are papers prepared by academics, for academics. As such,
they represent the latest thinking and may contain cutting-edge insights. But they are
often complex and dense due to their audience being experts and this makes them hard
for a beginner to read. In addition, journal articles are peer reviewed. This means they
have gone through a process of assessment by other experts and editors before being
published. During that process many changes and improvements may be made – and
articles often fail to make it through peer review and are rejected. So, journal articles are
something of a gold standard in scholarly writing.
In addition to being available through your university library search functions, most
journal articles are now available on the internet. This leads to confusion as students can
find it difficult to distinguish a journal article from other sources such as an online
magazine, a policy report, or an online newspaper article. Works such as these are not
peer reviewed and conform to different standards. In this case, while the internet is the
source of the confusion, it is also the source of the solution as it allows you to carry out a
search for the publisher and the author and do a little detective work to find out who/what
they are, and if they are credible academic sources. By using this simple and accessible
method, you should quickly discern whether you are looking at a genuine journal article.
Another helpful tip is length. A journal article will typically be 10–25 pages long (7,000–
12,000 words); articles of online journalism or commentary will usually be shorter.
A final note on the subject of sources: the internet is something of a Wild West. There is
great information there, but also a lot of rubbish. It can often be hard to tell them apart.
6 GETTING STARTED

But, again, if you follow the golden rule of looking up the author and looking up the
publisher (using the internet), you can usually find your way. However, even some of the
world’s most well known websites can be unreliable. Wikipedia, for example, is a great
resource, but it often has incorrect information because it is authored, and usually edited,
by ordinary people who are typically enthusiasts rather than experts. In addition, its pages
are always changing (because of user edits), making it hard to rely on as a source. So the
rule of thumb with the internet is to try to corroborate anything you find on at least two
good websites/from at least two reputable authors. Then you can use the internet with
confidence and enjoy its benefits while avoiding its pitfalls. When preparing assignments,
however, you should only use the internet to supplement the more robust information
you will find in academic journals and books.

END OF CHAPTER QUESTIONS

1. What are the key components of a nation-state?

2. Why, and when, do we capitalise ‘International Relations’?
3. The global system’s three key actors react to, are subject to and sometimes shape the
events and issues that drive international relations. Are there any specific events and
issues from your own experience that you consider most important as you begin your
journey with International Relations? Write them down and come back to your notes
later as you advance through the book to see how your thoughts may have developed.
4. Have you ever considered how ‘globalised’ the world is today? If so (or if not), write
down some of your first impressions about what this might mean.
5. What are the most important points to remember about reading academically and
using sources?
 T
AR
HISTORY AND
1
P

THEORY

The first part of the book starts with three chapters that deal with different
interpretations of how historical events have laid important foundations, ideas
and critiques that allow us to understand today’s global system. Starting with an
appreciation of history is essential as it paints a picture of ‘how we got here’.
Assuming that you could analyse today’s world without historical grounding
would be like setting out on a journey without knowledge of the terrain.
Following that, Part one continues with three chapters looking at how we can
interpret the world, primarily through theories, which comprise the main
analytical toolkit for how students and scholars analyse events and generate
ideas. Theory deepens and widens our knowledge about how the world works
and reveals what insights are available to solve problems and open up new
opportunities. History and theory are therefore essential starting points for any
student of International Relations.
CHAPTER
INTERNATIONAL
2 RELATIONS AND
THE GLOBAL
SYSTEM
Stephen McGlinchey

Question: There were two world wars in quick succession in the twentieth
century. Why has there not been a third?

The world today may seem to be in disarray. However, by historical standards, it is actually
relatively orderly and fixed into place. Those that were born in the early part of the last
century lived (if they were fortunate enough to survive) through a global pandemic, a
global recession and two world wars. Life in prior centuries was even more perilous.
Hence, there is no better place to start with International Relations than by explaining
how the modern global system came into being, primarily out of the ashes of such events.
This chapter deals with what can be described as the conventional origin story of
International Relations. It sets out that International Relations as a discipline, and the
global system it seeks to understand, was (and still is) dominated by warring nation-states
that over time became somewhat moderated by international organisations and the
characteristics that they embody – such as diplomacy and trade. Late in the story,
individual human beings began to have limited agency. As the two chapters that follow
this one will later detail, this origin story is under significant critique due to its limitations.
Yet, it remains important as a starting point in any journey through International Relations
to understand the history of the academic discipline by overlaying it on significant global
events – as this chapter does.

8
 International Relations and the Global System 9

The foundations of International Relations

You may have been drawn to studying International Relations for many reasons. But it is
likely that part of what shaped your thinking began with a memorable event – perhaps
one that occurred in your own lived experience or made it to the headlines. Such events
are diverse and fall into many categories. As the book progresses, we will focus on those
more. However, historically, significant events have typically involved violence between
peoples through warfare and to a lesser extent large-scale regional or global economic
events (Box 2.1). Indeed, it was the issue of warfare, and the seemingly endless occurrences
of it, that birthed the discipline of International Relations in 1919 in the United Kingdom at
Aberystwyth, University of Wales. Later that same year, Georgetown University in the
United States followed suit and a trend had thus been established that universities should
study and teach International Relations. Before long, there were groups of scholars spread
across different continents working on one principal issue: how to build a discipline that
could explain, and potentially solve, the problem of warfare.

2.1 – KEY INSIGHTS: Landmark eras for International Relations

The First World War (1914–18). Before 1914, a system of agreements and actions known as the
‘concert of Europe’ was orchestrated between the larger powers in Europe aimed at preserving
the status quo (keeping things as they are) in the continent. The collapse of this system led to war
and the European powers, divided in two broad groupings, drew their overseas colonies and other
great powers such as Japan and the United States into the conflict. At the time, it was known as
the ‘Great War’ as its global scale was unprecedented.
The Interwar Years (1919–38). An initially optimistic period in which the first attempts at global
governance were built, watermarked by the creation of the League of Nations, based in Geneva,
which provided a forum to manage disputes through negotiation rather than war. During this
period a stock market crash occurred in the United States in 1929, causing the ‘Great Depression’
that spread worldwide during the early 1930s and brought significant economic decline. This
event marked out the importance of economics to the global system, especially in terms of how
quickly it can cause negative effects spreading from one place to another.
The Second World War (1939–45). Certain states were unhappy with the status quo in the
interwar years, most notably Germany and Japan, which sought to grow their power and acquire
more territory by invading neighbouring states. This led to the collapse of the League of Nations
and another world war as a group of states (the United States, China, the United Kingdom, France
and the Soviet Union) formed an alliance to oppose the expansionist powers, eventually
triumphing following the occupation of Germany and the surrender of Japan in 1945.
The Cold War (1947–91). The Cold War was known as such because the presence of nuclear
weapons made a traditional war between the rival parties (in this case the United States and the
Soviet Union) unlikely as they each had the power to destroy each other and in doing so
jeopardise human civilisation as a whole. This was known as ‘Mutually Assured Destruction
(MAD)’. For that reason, smaller-scale conflict and competition existed but a major ‘hot’ war, such
as those in prior decades, was avoided. This period also underlined the importance of ideology in
shaping global conflict, principally between capitalism and communism, which produced two
incompatible international systems.
The New World Order (1991–2000). A short period following the end of the Cold War in which
it was assumed that the international organisations built post-1945 (such as the United Nations)
would finally come of age and provide a more secure and peaceful order based on globally shared
ideas and practices. Francis Fukuyama’s idea of the ‘end of history’ (1989, 1992), in which he
posited that liberal democracy was the only viable long-term political system to complement a
10 HISTORY AND THEORY

capitalist world, watermarked the era. Yet, critics of such ideas highlighted their shortcomings as
an overly Western image of world order.
The post-9/11 era (2001–19). On 11 September 2001, al-Qaeda – a terrorist group opposed to
Western (chiefly American) dominance in the global system – attacked the United States by
hijacking four commercial airliners and crashing two of them into the Twin Towers of the World
Trade Center in New York and a third into the Pentagon (the headquarters of the US Military in
Arlington, Virginia). The fourth plane crashed before hitting its target, which was presumed to be a
political building in Washington, DC. The event led to the United States starting its ‘War on Terror’,
seeking to rid the world of terrorists and governments that supported or enabled them. United
States actions – together with further operations by al-Qaeda and similar terrorist groups – shaped
the first two decades of the twenty-first century and led to material changes in the nature of both
domestic, and international, politics.
The post-Covid-19 era (2020–). People have always travelled from place to place and
exchanged goods and cultural artefacts. What has changed, due to advances in technology and
transportation, is the speed and intensity of this process. Embodying this shrinkage of time and
space, the term ‘globalisation’ is a major part of how we perceive today’s world. When the novel
coronavirus that causes Covid-19 became a pandemic in 2020 it brought two points into focus.
Firstly, transnational terrorism was no longer the central issue that it once was. Secondly, the
pandemic questioned images of an interlinked, interdependent world as borders closed and most
states initially turned inwards to tackle the problem for themselves rather than look outwards to
pursue a global solution for all. Consequently, it is likely that the era that emerges from this crisis
will be one where the global system’s resilience, and the very nature of globalisation, are stress
tested for an extended period.

The year 1919 was a landmark for many reasons. Not only was it the birth-year of
International Relations as a discipline, but it also followed the end of the First World War
(1914–18) which involved over thirty states and resulted in over 20 million deaths. Building
on this, a common feeling at the time was that a war of such scale would not, or could
not, happen again due to the financial costs and the toll it took on human life. Despite this,
it was surpassed only twenty years later by an even more deadly conflict, the Second
World War (1939–45), which took the lives of approximately 75 million people, 2.5–3 per
cent of the world’s population at the time. The Second World War is the most significant
war in history due to its scale and impact. It reinforced to scholars that warfare seemed to
be endemic to humankind’s past and was therefore likely to be a central problem in our
future. This reflected the so-called first ‘great debate’. Firstly, there were those who sought
to develop the discipline with scholarship that sought to manage warfare. This would be
done by developing and promoting strategies to help states manage their participation
and survival in the inevitable wars of the future. Secondly, there were scholars who sought
to focus on how war could be gradually replaced, or downscaled, by emphasising the
benefits of established patterns of peaceful interaction (mainly trade) and building new
structures that would restrict war and formalise diplomacy (international organisations)
such as the United Nations.
This early period left us with a discipline that focused on two key actors within the
global system: (1) nation-states, the formal name for the political communities in which
each of us lives and (2) international organisations, which provided a forum for states to
discuss their differences whilst also helping to facilitate international trade. Gradually over
 International Relations and the Global System 11

time, a third element would emerge within the system: individual human beings. This was
due to the rising issue of human rights, inspired by the atrocities of the Second World War
and a desire to prevent that kind of mass suffering and death from happening again. Yet, it
would take many more decades for individuals and the non-state groups they sometimes
form to more fully rise to prominence. These three key actors of International Relations –
nation-states, international organisations and individuals – were all in place by the mid-
twentieth century and they still encompass the basic shape of how we make sense of the
world today.
In attempting to make sense of history in all its complexity, scholars often use a
simplification device to break the last 100+ years into different ‘eras’ (defined periods of
time) as seen in Box 2.1. For example, the post-9/11 era consumed much of the debate in
International Relations for the first two decades of the twenty-first century. In a darker
sense than with human rights, it reinforced the growing importance over time of the
actions of individuals – this time manifested through non-state terrorist groups. It is hard
to say what the characteristics of our ‘present’ era are, that will only emerge in hindsight.
However, we can say it is likely to be defined by responses to shared threats and shared
opportunities beyond terrorism, which is no longer a top order global issue when taken
against pandemic disease, climate change and new patterns of state rivalries.

The making of the modern world

Of all International Relations’ key actors historically, the emergence of the nation-state is
the most important in terms of how the global system is shaped. Today, there are 193
defined and internationally recognised territories, which we formally call nation-states (or
more commonly just ‘states’). To fully understand their importance, we need to look
further back in history.

2.2 – KEY TERMS: Sovereignty

Map 2.1 Illustrating sovereignty

Kosovo Crimea

Taiwan
Somaliland
South Sudan
12 HISTORY AND THEORY

When you look at a map of the world today all the earth’s landmasses are divided by lines
(borders). Each of these borders are made (and remade) through historical events reflecting the
key ordering principle of our global system – ‘sovereignty’ – which must be in place for a people
to be recognised as a nation-state. Sovereignty has two benchmarks, both of which must exist
simultaneously. First, there must be no major internal competition over who or what rules the
territory. In practice this could be a parliament (or a similar set of institutions) in which power is
regularly transferred to different elected officials. Or, it could be a monarch or dictator who rules
until they are succeeded in some way by an equivalent figure. Second, there must be no
significant external competition for that people’s territory. In practice this means that no overseas
power claims ownership.
In practice, sovereignty is fluid. For example, should a state be attacked by another (an external
competitor) it may result in that state being absorbed into the aggressor’s territory should they
lose. In the modern day this is uncommon, but not unheard of. For example, Russia ‘annexed’
Crimea – part of Ukraine – in 2014. Additionally, if a group of people within a state start a
movement (an internal competitor) and succeed this may sometimes create a differently
composed state (carrying a new name and/or a new flag) occupying the same territory. We can
see this in the case of China in 1949, which became the People’s Republic of China, and later in
Iran in 1979, which became the Islamic Republic of Iran – both after successful revolutions. In
these cases, other states gradually recognised the sovereignty of the new leadership as the
internal competition had been settled. Finally, sometimes groups of people within states seek to
break away and form an entirely new state. This occurred most recently when South Sudan
seceded (legally broke away) from Sudan. As the existing state of Sudan did not contest this
(removing the factor of internal competition) and no external competitor existed, South Sudan
became the world’s newest nation-state in 2011.
There are territories often represented on maps which are described by terms such as ‘self-
declared’ or ‘partially recognised’ because the two benchmarks of sovereignty are not yet fulfilled
due to ongoing internal or external challenges. Among others, these include Taiwan, Kosovo and
the Republic of Somaliland.

