The Globalization of

International Relations
CHAPTER ONE

International Relations
Goldstein and Pevehouse
Pearson Education, Inc.
© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse
 The Study of International
Relations
• International relations concerns peoples
and cultures throughout the world.
• Narrowly defined: The field of IR concerns
the relationships among the world’s
governments.
– Relationships cannot be understood in
isolation.
– Central trend in IR today: globalization

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

IR profoundly affects
GLOBALIZATIO
your life as well as that
of other citizens. INTERNATIONAL RELATIO
• September 11
AND DAILY LI
• Global economic
recession of 2008-2010
•Prospects for getting jobs
• Global economy
• International economic
competition
• Better transportation and
communication capabilities.
• Individuals can influence
the world.
•Choices we make in our
daily lives ultimately affect
the world we live in.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 Core Principles
• IR rotates around one key problem:
– How can a group – such as two or more nations –
serve its collective interests when doing so requires
its members to sacrifice their individual interests?
• Example: Problem of global warming. Solving it can only be
achieved by many countries acting together.
– Collective goods problem
• The problem of how to provide something that benefits all
members of a group regardless of what each member
contributes to it

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 Core Principles
• In general, collective goods are easier to provide
in small groups than large ones.
– Small group: defection (free riding) is harder to
conceal and has a greater impact on the overall
collective good, and is easier to punish.
• Collective goods problem occurs in all groups
and societies
– Particularly serious in international affairs
• No central authority such as a world government to enforce
on individual nations the necessary measures to provide for
the common good

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 Core Principles
• Three basic principles offer possible
solutions for this core problem of getting
individuals to cooperate for the common
good without a central authority to make
them do so.
– DOMINANCE
– RECIPROCITY
– IDENTITY

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 Dominance
• Solves the collective goods problem by establishing a
power hierarchy in which those at the top control those
below
– Fight over scarce resources and Status hierarchy
• Representative acts of suggestion and dominance strengthen the
hierarchy.
• Hegemon/superpower
• The advantage of the dominance solution
– Forces members of a group to contribute to the common good
– Minimizes open conflict within the group
• Disadvantage of the dominance solution
– Stability comes at a cost of constant oppression of, and
resentment by, the lower-ranking members of the status
hierarchy.
– Conflicts over position can sometimes harm the group’s stability
and well-being.
© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse
 Reciprocity
• Solves the collective goods problem by
rewarding behavior that contributes to the group
and punishing behavior that chases self-interest
at the cost of the group
– Easy to understand and can be “enforced” without
any central authority
– Positive and negative reciprocity
– Disadvantage: It can lead to a downward spiral as
each side punishes what it believes to be the negative
acts of the other.
• Generally people overemphasize their own good intentions
and underestimate those of opponents or rivals.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 Identity
• Identity principle does not rely on self-interest.
• Members of an identity community care about
the interests of others in the community enough
to sacrifice their own interests to benefit others.
– Family, extended family, kinship group roots
• In IR, identity communities play important roles
in overcoming difficult collective goods
problems.
– Nonstate (non governmental organization, terrorist
networks) actors also rely on identity politics.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

Table 1.1

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 IR as a Field of Study
• Practical discipline
• Theoretical debates are fundamental, but unresolved.
• IR is about international politics, but the field is
interdisciplinary: relates to economics, history, sociology,
and others
– Usually taught within political science classes
– Domestic politics of foreign countries, although overlapping with
IR, generally make up the separate field of comparative politics.
• Issue areas: global trade, the environment, etc.
• Conflict and cooperation mix in relationships among
nations
• Subfields
– International security studies
– International political economy (IPE)

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 Actors and Influences
• Principal actors in IR are the world’s
governments.
• IR scholars traditionally study the decisions and
actions of those governments, in relation to
other governments.
• Individual actors: Leaders and citizens,
bureaucratic agencies in foreign ministries,
multinational corporations, and terrorist groups

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 State Actors
• Most important actors in IR are states.
• State: A territorial entity controlled by a
government and populated by a
population.
– State government exercises sovereignty over
its territory.
– Recognized as sovereign by other states
– Population forms a civil society; group identity
– Seat of government with a leader – head of
government or head of state
© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse
 State Actors
• The international system:
– Set of relationships among the world’s states, structured
according to certain rules and patterns of interaction.
– Modern international system has existed for less than 500 years.
– Nation-states-large states who share a sense of national identity.
– Major source of conflict: Frequent mismatch between perceived
nations and actual borders.
– Populations vary dramatically.
– Great variation in terms of the size of states’ total annual
economic activity
• Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
– Great powers
• Most powerful of these states are called superpowers. Having great
military and economic strength.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