In Westphalia in 1648, part of today’s Germany, a peace treaty was agreed between a
set of warring parties that had won the Thirty Years War (1618–48). With over 8 million
dead, the so-called ‘Peace of Westphalia’ was notable not just for ending what had been a
brutal war, but also for providing the origins of our modern global system. Prior to
Westphalia, Europe had been comprised of a fluid set of city states and smaller territories,
many of which were overseen in some way by the church (under the guise of the ‘Holy
Roman Empire’), which provided a guiding set of principles to each ruler (see Ringmar
2017). Under this arrangement, borders and the distribution of power were unclear and
often undefined. The Peace of Westphalia set out a system whereby authority going
forward would be based on the political idea of sovereignty, rather than religious
structures. Formalising this, each participant in the Treaty agreed on a set of defined
borders marking their territory, which the others recognised in turn. This led to the
redrawing of the European map and the gradual emergence of the idea of today’s nation-
states as territorially bound units, recognised by other such units as mutually sovereign.
Sovereignty came hand in hand with the principle of non-intervention of a foreign power
in another state. Nevertheless, non-intervention has always been a point of tension –
especially when relations between states break down.
Of course, peace did not come to Europe for long. In fact, Europe saw an ever-escalating
series of wars for several hundred years thereafter, ultimately culminating in the two world
wars. As power was (post-Westphalia) seen in the accumulation of territory, and the resources
and peoples therein, many leaders sought to expand their territory by taking over the territory
 International Relations and the Global System 13

of others. This led to frequent conflicts that regularly redrew the European map as existing
states grew (or shrank) in size, new states were created, and others vanished entirely. It
escalated further as European powers exported their continental rivalry to Africa, Asia and the
Americas, which they raced to colonise (control a foreign territory and its people). As a result,
by 1945, one third of the world’s population were living under colonial rulers.
Following the Second World War, the global system began shifting to incorporate ideas
of human rights and to recognise the illegitimacy of empire. This change was broadly
inspired by the growing power of the United States, which had emerged from the Second
World War in a stronger economic and political position relative to the other powers. It
sought to use that leverage to influence a different world order beyond empire.
Considering that the United States had freed itself from the colonialism of the British in the
late 1700s during its own struggle for independence, its ideas when matched with its
growing influence had sufficient gravity to reorder the system. Scholars have called this
the beginning of a period of ‘pax Americana’ denoting the United States’ key role
internationally from this point forwards.
The process of decolonialisation did not happen overnight, but gradually through the
second half of the twentieth century empires were almost entirely dissolved. A system of
establishing self-determination for formerly colonised peoples was overseen by the newly
formed United Nations. In that system, those colonised peoples had only one path to
independence – becoming nation-states along the very lines Europeans had established
in 1648. This process gradually gave us the world map we recognise today as new borders
were drawn worldwide. As had been the case in Europe, this was not always a peaceful
process and a range of challenges to sovereignty, both internal and external, continue to
this day across all continents. In that sense, our world map undergoes occasional updates
as this process evolves with time.
The ubiquity of sovereignty in today’s global system, embodied in the nation-state and
the quest for peoples who do not have a state to form one, is best represented numerically.
In 1945 there were fewer than seventy nation-states. Today, there are almost 200. In that
sense, today’s global system – represented by the division of the earth into territorially
sovereign units – is a system made first in Europe and then exported to the rest of the
world. It overrode pre-modern and alternative forms of arranging peoples and distributing
power. It endures to this day as the so-called global ‘Westphalian’ system, as key elements
of the logic and structure trace back to 1648.
Beyond the understanding of the Westphalian system and the ever-increasing patterns
of historical conflict it led to, the Cold War, which emerged in parallel to the decolonisation
process, is of central importance in reminding us that large-scale war was not over in
1945. Pax Americana translates from Latin as ‘American peace’, suggesting that the new
values of the global system would lead to a more peaceful world than the one overseen
by the frequently warring European colonial powers. However, while there has been no
third world war, large-scale state conflict would evolve to take on different forms –
primarily due to the arrival of a new technology, nuclear weapons. After the first uses of
an atomic bomb by the United States on Japan in August 1945, reports and pictures of the
devastation caused by the two bombs that the United States dropped on Nagasaki and
Hiroshima confirmed that the nature of warfare had changed forever. As one reporter
described the scene: ‘There is no way of comparing the Atom Bomb damage with
anything we’ve ever seen before. Whereas bombs leave gutted buildings and framework
standing, the Atom bomb leaves nothing’ (Hoffman 1945).
Nuclear weapons were soon developed by other states, resulting in an entirely new set
of conditions in the global system. It may seem strange but, despite their offensive power,
nuclear weapons are primarily held as defensive tools – unlikely to be ever used. This is
due to a concept central to IR known as ‘deterrence’. By holding a weapon that can (if
used) endanger the very existence of an opponent by potentially wiping them out, such
14 HISTORY AND THEORY

an opponent is unlikely to attack you as the risk is too high. Especially if your nuclear
weapons can (at least partially) survive that attack and allow you to retaliate. This is why
states frequently move their nuclear weapons around, place them in submarines or
aircraft, and even sometimes install them beyond their borders by agreement with an
allied host state. In an environment as insecure as the Cold War, gaining a nuclear arsenal
was a way to achieve deterrence from being attacked and thereby a measure of security
that was not otherwise attainable. And tens of thousands of nuclear weapons were built
and stockpiled by states during the Cold War. Underlining the logic of deterrence, nuclear
weapons were never again used in anger after their initial use by the United States in 1945.
Yet, in recognising the danger of the unmoderated spread of these weapons, a norm of
non-proliferation of nuclear weapons became one of the central ideas of our global
system, which is explored later in the chapter in the first case study.
The Cold War was responsible for the historical image of a world divided into three
zones. The ‘First World’ was the ‘Western’ nations (this is where the term ‘the West’ comes
from). These states were allied with the United States, broadly followed an economic
system of capitalism, and (at least aspirationally) a political system of liberal democracy.
The ‘Second World’ was the Soviet Union and a range of ‘Eastern’ states that were
governed predominantly by communist (or socialist) parties who rejected capitalism as an
economic model. This conflict between the first and second world went beyond
economics and created two irreconcilable international systems – leaving other states a
stark choice to operate within one system or the other. That led to some states opting out
and declaring themselves ‘non-aligned’ – creating a ‘Third World’. As most of those states
were newly formed and/or developing it became a term often used to describe
economically poorer states and is still sometimes used as such.
Despite the added ideological element of communism versus capitalism, the Cold
War resembled other wars before it in that it became a battle for control over territory.
Instead of meeting directly on the battlefield, both sides took part in ‘proxy wars’ as they
fought to either support or oppose elements within states who sought to (or appeared
to) move between the First and Second Worlds. The most well-known instances of this
occurred in Asia, in Korea (1950–3) and Vietnam (1955–75), each of which resulted in
several million deaths. As this took place in a time of decolonisation, the goal in this
period was not to be seen to directly conquer other states, but to influence their political
and economic development and in doing so increase the power of one ‘World’ and
diminish the other.
The Cold War ended when the Soviet Union collapsed internally between 1989 and
1991 due to endemic corruption, popular resistance and economic decline. The ‘Second
World’ was therefore no more, having lost its anchor. Virtually all of the world’s states then
transitioned to capitalism, if they had not already done so. At this point, the term
‘globalisation’ became widely used by scholars and policymakers more generally to
describe the process of the First World’s image gradually becoming representative of the
entire world. For the first time in history a truly ‘global’ system had been born. States then
became categorised more loosely within that global system by their economic levels of
development post-1991, with ‘Global North’ sometimes used to represent the most
historically developed economies, and ‘Global South’ essentially replacing the term ‘Third
World’.
The Cold War is therefore an interesting culmination in our journey of understanding
the global system as being one comprised of historically warring nation-states. In this
period, and continuing into the present, nuclear weapons helped prohibit the type of
large-scale war seen pre-1945. In that sense, although the Cold War is over, it demonstrated
a point in history where the global system changed materially in terms of how states can
 International Relations and the Global System 15

Photo 2.1 The BRICS leaders in 2019. Left to right: Xi, Putin, Bolsonaro, Modi and Ramaphosa

Credit: Alan Santos /PR/Flickr

Global North/South distinctions are not as categorical, or as mutually exclusive, as the three worlds image they replaced.
For example, when searching for an image that embodies the Global South we might reach for an image of the annual
meeting of the BRICS – a loose association of five states (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) that are classified as
amongst the most significant emerging economies. However, Russia was once a superpower and would likely not
consider itself ‘Southern’. Furthermore, China is the world’s second largest economy and therefore hard to usefully
categorise as ‘developing’. Finally, geographically, only Brazil and South Africa are in Earth’s Southern hemisphere,
providing further fuzziness in the use of ‘South’.

act internationally, especially when in conflict. This materially shaped the development of
the discipline of IR and also gave way to the modern image of a world embodied by one
global system. Not only has this changed the nature of warfare, it has also emphasised the
importance of non-violent forms of engagement by states, allowing us to explore other
elements in the system.

Beyond a world of warfare?

When military theorist Carl von Clausewitz remarked in the early 1800s that war was the
continuation of policy by other means, he sought to normalise the idea of war in
politics. Indeed, his words were reflective of the world at that time, as has been explored
earlier in the chapter. But his words also indicated that actions short of war are available
to help states achieve their objectives. These are typically the actions of diplomats. Their
work is often far less expensive, far more effective and much more predictable a strategy
than war. In fact, unlike in centuries gone by when war was common, diplomacy is what
we understand today as the normal state of affairs governing international relations.
When understood in tandem with the growing importance of international trade and
the associated links between individuals in today’s global system it allows us to expand
our journey through history while also adding more analysis to account for why we
have not had a third world war after witnessing two in short succession in the twentieth
century.
16 HISTORY AND THEORY

2.3 – KEY TERMS: Diplomacy

Photo 2.2 Carter, Sadat and Begin after the Camp Diplomacy is a process between actors
David Accords, 18 September 1978 (diplomats, usually representing a state) who
exist within a system (international relations)
and engage in private and public dialogue
(diplomacy) to pursue their objectives in a
peaceful manner. Diplomacy is part of the
broader category of foreign policy. When a
nation-state makes foreign policy, it does so for
its own national interests. And these interests
are shaped by a wide range of factors. In basic
terms, a state’s foreign policy has two key
ingredients: its actions and its strategies for
Credit: David Hume Kennerly/Hulton Archive/Getty
achieving its goals. The interaction one state
Images has with another is considered the act of its
foreign policy. This act typically takes place via
interactions between government personnel, sometimes the leaders of states themselves – as
pictured in the image celebrating the Camp David Accords. Historically, to interact without
diplomacy would limit a state’s foreign policy actions to conflict (usually war, but also economic
sanctions) or espionage. In that sense, diplomacy is an essential tool required to operate
successfully in today’s global system and a major explanatory factor that accounts for what
Gaddis (1989) called the ‘long peace’ due to the absence of major war since 1945.

While you will now be familiar with the concept of war in its varying forms,
diplomacy, due to its nature, may present itself as something alien or distant. Diplomacy
is most often an act carried out by representatives of a state, usually behind closed
doors. In these instances, diplomacy is a silent process working along in its routine (and
often highly complex) form, carried out by rank-and-file diplomats and representatives.
More rarely, diplomatic engagements can drift into the public consciousness when they
involve critical international issues and draw in high-ranking officials – and in tandem
the media. An example of this would be a high-profile event marking a major peace
agreement such as the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt in 1978, in which
the respective leaders appeared together and shook hands – an unexpected gesture
considering the deep tensions between both nations which had led to several wars over
prior decades.
Records of regular contact via envoys travelling between neighbouring civilisations
date back at least 2500 years. They lacked many of the characteristics and commonalities
of modern diplomacy such as embassies, international law and professional diplomatic
services. Yet, communities of people, however they may have been organised, have
usually found ways to communicate during peacetime and have established a wide
range of practices for doing so. The benefits are clear when you consider that diplomacy
can promote exchanges that enhance trade, culture, wealth and knowledge. The
applicable international law that governs diplomacy – the Vienna Convention on
Diplomatic Relations (1961) – references only states as diplomatic actors. Yet, the global
system also involves powerful actors that are not nation-states. These include
 International Relations and the Global System 17

international organisations, which regularly partake in areas of diplomacy and often

materially shape outcomes. For example, the United Nations materially shaped
diplomacy in the regulation of nuclear weapons – which will be covered in the first case
study later in this chapter.
Building on diplomacy, trade is another means to mitigate war. When the Cold War
ended in 1991 the idea of global trade came of age. There were no more images of
different worlds but instead an image of one world open for business. Still a world of
nation-states, but one where the barriers between them were at a historical low and a
system of shared practices (such as resolving disputes diplomatically) was enshrined in
international organisations. The complex nature of global trade, where each nation-state’s
economy is dependent on imports and exports to other states, is another development
that makes war less likely. This is especially evident amongst the bigger powers in the
global system who would likely be near-bankrupt and devoid of important commodities
without the trade they generate between their peoples and businesses. The Covid-19
pandemic underlined this as, despite the unprecedented shutdowns of borders and
restrictions on the movement of people, global trade – seen via the movements of goods
and services – continued due to its necessity. Even the vaccines that were developed by
pharmaceutical companies in certain states could not be manufactured at any scale
without the materials and services found elsewhere.
What also makes war less likely is the fact that due to the instant communications we
now enjoy via smartphones and global media, we can more easily see ‘the other’ as fellow
human beings and as a result, it is much harder to justify acts of state aggression and to
rally citizens to support a war. It is also easier to see (and therefore empathise with)
individual human suffering, whether from war or from other manmade or natural factors,
in other parts of the world. In this sense, the arrival of the globalised world in the 1990s
also coincided with the gradual mainstreaming of ideas such as human security that took
place both in the world of policymaking and in International Relations scholarship. It was
as the twentieth century ended, the bloodiest century in recorded history, that individuals
(and the groups they sometimes comprise) rose to prominence in the global system. In
that sense you might view history as a dark place for people, but the foundations laid in
the 1940s to emphasise the importance of human beings within the global system are
gradually becoming more visible, as is explored further in the second case study later in
the chapter.
Globalisation, especially when taken to be an unstoppable process within today’s
global system, raises a number of questions. When we try to answer these questions, we
quickly find new ones emerging. For example, if we settle on an idea of globalisation as
the emergence of a shared global culture where we all recognise the same symbols,
brands and ideals, what does that mean for local products and customs that may be
squashed out of existence? Examples like this build around the question of whether
globalisation is more negative than positive. In this sense, it can be seen to represent the
imposition of Western political ideas and neoliberal capitalist economics – which can be
viewed as unrepresentative and/or exploitative. Critiques such as this have inspired an
anti-globalist (or ‘alter-globalism’) movement which is active in society and academia (see
Chang 2002). The wide-ranging debate that just one term evokes is characteristic of the
discipline of International Relations itself and the complexity it attempts to navigate. As
noted earlier, globalisation also comes with a darker side via the opportunities it provides
for criminals and terrorists to operate more effectively. Yet, beyond these issues, it is a
useful way to visualise the importance of global trade and interconnectedness in a
tangible sense. When taken alongside diplomacy it offers a more holistic picture of the
ways states have options beyond war in today’s global system.
18 HISTORY AND THEORY

Adding trade and diplomacy, and the international organisations that facilitate them,
allows us to see the world as one that is not static. New elements can sometimes appear
and when they do, they can alter the nature of the system. Indeed, when recalling the
presence of nuclear weapons, another factor within our system that disincentivises major
war, it is clear to see that there are many reasons why today’s world is more peaceful in
absolute terms than it has been historically. This does not take away from the reality that
war still occurs, both between states (interstate war) and within states (civil war or
intrastate war). Indeed, there are hundreds of instances of these post-1945. Yet, unlike in
historical situations, these have not escalated to become systemic events (large-scale
regional or world wars). All of this does not mean that major war is impossible. It just
indicates that due to the shape of today’s global system, such a large-scale conflict is less
likely to occur than in the different systems of the past.

2.4 – KEY TERMS: Polarity

The Cold War represented a global system of bipolarity. A bipolar system is one where two
powers dominate. In that case, it was the United States on one side, and the Soviet Union on the
other – with each side assembling their allies into their sphere of influence.
When the Cold War ended, a debate raged over how to describe the system. Some
maintained that it was a system of unipolarity – as there was only one superpower remaining,
the United States. This idea was captured by Krauthammer (1991) when he described it as a
‘unipolar moment’ in which the United States stood in an unprecedented historical situation
where one state was significantly more economically, militarily and politically powerful to the
extent that it would take a generation or more for a competitor of equal stature (a peer) to
emerge.
Others have argued that the world has entered a period of multipolarity. Multipolarity is the
historical norm as it describes a system with multiple competing powers. The last defined
multipolar system ended shortly after the Second World War, which had left the European
powers depleted – giving way to the Cold War bipolar system. Multipolarity today can be
represented not just by rivalling states as it was in the past, but by the emergence of ideas of
global governance through international organisations which compete with, and often
constrain, the power of states.
Some suggest that bipolarity may return with the growing rivalry between the United States
and a rising China shaping the twenty-first century. Others have suggested that a system of
tripolarity may emerge, adding a resurgent Russia (or perhaps a different rising power) into the
United States-China picture. While these perspectives draw on historical patterns for their
inspiration, Acharya (2017) describes today’s system as one of multiplexity – a new type of order
in which several systems exist independently at the same time, but not necessarily in conflict,
much like the idea of different movies screening under one roof in a multiplex cinema.

It would be deceptive to end the origin story of International Relations without

re-emphasising the role of the nation-state. Despite the other key actors that have
emerged within the system, it is still only the state that holds sovereignty. This remains the
true bottom line in terms of power, and this is also reflected in International Relations
scholarship which has traditionally been very state centric. When Covid-19 was officially
declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (denoting an epidemic occurring
 International Relations and the Global System 19

in multiple places) the decentralised and individualistic behaviour of states in response

was more reminiscent of historical patterns than that of a supposed interconnected,
globalised world. Rather than work together, states acted individually – often at odds, or in
competition, with each other. This served as a reminder of their unmatched power to
shape events within the global system. Later in the crisis when the race to deploy vaccines
became the dominant objective, most states continued this path by competing to secure
doses for their own populations first rather than prioritising international schemes (such
as COVAX) to ensure everyone had equal access to vaccination.
Yet, a note of optimism. Major historical events, especially those that involve global
crises (as noted throughout this chapter), do tend on average to result in shifts over the
longer arc of history that come to improve how international relations operates. This
typically only becomes clear in hindsight once the instinctual behaviour of states for
short-term actions and reactions to crises gives way to opportunities for collective
measures and working together.

CASE STUDY 2.1: Regulating nuclear weapons

Photo 2.3 Atomic cloud formation from the Baker the United Kingdom (1952), France (1960) and
Day explosion over Bikini Lagoon, 1946 China (1964). As the number of nations
possessing nuclear weapons increased from
one to five, there were fears that these weapons
would proliferate (spread rapidly). This was not
only a numbers issue. As the weapons
developed, they became many orders of
magnitude more destructive. By the early
1960s, nuclear weapons had been built that
could cause devastation across over one
hundred square kilometres. Recognising the
danger, the United Nations attempted in vain to
outlaw nuclear weapons in the late 1940s.
Following that failure, a series of less absolute
Credit: National Archives/Hulton Archive/Getty Images
goals were advanced, most notably to regulate
The quest to regulate nuclear weapons offers the testing of nuclear weapons. Weapons that
a glimpse of interactions between states that were being developed required test detonations
were sworn enemies and had little in common – each releasing large amounts of radiation into
due to incompatible economic and political the atmosphere, endangering ecosystems and
systems. Yet, through diplomacy and the human health. By the late 1950s, diplomacy
influence of the United Nations, they were under a United Nations framework had
able to avoid war and find ways to achieve managed to establish a moratorium
progress in the most critical of areas. It also (suspension) on nuclear testing by the United
gives us one possible answer to the question States and the Soviet Union. However, by 1961 a
posed at the start of this chapter as to why climate of mistrust and heightened Cold War
there has not been a third world war. tensions between the two nations caused
Although the United States was the first state testing to resume.
to successfully detonate a nuclear weapon, One year later, in 1962, the world came to
others soon followed – the Soviet Union (1949), the brink of nuclear war during the Cuban
20 HISTORY AND THEORY

Missile Crisis when the Soviet Union placed recognise the destabilising effect of further
nuclear warheads in Cuba, a communist island nuclear proliferation. It was a triumph of
nation-state approximately 150 kilometres off diplomacy. The genius of the treaty was that it
the southern coast of the United States. Cuban was aware of the realities of the international
leader Fidel Castro had requested the weapons politics of the time. It was not a disarmament
to deter the United States from meddling in treaty as great powers would simply not give
Cuban politics following a failed US-sponsored up their nuclear weapons, fearful their security
invasion by anti-Castro forces in 1961. As would be diminished. So, instead of pursuing
Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev (1962) put it, an impossible goal of eliminating nuclear
‘the two most powerful nations had been weapons, the Treaty sought to freeze the
squared off against each other, each with its number of nations that had nuclear weapons
finger on the button’. After pushing each other at the five states that already possessed them.
to the brink of a nuclear war, US President Simultaneously, those five nations were
John F. Kennedy and Khrushchev found that encouraged to share non-military nuclear
via diplomacy, they could agree to a technology with other states – such as nuclear
compromise that satisfied the basic security energy and nuclear medicine – so that others
needs of the other. Over a series of would not feel tempted to pursue nuclear
negotiations, Soviet missiles were removed weapons. In short, those who had nuclear
from Cuba in return for the United States weapons could keep them. Those who did not
agreeing to remove missiles they had deployed have them would be allowed to benefit from
in Turkey and Italy. As the two sides could not the non-military research and innovation of
fully trust each other due to their rivalry, the the existing nuclear powers.
diplomacy was based (and succeeded) on the Due to the well-considered design of the
principle of verification by the United Nations, treaty and its enforcement, it has been highly
which independently checked for compliance. successful. Following the end of the Cold War,
Building further on the momentum, in July the Non-Proliferation Treaty was permanently
1963 the Partial Test Ban Treaty was agreed, extended in 1995. Granted, it has not kept the
confining nuclear testing to underground sites number of nuclear nations to five, but there
only. It was not a perfect solution, but it was are still fewer than ten – which is far from the
progress. And, in this case it was driven by the twenty or more projected before the treaty
leaders of two superpowers who wanted to entered into force. States with nascent nuclear
de-escalate a tense state of affairs. weapons programmes, such as Brazil and
Although early moves to regulate nuclear South Africa, gave them up due to international
weapons were a mixed affair, the faith that pressure. Today, only a small number of states
Kennedy and Khrushchev put in building are outside its bounds. India, Pakistan and
diplomacy facilitated further progress in finding Israel never joined as they (controversially in
areas of agreement. In the years that followed each case) had nuclear ambitions that they
the Cuban Missile Crisis, Cold War diplomacy were not prepared to give up due to national
entered a high-water-mark phase in what security priorities. Underlining the weight of
became known as a period of ‘détente’ between the Non-Proliferation Treaty, in 2003, when
the superpowers as they sought to engage North Korea decided to rekindle earlier plans
diplomatically with each other on a variety of to develop nuclear weapons, they withdrew
issues, including a major arms limitation treaty. from the treaty rather than violate it. To date,
In that climate, progress was made on North Korea remains the only state to
restricting nuclear proliferation. withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of The non-proliferation regime is not perfect,
Nuclear Weapons (1970) – often known as the of course – a situation best underlined today
Non-Proliferation Treaty – sought to channel by North Korea. It is also a system with an
nuclear technology into civilian uses and to inherent bias, since a number of states are
 International Relations and the Global System 21

allowed to have nuclear weapons simply Photo 2.4 Kennedy and Khrushchev in Vienna,
because they were among the first to develop April 1961
them, and this continues to be the case
regardless of their behaviour. Yet, while
humankind has developed the ultimate
weapon in the nuclear bomb, diplomacy has
managed to prevail in moderating its spread.
When a state is rumoured to be developing a
nuclear bomb, as in the case of North Korea,
the reaction of the international community is
always one of common alarm. We call ideas
that have become commonplace ‘norms’ and
non-proliferation has become one of the
Credit: The U.S. National Archives/Flickr
central norms within our global system.