Figure 1.1

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 State Actors
• Not formally recognized • Including various such
as states territorial entities with
– Taiwan: operates states brings the world
independently but claimed total to about 200 state or
by China quasi-state actors.
– Formal colonies and
possessions: Puerto Rico
• Other would-be states:
(U.S), Bermuda (British), – Kurdistan (Iraq), Abkhazia
Martinique (French), (Georgia), and Somaliland
French Guiana, the (Somalia) may fully control
Netherlands Antilles the territory they claim but
(Dutch), the Falkland are not internationally
Islands (British), and Guam recognized
(U.S.)
– Hong Kong (returned from
British to Chinese rule)
– The Vatican (Holy See) –
ambiguous status
© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse
 Nonstate Actors
• State actors are strongly influenced
by a variety of nonstate actors.
– Called transnational actors when they
operate across international borders
• Intergovernmental organizations
(IGOs)
– Examples: OPEC, WTO, African
Union, UN
– Vary in size from a few states to the
whole UN membership
NGO, House of Peace
• Nongovernmental organizations
(NGOs)
– Private organizations; no single
pattern
– Examples: Amnesty International, Red
Cross
© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse
 Nonstate Actors
• Multinational corporations
– Companies that extent multiple countries
• Substate actors
– Exist within one country but either influence that
country’s foreign policy or operate internationally, or
both
– Example: State of Ohio (entirely a U.S. entity)
operates an International Trade Division

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

Table 1.2

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 Levels of Analysis
• Many actors involved in IR
– Leads to complexity of competing explanations and theories
• Response: IR scholars sorted out the influences, actors,
and processes, and categorize them into different levels
of analysis
– Perspective on IR based on a set of similar actors or processes
that suggests possible explanations to “why” questions
– Individual, domestic (state or societal), interstate, global
levels of analysis
• Example of applying different levels of analysis
– War in Iraq
• No correct level for a given “why” question.
• Levels of analysis help suggest multiple explanations
and approaches to consider in trying to explain an event.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

Table 1.3

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 Globalization
• Globalization: Three conceptions of/schools of thought
on this process compete.
1. Globalization as the fruition of liberal economic principles/global
marketplace
2. Perspective characterized by skepticism: World’s major
economies are more integrated today than before WWI. North-
South divide increasing with globalization; distinct and rival
regional blocs; fragmenting of larger units into smaller ones
3. Globalization as more profound than the skeptics believe, yet
more uncertain than the view of supporters of liberal
economics.
• Globalization is changing both international security and
IPE, but IPE more quickly and profoundly.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 Global Geography
• World regions – geographical
distinction/divisions of the world
• Global North-South gap
– Between the relatively rich industrialized countries of
the North and the relatively poor countries of the
South is the most important geographical element in
the global level of analysis.
• East Asia: China, Japan, and Korea
• Southeast Asia: Countries from Burma through
Indonesia and the Philippines.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 Global Geography
• Russia is considered a European state.
• The Pacific Rim: East and Southeast Asia,
Siberia, and the Pacific coast of North America
and Latin America
• South Asia only sometimes includes parts of
Southeast Asia.
• Narrow definitions of the Middle East exclude
both North Africa and Turkey.
• The Balkans are the states of southeastern
Europe, bounded by Slovenia, Romania, and
Greece.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

Figure 1.2

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

Table 1.5

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Evolving International
System
• The basic structures and
principles of international relations
are deeply rooted in historical
developments.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Two World Wars, 1900-
1950
• Occupied only ten years of the 20th century, but shaped
the character of the century.
– WWI: Tragic irrationality of war; century of peace and suddenly a
catastrophic war that seemed unnecessary, even accidental
• Prior major war: Franco-Prussian War of 1870-1871
– Germany clear winner; railroad borne offensive and rapid victory
• WWI was not short or decisive
– Trench warfare along a fixed front
– Russia first state to crumble; revolution at home
– Entry of U.S. on the anti-German side in 1917 quickly turned the
war
• Treaty of Versailles of 1919
• German resentment against the harsh terms of the treaty would
contribute to Hitler’s rise to power in the 1930s.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Two World Wars, 1900-
1950
• Would lead to the League of Nations
– Senate did not approve U.S. participation
– League did not prove effective
• U.S. isolationism between WWI and WWII,
declining British power, and a Russia crippled by
its own revolution left a power vacuum in the
world.
• In the 1930s, Germany and Japan stepped into
the vacuum
– Aggressive expansionism
– Led to WWII