CASE STUDY 2.2: Human rights and sovereignty

Photo 2.5 Eleanor Roosevelt holding a poster of reference to the fate of Jewish people, the
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, New phrase ‘never again’ became synonymous with
York, November 1949 these events. Not only was there a desire to
prevent mass slaughter of human beings in a
third world war – which would likely be
nuclear – there was also a pressing desire to
establish an international standard of human
rights that would protect people from
atrocities like the Holocaust and from
unnecessary large-scale warfare.
Set up to represent all the earth’s recognised
nation-states, the United Nations became
ground zero for discussion of human rights.
Just three years after the organisation was
created, the ‘Universal Declaration of Human
Credit: FDR Presidential Library & Museum/Flickr
Rights’ (1948, pictured being held by Eleanor
Roosevelt in Photo 2.5) had been agreed by
During the Second World War, Adolf Hitler’s virtually all of the United Nations’ member
Nazi regime that had ruled Germany since states outlining thirty articles that – in principle
1933 had been discovered to have undertaken – extended to all the earth’s people. As a
a programme of exterminating Jews and other snapshot, the first three articles are as follows:
unwanted peoples such as homosexuals, » Article 1. All human beings are born free
political opponents and the disabled. In what and equal in dignity and rights. They are
is now known as the Holocaust, an estimated endowed with reason and conscience and
17 million people were killed by the Nazis should act towards one another in a spirit
through overwork in labour camps, of brotherhood.
undernourishment and various forms of » Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the
execution – which included gas chambers and rights and freedoms set forth in this
firing squads. Of those, approximately six Declaration, without distinction of any kind,
million were Jewish – two-thirds of the such as race, colour, sex, language, religion,
European Jewish population. Especially with political or other opinion, national or social
22 HISTORY AND THEORY

origin, property, birth or other status. human rights is a growing element within our
Furthermore, no distinction shall be made global system that has made such historical
on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or violations a rarity today. We can account for this
international status of the country or further by looking at a range of international
territory to which a person belongs, crimes that have been named and developed –
whether it be independent, trust, non-self- with the bulk highlighting cases where states
governing or under any other limitation of directly cause (or indirectly allow) unacceptable
sovereignty. harm to people, including in times of war. Of
» Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, these, perhaps the most well known is
liberty and security of person. genocide, which denotes the deliberate killing
of a defined group of people (usually defined by
Upon reading this, three thoughts may cross
nationality, religion or ethnicity) – precisely
your mind. The first is that it represents a step
what the Nazis did to Jewish people.
change in history. For the first time, an
Building on the momentum of establishing a
international document existed that sets all
range of legal norms, the Responsibility to
nation-states a set of benchmarks upon which
Protect (2001), sometimes referred to as ‘R2P’,
their behaviour towards individuals will be
was endorsed by all member states of the
judged. Secondly, the aforementioned comes
United Nations in 2005. It sought to build
from an international organisation that is now
further on the Universal Declaration of Human
part of the global system, in addition to states.
Rights and subsequent documents by
Here, it is important to understand the limits
establishing higher levels of punishment for the
of the United Nations and the principles and
worst violations by states. In principle, this
declarations it may proffer. The United Nations
involves a reinterpretation of sovereignty (at
is not sovereign. It does not have a territory, or
times) to the level of the individual. To illustrate
a people. Instead it is an organisation run by,
this, under the Responsibility to Protect,
and through, the voluntary participation of its
sovereignty can be imagined as similar to a
members. In that sense, it appends rather than
mortgage given by a bank (the United Nations)
replaces nation-state power. This leads us to
to a homeowner (a nation-state). Should states
the third thing that may have crossed your
keep up their repayments (by treating their
mind upon reading the articles above – that
people well) then the bank will never trouble
even with the most basic understanding they
the homeowner. However, if the state does not
do not reflect today’s global system, which
keep up its repayments (by acting in ways that
remains one scarred by warfare and well-
cause its people undue harm and suffering)
publicised failures to protect human rights. In
then that state may be repossessed by the
that sense, it is easy to regard human rights as
a failure because, much like international Photo 2.6 Protesters hold signs relating to 'R2P'
organisations, individuals have not become as they take part in a demonstration against the
sovereign the way nation-states are. military coup in Yangon, Myanmar on 12 April
Such a conclusion, while factually true and 2021
the product of our global system’s enduring
foregrounding of the nation-state, risks
betraying the momentum that has gathered
around human rights. Firstly, if we reverse to the
pre-1945 period, states often acted with
impunity by waging ever-escalating wars for
selfish reasons – and also by colonising or
enslaving human beings. There may be no
international sovereign to impose legal
punishment on states in the way a person
would be prosecuted by the legal system within
Credit: STR/AFP/Getty Images
a state for a crime. But, the normative power of
 International Relations and the Global System 23

international community, under the authority of norm have proliferated. Of course, some states
the United Nations. In practice, this could mean still mistreat their people and international
that a state comes under an increasing level of action is often insufficient to prevent it or stop
actions, up to and including a regime being it, or agreement on an action cannot be
forcibly removed from power through invasion. reached – as prolonged civil wars in Yemen and
The caveat is, as with any major issue involving Syria demonstrate. Yet, understanding how the
international security, it has to be agreed by the global system incorporates human rights in
world’s major powers – again reinforcing where ways that go beyond the merely aspirational,
the real bottom line of sovereignty lies. and the related place of international
The Responsibility to Protect has been organisations, is to understand that both the
invoked in well over a hundred resolutions at aforementioned exist in a position that is
various levels within the United Nations, gradually challenging the once absolute
signifying that it is not just something that exists monopoly on sovereignty held by states. It also
on paper, but that human rights in the decades adds further weight to the layer cake of reasons
since the Universal Declaration have come a why there has not been a third world war – in
long way. During the 2021 coup in Myanmar this case adding a legal and normative
pro-democracy protesters even held up ‘R2P’ architecture that restrains states from
signs (Photo 2.6) showing how deeply and endangering human security on the scale that
widely understandings and expectations of this has been evident in history.

Conclusion
Our global system, in reality and as understood intellectually by International Relations
scholars, is built on historical events. These events have resulted in a world dominated by
nation-states which are influenced by international organisations in a dynamic system
that has also opened a growing space for the voices and concerns of individuals. Future
events will most likely continue to alter the system, just as past ones – such as the Treaty
of Westphalia, the invention of nuclear weapons and the emergence of a global economic
system of capitalism – have left indelible marks. Critiquing this origin story is our next step
in the chapters ahead, which look deeper into our history and also ask questions of our
present. We hope this will encourage you to not see this book, or the discipline it
introduces to you, as something you can memorise as a series of events or static concepts.
Instead, you should see International Relations as a living, challenging and sometimes
confrontational journey of different perspectives. There are no correct answers for how
we should understand the world. Indeed, there is no correct answer for the question
posed at the start of the chapter of why we have not had a third world war. It may be
because of nuclear weapons, it may be because the United Nations exists, perhaps it is
born from a commercial desire to protect the global economy from a major disruption, or
it may be because we just don’t want to solve disputes in that way any more due a rising
norm of human rights. Each of these are relevant starting points and each may lead to
different, yet legitimate, answers.
24 HISTORY AND THEORY

END OF CHAPTER QUESTIONS

1. In what ways has warfare been central to International Relations from its inception as a
discipline?
2. What is the ‘Westphalian system’ and why is it so important?
3. With diplomacy, and the international organisations underpinning it, do we now have
the tools we need to mitigate major war?
4. What type of ‘polarity’ do you think best represents today’s global system?
5. The post-Covid-19 era is hard to describe as it has only just begun, and we do not (yet)
have the benefit of hindsight. Since you are living through it, what are your own
impressions of it so far and how would you describe it?
DISCOVERY, CHAPTER

CONQUEST AND 3
COLONIALISM
Robbie Shilliam

Question: If the age of colonialism is over why do we still need to

discuss it?

As the previous chapter argued, 1648 was the origin point for our global system. However,
another year is worthy of mention. In 1492, Christopher Columbus sailed from the Canary
Islands off the north-west African coast, crossed the Atlantic, landed in the Bahamas and
thus inaugurated the age of European empire and the rise of what we nowadays call ‘the
West’. From the introduction of potatoes into culinary diets worldwide, to the genocides of
indigenous peoples, to slavery and abolition, and to the creation of the most powerful
military force the world has ever seen (the United States), the ‘discovery’ of the Americas
has come to fundamentally shape our present. This chapter situates the idea of discovery
within the European mapping of the world prevalent in Columbus’s era. This map sketched
out a hierarchy of human beings, with those belonging to European Christendom
occupying the apex position, thus justifying the conquest of non-European, non-Christian
peoples. The chapter also asks whether the ‘conquest’ and ‘discovery’ associated with 1492
might contain deeper-determining norms and practices than those of ‘non-intervention’
and ‘sovereignty’ associated with 1648. Comparing the perspectives in this chapter with
the prior chapter should allow you to understand the contested nature of history and the
ways in which this impacts our view of the present. This chapter therefore builds on our
understanding of history by suggesting that ideas such as sovereignty and diplomacy
have always been entangled with conquest and colonialism.

25
26 HISTORY AND THEORY

The 1492 map of the world

Different points of departure can give rise to different narratives that open up important
nuances for anyone beginning their journey with International Relations. Consider, for
instance, the Treaty of Tordesillas between Portugal and Castile (part of today’s Spain),
which in 1494 granted jurisdiction over the Americas to the two European powers. Instead
of illustrating the rise of a modern state system (as we saw following the Peace of
Westphalia in 1648), this departure point highlights the pre-existing logic of European
imperial expansion and the consolidation of colonialism. In that sense, while the state
system has outlasted imperialism, it can also be argued that five hundred years of colonial
rule have nonetheless fundamentally shaped the political, economic, social and cultural
dimensions of our ‘post’-colonial global system. Strangely, 1492 does not feature
prominently in the years of departure with which we normally sketch out our
understandings of the contemporary world. To answer why, we need to once more
reconsider the image garnered from Westphalia in 1648 where you will most probably
imagine armies fighting across central Europe. Here, events happen on land. But think
1492, and you will imagine discovery and conquest across the ocean (see Table 3.1).

Table 3.1 Comparing images of 1648 and 1492

1648 1492

* Nation-states face each other with no higher * Imperial powers colonise indigenous peoples
power to rule their conduct existing in a state of while claiming that they are doing God’s work.
international anarchy. * Humanity is divided by religious authorities into
* The practice of diplomacy and the principle of those whose Christian faith compels them to
non-intervention in the affairs of other Christian conquer and enslave and those non-Christians
rulers, regardless of denomination, mitigate whose idolatry allows them to be conquered
against war. and enslaved.
* Although some are strong and some weak, * The world is comprised of a hierarchy of these
all are the same kind of unit – a sovereign, qualitatively different entities.
territorially bound state.

Cartography is the art of map making. It involves arrangement (how the parts are
defined and laid out) and animation (what each part does and how are they connected to
each other). By using 1492 as our departure point, we must grapple with different
cartographic challenges to that of 1648. Instead of mainland Europe, we can look to the
oceans and non-European islands and landmasses. Instead of sovereign territories in
Europe we can sketch out an expanding imperium (the area under imperial rule spread
more globally). Instead of non-intervention, we must consider conquest to be an
organising principle of how actors carve out their space. And, rather than diplomacy and
war being the practice that animates these actors, we must look towards the act of
discovery and the pursuit of colonisation.
Considering these factors leaves us with a range of issues to ponder, each of which
allows us to build on or perhaps challenge the traditional image of history that was
outlined in the previous chapter. Firstly, 1492 might be a far more portentous date for
humanity than 1648, as the act of discovery might be more important for scholars than
the recognition of sovereignty. Secondly, we might need to refresh our cartographic
 Discovery, Conquest and Colonialism 27

skills – our physical, but also mental, map-making abilities – to not only attend to peace-
making in Europe but also the imperial expansion across the world that followed
Columbus’s journey. Towards this aim, we can think of different ways of defining and
laying out the constituent parts of International Relations. We can also think more deeply
about what principles animated these parts to action. Above all, we can think about what
discovery meant for Columbus, and how its meaning and practice were embedded within
broader policies of imperial expansion amongst the polities of European Christendom,
especially the Spanish and Portuguese.
It is also important to fully understand what we mean by ‘discovery’. In Columbus’s era,
‘discovery’ did not necessarily refer to unknown land. Rather, to discover meant to uncover
land that was known to exist yet had remained hidden (Washburn 1962). This might seem
like a pedantic distinction to make. It is, though, a crucial one. The expansion of European
Christendom across the world was not conceived of as a haphazard process but as one
that was divinely ordained. In order to understand why in 1492 Columbus took upon
himself and his crew the risk of sailing across the Atlantic Ocean into the unknown we
first need to examine how the scholarly community of European Christians of that age
mapped out the world.
Medieval Christendom had many different maps of the world. All of them were based
upon geographical knowledge inherited from ancient Greek, Roman and Islamic scholars.
Perhaps the most influential model was the ‘five zone’ model provided by fifth century
BCE philosopher Parmenides (see Photo 3.1). Known as the ‘five zone’ model, maps based
on Parmenides’ writings split the world into a sphere comprising two frigid zones (the
poles), two temperate zones (between the tropics and the poles) and one torrid zone
(the tropics). The frigid and torrid zones were considered to be uninhabitable, while the
northern temperate zone comprised the lands of Europe, Asia and Africa known to the
Greeks. These lands were divided from each other by the Mediterranean (which ran east
to west globally) and the Nile River (which ran north to south globally). Finally, the world
was encircled by a huge ‘ocean river’ (Sanderson 1999). Greek scholars also argued that
celestial bodies affected the human body and influenced behaviour. Building on
observations such as this, many scholars of the time claimed that where people were
geographically located beneath the stars and planets had an effect on their conduct. Put
this arrangement and principle of animation together, and you have the classical Greek
map of the world. The cold regions – that part of the northern temperate zone that verged
on the frigid zone – produced fierce yet unwise people. The hot regions of the temperate
zone, which verged on the torrid zone, produced wise yet tame people. It was only the
middle of the temperate zone – that is, the parts of Europe that lay next to the
Mediterranean – that produced a well-balanced people who were both wise and spirited.
In other words, the European Mediterranean people, Greeks specifically, accorded to
themselves the exclusive ability to govern and thus rule over peoples from the ‘hot’ and
‘cold’ nations.
Hundreds of years later, medieval scholars took the Greek map and translated its
arrangements and principles of animation into biblical lore. The celestial region became
God’s incorruptible heavens, which regulated the terrestrial world of ‘fallen’ humans.
Furthermore, the division between temperate, cold and hot nations was mapped onto
the sons of the biblical figure, Noah (Shem, Japheth and Ham). In this way, every human
being occupied a geographical place according to their divinely ordained and biblically
narrated nature. Of special importance is the prevailing association at this time of the
word Ham with ‘hot’. Add to this the infamous ‘curse of Ham’, which in Genesis 9: 20–7
placed Ham’s descendants in servitude to the descendants of Shem and Japheth.
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
prahlend, »da Ihr einen Kerl unter Euch gehabt, der eine Gans
gestohlen hat.«
Und der wäre?
»Ein gewisser O. aus X., ich will es ihm beweisen, daß er eine
Gans gestohlen hat.«
O. gehörte nicht zu meinen nähern Bekannten, ich konnte es ihm
füglich selbst überlassen, diesen ihm angethanen Schimpf von sich
abzuwaschen. Allein die levis notae macula, welche A. der
Heidelberger Burschenschaft angethan, konnte ich nicht sitzen
lassen. Ich foderte ihn daher auf, zu erklären, daß wenn sich die
Wahrheit seiner Behauptung auch herausstelle, die Existenz eines
räudigen Schafes in unserer Heerde unmöglich unserer
Burschenschaft präjudiciren könne. Allein darauf wollte sich A. nicht
einlassen. »Ich bleibe bei dem was ich gesagt habe,« wiederholte er,
»und wenn Du dadurch die Heidelberger Burschenschaft touchirt
glaubst, so kannst Du es nehmen wie Du willst.« —
»Du bist g e f o r d e r t,« war meine nothgedrungene Antwort.
Trotz meiner nicht eben angenehmen Situation, mußte ich in dem
Augenblick laut lachen, was meinen mit seiner Suite scheidenden
Gegner zu erbittern schien. Mir kam nemlich das Einlagerrecht, in
den Sinn, ein im Westphälischen Frieden in Deutschland
aufgehobenes und nur für die Holsteinischen Lande reservirtes
Institut, auch O b s t a g i u m genannt. Man verstand darunter die
Verpflichtung, wornach der Schuldner versprach, wenn er seine
Zusage nicht erfüllen würde, auf erfolgte Einmahnung, sich mit
einem bestimmten Gefolge an einem gewissen Orte einzufinden und
denselben bei Strafe der Ehrlosigkeit nicht eher zu verlassen, als bis
er alles Versprochene geleistet haben würde. Auch die Herzöge von
Holstein konnten sich auf das Einlager verpflichten, wenn sie aber
ihre Verbindlichkeit nicht pünctlich erfüllten, so durften sie sich
remplaciren lassen und mußten alsdann Drei Räthe für sie in eine
Herberge einreiten, wo immer das E i n l a g e r (das auch deshalb das
E i n r e i t e n heißt,) gehalten wurde. Einer dieser Herrn Räthe schien
ich mir in dem Augenblick zu sein.
 Noch an demselben Tage erwählte ich meinen Sekundanten. Da
ich aber nur den Hieber, mein Gegner den Stoßdegen zu führen
gewohnt war, so wurde ein Pistolenduell unter ziemlich gefährlichen
Auspicien beschlossen.
Die Jenaischen Burschenschaftler fühlten sich tief über diese
Verletzung der Gastlichkeit an einem Deputirten gekränkt, um so
mehr jubelten aber ihre Feinde im Stillen, begeistert durch die
Ermunterungen ihres despotischen Generals.
Eine Stunde vor dem Zweikampf ging ich über den Markt,
woselbst mein Gegner sich im eifrigsten Gespräche mit seinem
Gelichter befand, das auf mich, als auf einen Passagier nach Elisum
zeigte. Aber siehe, plötzlich traf mich der Blick des dermal
anwesenden Generals.
»Ist das Dein Gegner?« fragte er den bejahenden Nachbar.
»Nun« sagte er, »denn wird aus Eurem Kampfe nichts. Diesse Kehrl
hät bi de erste Pröv von twintig Sorten Beer dat schwarte Köstritzer
för dat beste erklärt.« (Dieser Kerl hat bei der ersten Probe von
zwanzig Sorten Bier das schwarze Köstritzer für das Beste erklärt.)
Der General hatte nie so gesprochen, mein erstaunter Gegner
aber gehorchte mit jesuitischem Gehorsam. Er gab mir eine
genügende Erklärung und der General trank mit uns eine Flasche
Köstritzer Bier zur Versöhnung.
Die Jenaer Philister waren mir von Thibaut ganz anders
geschildert, als ich sie fand. Dieser, welcher dort Professor gewesen,
nannte sie die demüthigsten Menschen, welche ihm je vorgekommen
seien. Er behauptete sogar, daß sie sich in der Anrede der
Brieftitulaturen bedienten, und die lernenden und lehrenden
Mitglieder der Academie mit »Ew Wohlgeboren, Ew
Hochwohlgeboren und Ew Hoch und Wohlgeboren« anredeten. Mir
kamen sie keineswegs so demüthig vor, vielmehr wie enthusiastisch
liebende Jungfrauen, welche alle Thorheiten ihres Liebhabers (hier
der Studenten) vergöttern, oder besser gesagt, wie reine Sancho
Pansa’s, welche sich ganz nach ihren Don Quichotischen Herren
gemodelt haben. — Als ich den alten Kneipier Senfft, in dessen
Hause die Burschenverhandlungen gehalten wurden, zum ersten
Male mit zwei anderen Deputirten sah, bat uns dieser um die
Erlaubniß Eine Frage an uns richten zu dürfen. Da ihm dies gewährt
worden, erkundigte er sich, was für Landsleute wir seien. Als darauf
die Antworten »ein Sachse, ein Kurhesse, ein Holsteiner«, ertheilt
worden waren, versetzte er gravitätisch: »Falsch geantwortet meine
Herren! Sie sind alle D e u t s c h e und das sollen Sie hier erst recht
kennen lernen.«
Der Jenaer Burgkeller bot insbesondere zur Zeit des Mittags- und
des Abendessens einen besondern Anblick. — Wenn man in die
Thüre des Saales trat, der von einem großen Pfeiler in der Mitte
getragen wurde, sah man rechts an einem Tische einige
Privatdocenten, welche unter sich das kümmerlichste Mahl
verzehrten was einem geboten werden kann. Unter ihnen befand
sich der Sohn Wielands. Dasselbe Diner wurde dem Bruder Studio
vorgesetzt, welcher die Mitte und den Hintergrund des Saales
einnahm, während die linke Seite von Bier und Branntwein
zechenden Philistern, größtentheils von Frachtfuhrleuten, besetzt
war, welche ungehindert ihren Kneller pafften, der sich mit den
magern Speisedämpfen zu einem, den Göttern gewiß nicht gefälligen
Rauchopfer vereinigte. —
Man speiste von zinnernem Geschirr, die Suppen erinnerten nicht,
wie in Norddeutschland, an einen Pfauenschwanz, höchstens an
einen Cyclopen, denn es war in derselben selten ein Fettauge zu
bemerken. Die meisten Teller boten auf der Kehrseite ein Studium
für Alterthumsforscher. Condordia res parvae erescunt — Gloria
virtutis comes. — Vivat circulus fratrum Rhenanorum, Elise ist ein
Engel, gekreuzte Schläger, Todtenköpfe. »Falsch ist Jena« »Vivat
Jena!« »1763, 1785, 1800,« und manche mehr oder wenig
verwischte Inscriptionen, waren es die den archäologischen Hunger
viel mehr als den physischen befriedigten. Der räthselkundigste
Hosteiner hätte als Oedip auf dem Rathskeller ohne Zuflüsterung
nicht gerathen, daß das graue Zeug, welches man in Rüben verhüllt
ihm auftischte, R i n d f l e i s c h sein sollte.
 Nach Tisch zog eine große Menge der Burschenschaftler
gewöhnlich nach Ziegenhain. — Der Wirth war sehr tolerant und
verzapfte sein, nach meiner Meinung mit betäubenden Kräutern
geschwängertes Bier fast Alles auf Credit, jedoch mußte man den
ersten Krug mit einem Groschen baar bezahlen. Dieser Punct war ein
präjudizieller. Daher riefen die oft alles baaren Geldes entblößten
Musensöhne, bevor man von dem Markt zog: »Wer hat einen Spieß,
daß ich mitgehen kann?« Und fast immer fand sich ein Freund in der
Noth. —- Sobald aber alle gehörig mit einem Spieß bewaffnet waren,
ging es im lauten Gesange auf das Dorf. Die Landsmannschaftler
zogen nach Lichtenhain, wo eine Cerevisia, freilich sehr im
Anderssein der meinigen haus’te und dermalen ein Bierkönig
»T h u s d e r a c h t e« regierte. Ich bin nie dort gewesen. Abends
zog der Schwarm brüllend heim, am andern Morgen aber erinnerten
die blassen Gesichter der Bierhelden, welche nicht so frisch wie die
Walhallahelden aufgestanden waren, an die Theriakisten,
(Opiumesser) der Türken.
Die Jenaer Burschenschaft, so arm sie auch war, bewirthete die
Deputirten auf eine höchst gastliche Weise. Jeder theilte sein Logis
mit den Burschen, welche sich zum Congreß eingefunden hatten, es
wurde nicht allein den Deputirten während ihren ganzen
Aufenthaltes freie Kost gereicht sondern demselben an den
Sessionstagen sogar eine Flasche Würzburger vorgesetzt, eine so
rührende Gastlichkeit, daß sie selbst die Säure des Weines
überwand. Ja man ging soweit innerhalb des Umkreises von einer
Meile jeden Deputiten zu signalisiren und jedem Wirth bei Strafe des
Verrufs zu verbieten, von einem Deputirten Zahlung zu nehmen. —
Mir fiel oft das Sprichwort dort ein — »Ein Engel löffelt mit dem
Andern.«
Unter den Deputirten waren Leute, die jetzt einen
ausgezeichneten Namen und bedeutende Stellungen sich erworben
haben. Obgleich ich es für ganz unpräjudicirlich für sie halte,
dieselben namentlich aufzuführen, da, wie ich bereits erwähnt habe,
die Acten ergeben, daß jene Versammlung nur das Gas entwickelte,
welches alle Fürsten Deutschlands von Napoleonischem Drucke
befreit, daß die Idee eines Deutschen Bundes in das Leben gerufen
hat, und daß die Fürsten um Gotteswillen zu conserviren haben, so
scheue ich doch jeden Vorwurf einer Indiscretion, und will mich
daher begnügen hier nur zweier zu erwähnen, die jetzt schon in
zweiter und letzter Instanz gerichtet sein werden. Es sind dies
L o r e s e n und S a n d. Der Dänische Canzleirath Loresen war damals
von Kiel deputirt. Ein blonder, breitschulteriger Insulaner imponirte
er mehr durch seinen Körper, seine Gutmüthigkeit als durch seinen
Geist. Man kam in Versuch diesen kräftiger zu halten als er war und
es ist mir ohne allen Zweifel, daß alle seine nachherigen Schritte,
von denen ich übrigens keinesweges unterrichtet bin, von ihm nur
auf fremde Einflüsterungen gethan sind. — Überhaupt ist es nicht zu
leugnen, daß die Deutschthümlei in jener Zeit sowohl im guten wie
im bösen Sinne über die Maaßen einseitig und oft nur zu
Werkzeugen Anderer machte. Gewiß paßte auf Viele damals der
bekannte Satz:

»Du glaubst zu schieben und Du wirst geschoben.«

Ein ähnlicher Character war der S a n d s. Die Ermordung

Kotzebues war lächerlich und deutet hinlänglich auf die partiale
Schwachköpfigkeit des unglücklichen Mörders. Und dennoch war viel
Edles und Großes in ihm verborgen. Nicht ohne Rührung sind
folgende Worte zu lesen, die er mir in das Stammbuch schrieb, als
ich voll heiterer fast französischer Laune ihm das Epigramm beim
Abschiede geweiht hatte:

Lieber Freund, wer Dir vertraut,

Der hat auf keinen S a n d gebaut.