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Two World Wars, 1900-
1950
• In Europe, Nazi Germany re-armed, intervened
to help fascists win the Spanish Civil War,
grabbed territory from its neighbors
– Weak response from the international community and
the League of Nations to fascist regimes in Italy and
Spain emboldened Hitler
– Munich Agreement of 1938
• Appeasement has since had a negative connotation in IR.
• 1939 – Hitler invaded Poland, leading Britain
and France to join the war against Germany
– Hitler signed a nonagression pact with his archenemy
Stalin (Soviet Union) and then invaded France.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Two World Wars, 1900-
1950
• Hitler double-crossed Stalin; invaded the Soviet
Union in 1941
– Soviet Union took the brunt of the German attack and
suffered the greatest share of the 60 million deaths
caused by WWII.
• U.S. joined WWII in 1942
– Important supplier of weapons and supplies for allied
armies
– Important role with Britain in bombing of German
cities, including Dresden (100,000 civilian deaths)
– 1944 British-American forces pushed into Germany
from the west while the Soviets pushed from the east.
– Ruined Germany surrendered and was occupied by
the allied powers.
© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse
 The Two World Wars, 1900-
1950
• During this time, Japan fought a war to control
Southeast Asia against the U.S. and its allies.
– U.S. cut off its oil exports to Japan in retaliation for
Japan’s expansionism.
– Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and destroyed much of
the U.S. navy.
– Hiroshima and Nagasaki
– Japan’s surrender

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Two World Wars, 1900-
1950
• Lessons of the two world wars seem
contradictory:
– Failure of the Munich Agreement in 1938 to appease
Hitler used to support hard-line foreign policy –
deterrence
– BUT in 1914 it was just such hard-line policies that led
Europe to WWI, which might have been avoided with
appeasement.
• IR scholars have not discovered a simple
formula for choosing the best policy to avoid
war.

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Cold War, 1945-1990
• U.S. and Soviet Union – two superpowers of the
post-WWII era
– Each had its ideological mission (capitalist democracy
versus communism).
– Each had network of alliances and clients and a
deadly arsenal of weapons.
• Stable framework of relations emerged.
• Central concern of the West: that the Soviet
Union might gain control of western Europe
– Marshall Plan
– Containment
• Sino-Soviet alliance

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Cold War, 1945-1990
• Sino-Soviet split when China opposed Soviet
moves toward peaceful coexistence with the
U.S.
– Cultural Revolution
• Korean War
• Cuban Missile Crisis
• Use of Proxy wars
• U.S. policy in the Cold War
– Flaw: Seeing all regional conflicts through East-West
lenses
• Vietnam War

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Cold War, 1945-1990
• Afghanistan
• 1970s strategic parity between U.S. and Soviet
Union
• Pro-democracy movement in China
• Perestroika
• Break-up of the Soviet Union
• Scholars do not agree on the important question
of why the Cold War ended.
– U.S. military strength under Reagan forced the Soviet
Union into bankruptcy.
– Soviet Union suffered from internal stagnation over
decades and imploded.
© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse
 The Post-Cold War Era, 1990-
2009
• Iraq invades Kuwait, 1990
– Gulf War
• Collapse of Soviet Union
– Declaration of republics as sovereign states
– Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)
• Only three small Baltic states are nonmembers

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Post-Cold War Era, 1990-
2009
• Western relations with Russia mixed since the
1990s
– Little external aid for Russia during the harsh
economic transition
– Chechnya
– Russian nationalism
– Japan and Russia lingering, mostly symbolic,
territorial dispute
• Break-up of the former Yugoslavia
– Bosnia crisis
– Serbia and Kosovo- ethnic cleansing
• Somalia

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Post-Cold War Era, 1990-
2009
• Rwanda
• Haiti
• New rifts between the U.S. and both China and Europe
– Signal of a realignment against U.S. predominance in world
affairs?
– Kyoto treaty and other developments
• September 11 attack on the World Trade Center in New
York
• War on Terrorism
– Afghanistan’s Taliban
– Iraq and Saddam Hussein

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

 The Post-Cold War Era, 1990-
2009
• North Korea
• Post-Cold War more peaceful than the
Cold War
• Warfare is diminishing
• Globalization
– Some backlash; resurgence of nationalism
and ethnic-religious conflict
– Concerns about environmental degradation
and disease

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse

The Post-Cold War Era, 1990-2009
• China becoming more central to world politics
– Size and rapid growth
– Only great power that is not a democracy
– Holds but seldom uses veto power in the UN Security
Council
– Has a credible nuclear arsenal
– What will happen in terms of China’s position in the
international system?
– 2008 Olympics in China
– Communist ideology losing hold on young in China

© 2010 Joshua S. Goldstein and Jon C. Pevehouse