Sand, dem alle Scherze fatal waren, und den ich wenigstens nie
lächeln sah, antwortete darauf diese ernste Worte:
 »Die Kraft, jegliche die Du hast, ist dem Vaterlande, damit du
ihm selbst heimbezahlen die unerlösliche Schuld für Sprache, Sitte
und Erziehung für den Boden, worauf Du groß geworden bist und
auf welchem Du Deine Thaten üben willst, für Alles was Du von ihm
hast. Dieses wollen wir wohl bedenken, — aber wollen wir dann
noch Wohlgefallen haben an der bisherigen Kleinheit, oder suchen
wir wieder die Größe und Erhabenheit der alten Zeit? Soll uns
endlich das ganze deutsche Land zum Tummelplatze werden, und
wollen wir uns eines Volkes erfreuen, daß nach altem Brauche den
mächtigen Schiedsrichter in Europa zu machen, berufen ist?«
Wir haben Ja gesagt und wollen dem nachleben. —
Jena, am Burschentage vom 29. März
bis 14. April 1818.
Dein deutscher Bruder C a r l S a n d,
G. G. B. aus dem Fichtelgebirge.
Merkwürdig war es, daß, als ich Sand Lebewohl sagen wollte, ich
denselben auf seinem Sopha liegend fand. Er schien eine
Anwandlung von Pleuresie zu haben, denn er griff mit der Hand
krampfhaft in die Seite und rief mir zu: »Lebewohl! ich sterbe an
diesem Stich in der Brust.« —
Als ich in Weimar den Postwagen bestieg um über Göttingen den
Rückweg nach Heidelberg zu machen, war mein Mitpassagier der
Sohn Kotzebue’s, den allerhand Spöttereien welche man aus Rache
seinem Vater, ich glaube bei einer maskirten Schlittenfahrt, angethan
hatte, von Jena vertrieben hatten und der Deutschland verließ, um
seine Studien in Dorpat zu beendigen. Er war ein liebenswürdiger
Mensch und ist eine der angenehmsten Bekanntschaften meines
Lebens.
Während ich diese Memoiren schreibe und nach einem von mir
entworfenen Schema die einzelnen Begebenheiten zu einer Schnur
zusammen reihe, komme ich mir vor wie ein Fährmann der bereits
vom Ufer abgestoßen ist, von demselben her aber noch immer ein
»Heda! nimm mich doch auch mit!« vernimmt. Die Erinnerungen
tauchen in mir zu Hunderten auf, ich muß alle Augenblick verneinen
um nicht gar zu viel Überfracht zu bekommen. Mir wird dabei
ängstlich, wie einem Reisenden, der auf der Schnellpost reiset und
nur 30 l̶b an Bagage frei hat. Und was zeigt sich da meinen Blicken?
Nichts weniger als ein Todter, ein Leichenhemd. Eine
Geistergeschichte, die, weil sie erlebt ist und wahrscheinlich noch
von einem Lebenden außer mir documentirt werden kann, wohl
berechtigt ist, noch als Passagier in das Schiff meiner Erzählung zu
steigen. — Das ganze ist eine sogenannte Vorahnung worin ich
überhaupt ziemlich stark bin, obgleich ich sonst nicht zu den
Sonntagskindern gehöre. Das mag indessen in meinem Blute liegen.
Träumte doch meinem ältesten Bruder, Peter von Kobbe, dem
Historiker, einem dreizehnjährigen Knaben, in der folgenden Nacht,
da sich das Ereigniß im mittelländischen Meere zugetragen hat, die
Schlacht bei Trafalgar, (mit Ausnahme dieses Namens) der Tod
Nelsons, die Zahl der von ihm eroberten Schiffe, das Datum der
Schlacht, die Nummer des Hamburger Correspondenten worin diese
gemeldet wurde, und der ganze Artikel, welcher den Sieg und die
Himmelfahrt Nelson’s enthielt. Sah er doch in Itzehoe in dem Hause
der Generalin H e d e m a n n einen Tag vorher die Leiche eines
Knaben in jedem Zimmer, der am andern Tage aufgefischt und in
das Haus der Generalin gebracht wurde. Mein Bruder, ein Mann von
seltener Gelehrsamkeit, der als rühmlichst bekannter
Geschichtsforscher dem legitimen Princip ergeben ist, hat für seinen
Kaßandratact die Undankbarkeit der Fürsten erfahren, welche ihm
ehren sollten, wie keinen seines Gleichen, und ihm ein Prytaneum
bauen. Ich bin aus zu luftiger Construction, weder für Aristokraten
noch für Democraten recht brauchbar, aus viel Respect gegen den
Himmel und aus viel Verachtung gegen die Erde zusammengesetzt
und daher ein Humorist geworden, oder besser gesagt, geblieben,
habe übrigens meine Qualität als Geisterseher, wovon ich noch
einige andere merkwürdige Beispiele erzählen könnte,
wahrscheinlich für dieses Leben verscherzt. Erzogen von einem
frommen Großvater im sogenannten Mysticismus, wofür ich übrigens
Gott als Poet noch auf meinen Knieen danke, habe ich alle meine
Sonntagskindseigenschaft durch eine ganz im Ernste gemeinte
Bemerkung meines Freundes v. St. verloren, welcher kurzsichtig war
und nach einer Relation mehrerer Geistergeschichten in einem Kreise
von Freunden sich höchst naiv über seinen Mangel an Aperception
von solchen Dingen mit den Worten darüber beklagte: »Ich kann
leider! keine Geister sehen, weil ich einen Geist nicht von einem
Bettlacken zu unterscheiden vermag.« Seit dem heftigen Gelächter,
worin ich damals über diese crassa minerva ausbrach, bin ich kein
Seher mehr, sondern nur noch höchstens ein Fühler geworden. Ich
fordre den Buchhändler Herrn Berndt zu Oldenburg hiemit zum
Zeugen auf, ob ich ihm nicht im Jahre 1832 als eine Neuigkeit erzählt
habe, d a ß i c h i n n e r h a l b d r e i Ta g e n e i n B e i n
b r e c h e n w ü r d e. Am zweiten Abend hatte ich durch ein bloßes
Ausgleiten die tibia zersprengt. —
Vielleicht hätte ich übrigens Restitution als Geisterseher
bekommen. Allein ich habe einen zu rationalistischen Weg
eingeschlagen, der mich bald ganz um meine Swedenborgschen
Eigenschaft bringen wird. Da nämlich der Zufall mich auf alle Weise
chicanirt, habe ich mich entutirt, denselben zu besiegen. Ich habe
ihn lieb gewonnen, wie Richard Savage seine grausame Mutter, ich
lasse nicht von ihm, ich erscheine ihm bald als Berliner, bald als
Braunschweiger, bald als Osnabrücker, d. h. ich spiele häufig in der
Lotterie, und verwende alle meine Sehergaben dabei um einen
großen Gewinn zu ergattern. Ja, mein Streben geht soweit, daß
wenn ich in stiller Mitternacht zu meiner villa kehre, welche vor dem
Heiligengeistthore unfern des Kirchhofes liegt, und den Todtenweg
hinunter wandre, auf dem es bekanntlich in dieser Stunde nicht
recht richtig ist, — — sobald mir irgend ein Geist begegnet, sei es
ein edler Hingeschiedener im unversehrten Todtengewande oder nur
so ein Lump in der Form des Bettlakens, ich sogleich rufe: »Bester!
oder Beste, welche Nummer in der Preußischen oder in der
Braunschweigischen Lotterie wird das große Loos gewinnen?« Die
Verstorbenen müssen allerhöchste Ordre haben, auf diese epinöse
Frage, vielleicht aus Furcht, daß der souveraine Zufall sie doch
nachher blamirt, nicht zu antworten; sogleich wenden sie sich. Wenn
man darauf losgeht sind sie verschwunden und man muß sich Mund
und Augen wischen, in denen sich dann höchstens von der ganzen
Erscheinung, noch etwas alter Weibersommer befindet.
Doch zur Sache. — Ich logirte in Jena bei zwei Gebrüder B. aus
Mecklenburg, welche in der Apotheke am Markt wohnten. Eines
Tages ging ich mit Sand und einem Andern, dessen Name mir
entfallen ist, ich glaube aber es war der jetzige Professor L e o in
Halle über das forum vor das Thor, um einen Platz zu suchen, wo wir
am 3. März zur Feier der Einnahme von Paris eine Eiche pflanzen
wollten, welches auch an dem fraglichen Tage mit großer
Feierlichkeit vollführt worden ist. Ich beklagte mich, daß der Taback
schlecht sei und daß ich um mich Sächsisch-Weimarsch-Eisenachsch
auszudrücken, den L a u s e w e n z e l nicht mehr b l e f f e n möge.
»Ei!« bemerkten meine Begleiter, »wenn Du sechs gute Groschen für
das Viertelpfund anwenden willst, so gehe nur in den Kramladen da,
dicht neben der Sonne, da kannst Du Hamburger J u s t u s
bekommen.« »Hängt!« (das lateinische accipio) entgegnete ich
burschikos und ging in das mir bezeichnete Kaufhaus, worin sich der
Krämer mit seinem Lehrburschen befand. Die Anderen warteten
meiner draußen. —
Ich foderte den mir bezeichneten Taback. Der Kaufherr erklärte
mir, daß die fragliche Sorte auf dem Boden liege, daß er sie mir
holen wolle. Aber in demselben Augenblicke sah ich diesen guten
Mann als L e i c h e auf einem Paradebett. Die Vision schwand
indessen sogleich und beängstigte mich eben auch nicht sehr, denn
es war heller Mittag. —
Nichts desto weniger bemerkte ich dem Ladenjungen: »Geben
Sie Acht Ihr Herr stirbt bald.« »Ei warum entgegnete dieser, er ist ja
kerngesund.« »Er ist so corpulent,« versetzte ich, hiedurch
Entscheidungsgründe für mein Gottes-Urtheil suchend.
»O das hat nichts zu bedeuten,« versetzte der Lehrling. »Ich
kenne den Herrn schon seit vielen Jahren, er hat immer so
ausgesehen.«
 In dem Augenblicke kam der Kaufmann und überreichte mir das
Paquet Taback. Ich zahlte, glotzte ihn noch einmal an und fühlte nun
wohl daß ich mich total geirrt hatte. Er sah in der That kerngesund
aus.
Wenn man im Norden einen Bauer fragt: »Freund! wie weit habe
ich bis zu X.?« so hört man nicht selten die Antwort: »Eine Pfeife
Taback.« Es wird von den Antwortenden darunter eine gewisse Zeit
verstanden. In diesem Sinne kann ich von einem Viertelpfund Taback
weiter referiren. Ich blies meine letzte Pfeife nach wenigen Tagen
aus dem zweiten Stock der Jenaer Marktapotheke in die Luft, als ich
vor dem bereits erwähnten Kramladen, dicht an der Sonne, einen
Leichenzug halten sah.
Ich gestehe, nie in meinem Leben von einer solchen innern Angst
ergriffen worden zu sein, als an dem fraglichen Nachmittage. »Seht
Ihr,« rief ich aus, abermals eine Vision wähnend, mit dem Finger
nach dem Kramladen zeigend, »seht Ihr was dort vorgeht?«
»Es ist ein Leichenzug,« war die, aus dem Munde der
Gegenwärtigen einstimmig hervordringende Antwort.
In Bremen lebt ein geistreicher Schiffsmackler Namens
H e i n e k e n, der erste und vielleicht der einzigste, welcher nach
einem Compaß von Schwedisch nach Russisch Lappland gesteuert
ist. Zehn Tage und zehn Nächte hat derselbe sich mit gefrorner Milch
und Fleisch vom Rennthier und mit Branntwein genährt, und schon
die Hoffnung aufgegeben, je wieder menschliche Wohnungen in
diesen Schnee- und Eisgefilden zu finden, als er endlich am eilften
an einem Tannengehölz gekommen ist, aus dem ein Hundegebell
ihm die Nähe von bald gefundenen Menschen verkündigt hat. »Nie,«
pflegte er oft zu sagen, »hat mich eine menschliche Stimme, nie der
Ton einer Sängerin so entzückt, wie dies Wau-Wau eines
unvernünftigen Thieres.«
So war auch mir zu Muthe, als ich merkte, daß meine
Erscheinung kein Spuck sei, sondern diesmal wirklich Realität hatte.
Neugierde und Tabacksbedürfniß führten mich indessen noch an
demselben Tage in das Haus des Krämers, dessen Tod mir die
Nachbarn bestätigt hatten. Im Anfang gab der Bursch mir sorglos die
verlangte herba nicotiana; als ich ihn aber an meinen prophetischen
Spruch erinnerte, wurde er kreidebleich und rief aus: »I Herr Jesus
es ist wahr, Sie haben den Tod meines Herrn vorausgesagt, er ist
noch an demselben Abend, da Sie zuletzt hier waren am Schlagfluß
gestorben.«
Ich überlasse die nähere Anatomie dieser Geschichte den
Medizinern, Philosophen und selbst den, bald hiezu berechtigt
werdenden Wassertrinkern, wahr ist sie auf Cerevis und Ehrenwort.
Überhaupt lüge ich nie, habe es auch nicht nöthig. Denn warum? Es
wäre dies ein abscheulicher Luxus. Mir passirt Gott sei Dank! und
Gott leider! vielmehr, als sich die tollste Fieberphantasie auszubrüten
vermag, und vor allen auf Reisen; ich brauche oft nur das Erlebte zu
schildern um zu riskiren, daß man mich für einen Münchhausen hält.
Zwar gilt von mir auch der Göthische Vers:

»Das Geisterreich ist nicht verschlossen;

Dein Sinn ist zu, Dein Herz ist todt,
Auf Schüler! bade unverdrossen
Die ird’sche Brust im Morgenroth.«

Ich bin vigilant und Vigilantibus, »jura sunt scripta« sagen wir
Juristen. Zudem versäume ich nicht leicht eine Gelegenheit, um
meinen Abentheuerschatz zu bereichern. Wenn ich reise und es
bricht in dem Orte wo ich mich befinde, sei es auch in der weit
entferntesten Vorstadt, Feuer aus, so stehe ich auf und eile hin, wie
ein guter Landesherr, weil ich mich für einen humoristischen Prinzen
von Geblüt ansehe, dem zu Ehren das Feuerwerk gegeben wird.
Hiebei fällt mir wieder eine Erzählung aus dem Philisterio ein, die
an das Unglaubliche gränzt und meinen Satz schlagend
bewahrheitet. Also wieder ein Passagier der in mein Schiff springt.
Ich besitze das Talent, so ziemlich jeden Dialect zu copiren, und
ein wie schlechtes musicalisches Ohr ich auch habe, so scharf und
sicher höre ich doch aus jeder Rede des einzelnen Deutschen den
Ort seiner Geburt oder besser gesagt, seiner Erziehung, und bin
dabei im Stande die meisten gehörten Idiome zu reproduciren.
Hiebei will ich eine Historie zum Besten geben, welche der
Vergangenheit entrissen zu werden verdient. —
Vor ungefähr 6 bis 8 Jahren saß ich in den Gasthof hôtel de
Russie in Oldenburg an der table d’hôte, mir zur Rechten der noch
lebende Agent Herr J ü r g e n s, am Ende der Tafel ein
Hannoverscher Officier Herr Major M a g i u s, welcher mit seinem
Nachbar sich über Paganini unterhielt.
»Können Sie nun wohl rathen, was der Officier für ein
Landsmann ist? raunte mir mein Nachbar zu.« —
Ich besann mich, auf die Rede des Majors horchend, dann aber
sage ich: »Der Herr spricht wie ein L ü b e c k e r.«
»Wollen Sie eine Flasche Wein darauf wetten?« lächelte Herr
Jürgens scherzend.
»Die ist gehalten,« entgegnete ich.
Ich wartete nun bis Herr Magius einen Punct in der Rede hatte
und bat ihn dann da wir eben eine Wette gemacht hätten, um
Bescheid was er für ein Landsmann sei.
»Das werden Sie nun und nimmer rathen,« versetzte der Herr
Major ablehnend, und gab dann eine Menge, mich freilich nicht von
meiner Juryüberzeugung abbringende Gründe an, weshalb es
unmöglich sei, daß ich seine Heimath errathe. Mir ist nur der, seines
längern Aufenthaltes in Italien vor allen noch erinnerlich. —
Endlich schloß der Redner: »Ich will Ihnen nur sagen, daß ich ein
geborner L ü b e c k e r bin.«
»Ich danke Herr Major! ich habe meine Wette gewonnen.«
Während mein Treffer dem Herrn Magius wol etwas magisch
vorkommen mochte, ich hingegen mich des Triumphzuges meines
Steckenpferdes freute, erhob sich ein jüdischer Kaufmann, welcher
mir die viel kitzlichere Frage stellte ob ich wol merken könne woher
er denn sei.
Das war eine sehr schwere Nuß. Man weiß, daß der Dialect der
Juden eben so selten wie ihr Herz an einer Provinz gebunden ist,
und wenn der Frager auch zu den Gebildeten seines Volkes gehörte,
so war er doch nicht frei von der mosaischen Pronunciation. —
Indessen gab ein Gott mir doch folgende Antwort in die Seele:
»Ich kann aus Ihrem angebornen Dialect nicht recht klug
werden. Bald reden Sie wie ein Nordhesse, bald wie ein Hamburger.«
»Wunderbar!« rief der besiegte Sphinx, »Ich bin in Bückeburg
geboren und erzogen, allein seit zehn Jahren in Hamburg etablirt.«
Mit diesem Knalleffect ist meine Geschichte noch nicht aus.
Sie kam mir nämlich etwa anderthalb Jahre später, an einer
Abendtafel in demselben Hause, als von Dialecten die Rede war,
wieder in den Sinn. Ich erzählte sie den um mich her sitzenden
Oldenburgern.
Der Obergerichtsanwald Herr H a h n e bemerkte scherzend, daß
man wol daran gewöhnt sei, nie eine Unwahrheit zu hören, daß
diese Geschichte mit dem Bückeburger Juden doch zu sehr in das
Gebiet des Unglaublichen gehe, und wenigstens auf einer Täuschung
beruhen müsse.
Leider war Herr Jürgens nicht zugegen. —
Die Möglichkeit eines Zweifels an meiner Rede jagte mir das Blut
in das Gesicht. —
Das Roth aber ist die Farbe der Schuld wie der Unschuld. Es ist
die Leibfarbe des Defensors wie des Anklägers.
Man schien dem meinigen eine böse Deutung zu geben.
Der Gedanke war höchst peinigend.
Da erhob sich ein deus ex machina im Hintergrunde an der
Wirthstafel.
 »Ich kann die Geschichte eidlich bezeugen,« rief es aus, »sie ist
mir passirt.« — Und siehe! ich erkannte meinen bis dahin nicht
beachteten Bückeburger-Hamburger, dessen Persönlichkeit bereits
aus meinem Gedächtniß desertirt war.
Schon während der ersten Tage meiner Ankunft in Jena war Wit
v. Dörring als Fuchs dort angelangt. Es waren schon unterweges
Zeichen und Wunder mit ihm geschehen, man hatte ihm in Erfurt
seinen ganzen Wechsel gestohlen.
Dieser rubricirte Exdemagoge, der in den neuern Zeiten eine so
verschiedene Beurtheilung erfahren hat, verrieth schon in seiner
Jugend seltene Anlagen. In seinem vierten Jahre hielt er vor seiner
vortrefflichen, jetzt verstorbenen Mutter ganze Predigten aus dem
Stegreife. Seine Mitschüler, zu denen ich auch gehörte, liebten ihn.
Zu allen Aufopferungen bereit, zeigte er ein liebenswürdiges Herz.
Sein Hang zum Mysticismus aber blieb in seiner Seele und er redete
oft wie ein Missionär. Das aber verdroß den alten Doctor G u r l i t t,
der damals Director des Johannei in Hamburg war, welches Wit von
Altona aus frequentirte. Gurlitt sprach oft von orthodoxen
Rindfleischseelen, und pflegte die Mystiker Hechte zu nennen.
Ein Tag in jedem Monat war zu öffentlichen Redeübungen in den
verschiedenen Sprachen bestimmt. Wit hatte das Thema: »Wer die
Gottheit fassen will, der ist verloren,« gewählt und sprach mit
ergreifenden Worten, aber manche dunkle Deutung war in seine
blumenreiche Rede gewirkt. Mit komischem Ernste betrachtete ihn
der alte Schulmonarch. Zitternd ging er zu ihm als er geendet hatte,
und eine große Thräne entperlte den Augen des gutmeinenden
Greises. »Liebes Kind, ich fürchte am Ende, Sie glauben an den
Teufel?« rief er bebend. »Ja, Herr Doctor,« versetzte Wit sich
verbeugend: »den lasse ich mir nicht nehmen!« »Armer junger
Mensch,« versetzte Gurlitt betrübt: »wie oft werden Sie noch die
Alten vertiren und revertiren müssen, ehe Sie zur richtigen Ansicht in
der Religion gelangen!«
Nach wenigen Tagen hatten sich sämmtliche Abgeordnete
eingefunden. In dem Burschenhause, dessen Wirth der altdeutsch
gewordene S e n f t war und zu dem man durch ein enges Gäßchen
vom Markt aus geht, wurden unsere Versammlungen vom 29. März
bis zum 3. April 1818 gehalten. Wir saßen an einem Tisch der mit
schwarzem Tuch behangen, welches mit goldenen und rothen
Frangen, unsern Farben, verbrämt war. Die Sitzungen waren
öffentlich, doch trennte eine Barriere die Deputirten von den
Zuhörern, welchen zwar auch zu reden vergönnt war aber erst dann,
wenn der Präsident ihnen das Wort bewilligt hatte. —
Vor zehn Jahren habe ich die Verhandlungen, welche ich der
Heidelberger Burschenschaft übergeben, ohne daß ich eine Abschrift
davon behalten hatte — in einem kleinen Hannoverschen Ort, bei
einem jungen Staatsdiener zu meiner großen Freude
wiedergefunden und zum Geschenk erhalten. Ich stehe nicht an
dieselben mitzutheilen, theils um jene Gerüchte zu wiederlegen, als
habe jener Burschencongreß die geringste revolutionäre Tendenz
gehabt, theils um darzuthun, daß man im Anfang durch Mißgriffe die
Studenten wie schon erwähnt zu Zeloten und Märtyrern gemacht
hat.
Wahrlich! ich verpflichte mich unter Garantie meines Kopfs, eine
ganze Universität von funfzehnhundert Studenten, in der besten
Ordnung in der loyalsten Stimmung und ferne von jeder Aufregung
zu halten, ihre Phantasie zu beschäftigen ohne sie zu verbrennen
und durch die Burschen fortwährend selbst von ihren geheimsten
Gedanken in Kenntniß gesetzt zu werden. Aber man muß auch das
Gemüth haben auf die Jugend zu wirken und sie ruhig gewähren
lassen, wenn sie in die Sackgassen der Phantasie laufen. Sie
kommen schon von selbst zurück und schlagen dann beschämt die
Augen nieder.
»Pueri sunt pueri, pueri puerilia tractant.«
Beglaubigte Abschrift der Protocolle, gehalten in der
Abgeordneten-Versammlung zu Jena.

Protocoll,
gehal ten in der Versammlung der Abgeordneten
verschiedener Deutscher Hochschulen, zu Jena
am 29. März 1818.

1) Es wurden die Vollmachten der durch Abgeordnete an der

Versammlung Theil nehmenden Hochschulen Berlin, Halle,
Heidelberg, Jena, Kiel, Königsberg, Leipzig, Marburg und Rostock,
mündlich oder schriftlich bekannt gemacht.
2) Veranlaßt durch die Abgeordneten des Berliner
Burschenvereins und den erwählten Abgesandten derjenigen nicht
verbündeten Berliner Burschen, welche auf ihrer Hochschule eine
allgemeine Burschenschaft nach Zweck und Form gegründet sehn
wünschen, entstand die Frage, ob der Abgeordnete des Letztern
eine entscheidende Stimme haben könne, welche Frage durch
Stimmenmehrheit mit »nein« beantwortet wurde.
3) Wurde von den sämmtlichen stimmenfähigen
Burschenabgeordneten, erstens R. aus Jena zum Sprecher, zweitens
W. zum Schreiber in den Versammlungen gewählt.
4) Nach einer Ermahnung von R., den Zweck der Versammlung
im Auge habend, Ruhe, Ordnung und Bestimmtheit zu zeigen, wurde
beschlossen, alle Verhandlungen nach Stimmenmehrheit zu
entscheiden, und vom Sprecher rechts abzustimmen, jedoch mit
Vorbehalt, daß alle Beschlüsse nur dann gültig wären, für die
Hochschulen, wenn sie sich mit den Vollmachten der Abgeordneten
derselben vereinigen ließen.
5) Wurden die angekommenen abschlägigen Antworten von
einigen Deutschen Hochschulen verlesen. Göttingen, Tübingen und
Erlangen hatten entweder keine Abgeordnete stellen wollen oder
können, und dieß schriftlich erklärt.
6) K. aus Heidelberg forderte auf Vergessen aller Selbst und
Partheisucht, den großen Zweck der Versammlung zu erfassen und
in reiner Liebe zum Wahren und Guten so zu reden und zu handeln,
wie jeder es verantworten könne vor Gott und seinem Gewissen.
7) Wurden die Angelegenheiten der Halleschen Burschenschaft,
an sich, und in Verhältniß und Gegensatz der sogen. Sulphuria
verhandelt. Es wurde beschlossen, daß diejenigen, welche sich mit
ihrem Ehrenworte verpflichtet hatten, wegen der Unterdrückung der
dortigen Teutonia Halle zu verlassen, nachher aber diese
Verbindlichkeit nicht erfüllten, weil manche Gründe zu ihrer
Entschuldigung vorhanden waren, nicht streng nach den Buchstaben
des Gesetzes gerichtet werden sollten, sondern alle die von ihnen als
ehrliche und wehrliche Burschen anzuerkennen wären, deren
Entschuldigungsgründe von der Halleschen Burschenschaft als triftig
entweder schon anerkannt wären, oder noch würden, sie aber durch
eine von der sämmtlichen Versammlung des Abgeordneten zu
unterschreibende Urkunde ihrer Übereilung und ihres Leichtsinnes
wegen eine Rüge erhalten sollten. Hierdurch wurde zugleich die
Hallesche Burschenschaft, in welcher sich einige von den genannten
Burschen befanden, als rechtmäßig anerkannt.
A n m e r k u n g . K. aus Heidelberg bat zu bemerken, daß er
deswegen vorzüglich auf Anerkennung und Verweis gestimmt habe,
weil K. die Versicherung gegeben, daß ihm von einem ehemaligen
Teutonen gesagt sei, er habe an dem bekannten Abende einige
Hallesche Burschen blos zu einer b e d i n g t e n Unterschrift
aufgefordert. K. meinte daher, daß dieses von einem jeden gehört
sein könne, oder auch von denen, die es gehört hätten, verbreitet,
also die Präsumtion für Straflosigkeit sei, und ein Verweis genüge.
 Die Halleschen Sulpfuristen betreffend, wurde durch
Stimmenmehrheit ausgemacht, daß, da die von ihnen am meisten
Beleidigten um Milde für sie baten, ferner wohl zu wünschen stand,
daß auch in Halle wiederum ein kräftiges und einiges Burschenleben
sich gestalte und gedeihe, ihnen eine allgemeine Verzeihung und
Erlösung vom Banne gewährt werde, wenn sie folgende
Bedingungen eingehen würden:

a) Daß sie nach Namhaftmachung aller ihrer Mitglieder mit dem

Ehrenworte sich verbürgten, die unter ihnen bestehende
Verbindung aufzuheben.
b) Sich verpflichteten, die Hallesche Burschenschaft und ihren
Brauch anzuerkennen.
c) Sich gefallen lassen wollten, daß bei dem Wunsche einzelner,
von ihnen, in die Hallische Burschenschaft, oder in eine auf
andern Hochschulen bestehende Verbindung einzutreten,
über diese erst abgestimmt werde.

A n m e r k u n g a) K. von Heidelberg erklärte, daß er im Namen

seiner Burschenschaft den Verruf nicht eigentlich aufheben könne,
indem derselbe bisher von ihr noch nicht ausgesprochen sei, und
zwar aus dem Grunde, weil Heidelberg noch nicht im Cartel mit
Halle, beschlossen habe, die Sache selbst zu untersuchen. Er hebe
aber im Namen Heidelbergs den Vorbehalt der näheren
Untersuchung auf, und trete oben genannten Bestimmungen bei.
A n m e r k u n g b) Marburg stimmte obiger Meinung aus dem
besondern Grunde bei, daß diejenigen nicht namhaft gemacht
werden könnten, durch welche die Teutonia bei der Regierung
angeklagt sei.
A n m e r k u n g c) In Königsberg war die Acht über die Sulpfuria
nicht ausgesprochen, weil die Partheiungen in Halle dort nicht genug
bekannt geworden waren.
R. — Sprecher.
 W. — Schreiber.
Graf v. K. — für J e n a.
L. —
R. — } für K i e l.

F. D. —
L. L. — } für K ö n i g s b e r g.

C. F. L. —
D. E. — } für L e i p z i g.

E. B. — für M a r b u r g.
A. B. —
A. v. B. — } für B e r l i n.

T. v. K. — für H e i d e l b e r g.
F. S. —
D. — } für H a l l e.

W. W. — für R o s t o c k.
Folgen die Unterschriften.
 Protocoll,
gehal ten in der Versammlung der Abgeordneten
Morgens den 30. März.

1) Zu den für die Theilnehmer der Hallischen Sulpfuria zu

bestimmenden Puncten und Bedingungen wurde noch hinzu gefügt,
daß sie selbst jeden von ihnen, der die abgefaßte Schrift nicht
unterschreiben wolle, als Verrufenen anerkennen und gegen ihn
verfahren wollten, wie der Burschenbrauch der Hallischen
Burschenschaft bestimme.
2) Es erschienen die Bevollmächtigten der Hallischen Sulpfuria
und unterschrieben die verlangten Puncte, und es war also für ihre
Person der Bann aufgehoben.[6]
3) Ein aus Leipzig angekommener Brief wurde verlesen. Der
Seniorenconvent erklärte darin, daß man zur Förderung aller guten
Zwecke bereit sei, daß aber nach seiner Meinung eine allgemeine
Burschenschaft in Leipzig nicht leicht errichtet werden könne.
4) Es wurden die mündlichen und schriftlichen Klagepuncte des
ehemaligen Breslauer Burschen U. (jetzt in Berlin) gegen die Polen in
Breslau gehört, und beschlossen, er solle den Thatbestand schriftlich
aufsetzen, damit dann, nachdem auch jene gehört wären, in der
Sache ein Weiteres bestimmt werden könne.[7]
5) Nachdem auf diese Weise die auf Brauchssachen Bezug
habenden Angelegenheiten abgemacht waren, wurde zur
Besprechung über die Grundidee einer allgemeinen Deutschen
Burschenschaft geschritten. J., Abgeordneter von mehreren
Burschenschaften aus Berlin, die eine solche wünschten, erkannte,
auf Befragen den erwählten Sprecher und Schreiber an.
6) Es wurden von R. 19 Puncte als Grundlage zu einer
allgemeinen Burschenschaft verlesen, und über dieselben einzeln
abgestimmt. Leipzig begab sich seine Stimme, weil dort noch
Landsmannschaften beständen.
Punct 1.[8] wurde von allen Deutschen Hochschulen anerkannt.
Punct 2. gleichfalls anerkannt. K. behielt sich nähere Erläuterung
bei § 4. vor.
A n m e r k u n g . Es wurde bestimmt, daß eine Deutsche
Burschenschaft Ausländer unter sich aufnehmen k ö n n e, wenn sie
nur von ihnen überzeugt sei, daß sie dem Zwecke einer allgemeinen
Deutschen Burschenschaft nicht schädlich, sondern eher förderlich
sein würden, daß dieselben auch Ausländern eine eigene Verbindung
neben sich gestatten könne, wenn nur diese ihr untergeordnet
blieben, a l l e i n in Brauchssachen entscheidend stimmfähig sei,
jedoch so, daß die Deutsche Burschenschaft wenigstens immer ⅔
der Stimmen erhalte.
K. für Heidelberg erklärte, daß die Burschenschaft sich, wegen
der Zwistigkeiten und Vereine, die noch außer der Burschenschaft in
Heidelberg beständen, aller Rechte auf Renoncen und Nicht-
Burschenschaftsmitglieder enthalte, wenn sie nicht mit ihnen in
Collision käme.
Die Kieler Abgeordneten behielten der Entscheidung ihrer
Burschenschaft vor, ob der von ihr anerkannte Burschenbrauch in
allen seinen Beziehungen auch für die nicht Verbündeten
verpflichtend sein solle.
F. d. U.
 Protocoll,
Abends am 30. gehalten.

§. 1. K. wurde auf Verlangen sein Freund L. aus Heidelberg als

Rathgeber in schwierigen Fällen zugesellt.
§. 2. Weitere Berathung über die vorgeschlagenen Puncte:
§. 3. wurde allgemein anerkannt.
§. 4. wurde nach §. 2. eingeschränkt.
K. bezieht sich auf die gemachten Modificationen. V. B. und L.
erkannten dies und das nachfolgende nur in so weit an, als es sich
mit ihren Vollmachten vereinigen ließ.
§. 5. Hiebei wurde vor dem Worte öffentlich »wo möglich«
eingeschaltet.
Das Wort unauflöslich wurde weggelassen. D. erklärte es dahin,
daß er glaube, die Verbindung müsse geistig unauflöslich, auch fürs
bürgerliche Leben fortbestehen.
§. 6. beschränkt sich auf §. 2. Ob Nichtchristen aufzunehmen
seien, wurde der Entscheidung der einzelnen Burschenschaften
überlassen.
§. 7. wurde mit der Bemerkung angenommen, daß es jeder
Burschenschaft frei stehe zu bestimmen, ob nach der
Exmatrikulation jemand von ihr noch als Bursch anzusehen sei, oder
nicht. Die Königsberqer Abgeordneten behielten sich vor, daß die
darüber in ihrem Brauch enthaltenen nähern Bestimmungen in Kraft
bleiben sollten.
§. 8. 9. und 10. wurde angenommen.
§. 11. von den Meisten gebilligt.
Heidelberg stimmt in der Idee dem §. 11. alsdann bei, wenn
jeder ehrenhafte Bursch aufnahmsfähig ist. Die Verhältnisse selbst
haben die Realisirung dieser Idee dort noch nicht gestattet. — Kiel
bezog sich auf seine Anmerkung nach §. 2.
§. 12. angenommen. — Kiel erklärte, da bis her dort keine Wilden
gewesen seien, sei noch nicht bestimmt worden, in wie fern der
Burschenbrauch auch für Nichtverbündete gelte.
§. 13. angenommen.
§. 14. Hiebei verwiesen nur die Kieler auf das oben in dieser
Beziehung Gesagte.
F. d. U.
 Protocoll,
gehalten den 31. März.

1) Wurden die von U. abgefaßten Klagepuncte verlesen und

beschlossen, es solle in Breslau Aufhebung des Verrufes und
Rechtfertigung wegen des Überfalls verlangt, U. aber so lange ganz
schuldlos angesehen werden.
2) Wurde angezeigt, daß die Gießner geschrieben hätten, sie
wären verhindert worden Abgeordnete nach Jena zu senden, indem
der Senat allen solchen Relegationen angedroht habe.
3) Es wurde in der abgebrochenen Berathung wieder
fortgeschritten.
§. 15. angenommen.
§. 16. wurde folgendermaßen abgeändert. Es bleibt der
gesammten Deutschen Burschenschaft das Recht, die Verfassungen
der einzelnen Hochschulen, wo Burschenschaften sind, einzusehn
und zu beurtheilen, ob, und in wie fern sie der Grundidee
entsprechen, und bei etwanigen anstößigen dieselbe um Abstellung
derselben anzugehn.
§. 17. Hier wurde die Bestimmung hinzugefügt, daß wenn die
Casse einer, oder mehrerer Burschenschaften zu den Kosten der
Reise nicht hinreiche, eine allgemeine Casse nach Verhältniß des
Einkommens der Burschenschaften eingerichtet, und dadurch die
Reise erleichtert werden solle.
§. 18. Hier wurde Eisenach vorläufig als Versammlungsort
bestimmt.
§. 19. Es wurde hinzugefügt, daß bei den genannten
Berathungen ⅔ der Stimmen entscheiden sollten.
4) Der Vorschlag, alle Jahre am 18. Juni ein Fest zu feiern, wobei
man sich vorzüglich der Brüder an andern Orten in traulicher Liebe
erinnere, wurde gebilligt.
5) Die Abgeordneten der Leipziger Hochschule behielten sich vor,
daß, wenn bei ihnen gleichfalls eine allgemeine Burschenschaft zu
Stande gekommen wäre, auch ihr das hier den einzelnen
Hochschulen gegebenes Recht, den verlesenen Puncten
Anmerkungen hinzuzufügen, aufgehoben bleiben solle, und es wurde
dieß allgemein gebilligt.
F. d. U.
 Protocoll,
vom 1. April 1818.

1) L. aus Königsberg zeigte an, daß, da sein Mitabgeordneter D.

unwohl sei, er seine Stimme mit übernommen habe, D. sich aber
etwanige Bemerkungen noch vorbehalte.
2) B. für Marburg dankte den Jenaern für die Abfassung der 19
Puncte, bemühte sich darauf, auseinanderzusetzen, wodurch wir
etwa den darin aufgestellten Zweck erreichen möchten, wobei er vor
allen zur Erlangung wahrer vaterländischer Bildung, Streben nach
umfassender Kenntniß, Ehrenhaftigkeit, und Freiheit, aber was die
Burschenschaften auszeichnend unterscheiden solle, rücksichtslosen
Gemeingeist und möglichste Gleichheit der Rechte empfahl. Es
wurde von R. antwortend auf den 10. Punct verwiesen, wo schon
zum Theil darüber verhandelt sei. Nur wurde noch in Betreff der
Gleichheit vor dem Rechte folgendes Nähere verhandelt.
Es entstand:

a)[9] Die Frage, ob ein Fuchs zum Vorsteher erwählt werden

könne, welche im Allgemeinen verneint wurde.
b) Ob einem Fuchs Stimmrecht zuzuerkennen sei.

Die übrigen Hochschulen bejahten die Frage; Jena, Kiel,

Königsberg und Marburg aber, deren Bevollmächtigte noch nicht von
ihrer Verfassung abgehen konnten, behielten sich Berathung mit
ihren Burschenschaften vor. — Es wurde noch der Vorschlag
gemacht, ob nicht diejenigen Burschenschaften, welche Füchse
entweder nicht sogleich aufnehmen, oder denselben nach der
Aufnahme keine Stimmfähigkeit zuerkennen würden, allen den
Füchsen, welche einzutreten wünschten, Erlaubniß und Veranlassung
geben wollten, vor der Aufnahme eine gewisse Anzahl von
Versammlungen zu besuchen, damit auf der einen Seite dieselben
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com