COLLEGE OF LAW AND

GOVERNANCE

DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNANCE AND DEVELOPMENT

STUDIES

COMMON COURSE DIVISION FOR FRESHMAN STUDENTS

COURSE TITLE: GLOBAL TRENDS

COURSE CODE: GLTR 3223

Instructor: Amanuel seifu

 CHAPTER ONE
UNDERSTANDING INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
1.1. Conceptualizing Nationalism, Nation and State

• Nations are historical entities that evolve originally out of more similar ethnic

communities and they reveal themselves in myths, legends, and songs.

• Nationalism is an idea and movement that promotes the interests of a particular

nation (as in a group of people), especially with the aim of gaining and maintaining

the nation's sovereignty (self-governance) over its homeland. It also encourages pride

in national achievements and is closely linked to patriotism.

• State is a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under

one government.
 Nationalism, nations and states cont’d…

• On the other hand, at the end of the eighteenth century this state came to be

radically transformed. The state‘ was combined with a nation‘ forming a

compound noun – the nation-state‘ – which was organized differently and pursued

different goals.

• A nation, in contrast to a state, constitutes a community of people joined by a

shared identity and by common social practices.

• The revolutions that took place in Britain‘s North American

colonies in 1776, and in France in 1789, provided models for

other nationalists to follow. ‘We the People of the United

States‘ – the first words of the Preamble to the US

Constitution – was a phrase which itself would have been

literally unthinkable in an earlier era.

• In the revolution of 1789, the old regime was overthrown and

with it the entire social order.

 Understanding of International Relations

1.2 What is International Relations?

International Relations is comprehensive, broad and multidisciplinary concept.

Inter-national
 Inter- ♠ refers to something between and among.
♠ having to do/inter with one or more than one.
 National ♠ refers to sovereign state/country.

♠ the actors are mainly states.

Inter-national refers to the interaction and communication between countries regardless of

national boundaries.
Definition of International Relations
Originally, the study of international relations (a term first used by Jeremy

Bentham in 1798)

• International Relation [IR] is the study and practice of political, social

and economic relationships among the world’s nations, especially

between and among national governments which can be bi-lateral and

multi-lateral relations.

• International relations may also refer to the interactions between Non-

Governmental Groups, such as Multinational Corporations (MNC)

(companies that operate in more than one country) or International

Organizations(IO) such as the Red Cross or the United Nations (UN).

Today, international relations could be used to describe a

range of interactions between people, groups, firms, associations,

parties, nations or states or between these and (non)

governmental international organizations.

 Understanding IR cont’d…
Scholars and practitioners in international relations use concepts and theories to make

their study more manageable.


Hobbes, interpreted the state of society to be: continual fear, and danger of violent

death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.


The concepts articulated by Hobbes still reverberate in many modern fundamental

assumptions about the nature of the system and of human beings.


Whereas, Locke took a more optimistic view and suggested that sociability was the

strongest bond between men were equal, sociable and free.

 1.2 Why International Relations Was
Needed?

• Why International Relations was

Needed ?
• Is there self-sufficient State?
 1.2 Why International Relations Was Needed ?
 Sovereign States need to have IRs:-

 because there is no single State that is self-sufficient and that can exist independently without

establishing relationship with other States.

 the existence of gaps in political, economic, social, security, environmental areas at home is the

characteristics of all countries

 Hence, States need to have relations among each other in the international arena so that they can

fulfill their gaps/needs by understanding, analyzing, explaining events beyond national

boundaries.

 MNC, NGOs, movements , global opinion leaders , help them play their part/ role in global

community or in international system.

 Help to tackle global problems such as climate change, terrorism, migrations/ refuge, hunger

and poverty, natural disaster, human rights etc.

 NB:- domestic gaps and needs are basis of IR

 1.3.The Nature and Evolution of International Relations

 The study of International Relations as a discipline is an ancient, example the history of

wars of the Greek city-states, the relations of Italian city-states and the ties of tribute
states to the Chinese Empire.

 But political science specializing in the subject of International Relations appeared in the

United States with the advent of the First World War (1914-1918) and the formation of
the League of Nations (1919).
• At the aftermath of the WWI, a new academic discipline was thought essential to understand
and prevent international conflicts, disputes as well as wars in the world.
 Read about WWI
For many historians, the intellectual question which
eclipsed all others and monopolized their interest was
the puzzle( unable to understand) of how and why
the WWI began.
 1.3.1 Historical Evolution of the International System

 International system is a dominant set of ideas, power

structure, economic patterns, and rules that shape the

domestic politics in a particular and international
relations of more countries in more places in a particular
historical era.

 The history of IRs is often traced back to the Peace of

Westphalia of 1648, where the modern state system

was developed.
 Before Westphalia, the European medieval
organization of political authorities were based on a
vaguely hierarchical religious order, governments
were not secular.

 On October 24th 1648, the Treaty of Westphalia was

signed, marking the end of the Thirty Years' War
between Catholic and Protestant believers/followers.
The Thirty Years‘ War, 1618–1648, was the bloodiest

and most protracted military confrontation of the era.

The war concerned which state should have hegemony

(or dominance) over Europe.

The treaty of Westphalia, 1648, which concluded the

30 years of warfare, has come to symbolize the new

way of organizing international politics.

International politics was a matter of relations between

states and no other political units.

All states were sovereign, meaning that they laid

claims to the exclusive right to rule their own

territories and to act.

All states were formally equal and they had the

same rights and obligations.

 Actors in international relation

Who are the major the actors of international

Relations?
• The participants in international relations, often called actors.

• Actors have a great influence on the relationships between nations

and on world affairs.

There are two major actors in international relations:

1.state and

2.non-state actors
 State actors in IR cont’d…
1. State actors

International Relations (IR) traditionally focused on interactions between states.


However, this conventional view has been broadened over the years to include relationships between all

sorts of political entities (polities).


It includes international organizations, multinational corporations, societies and citizens.


There are a lot of states in the world – in fact, according to the latest count there are no

fewer than 195 of them.


States are obviously very different from each other, but they are also similar to each other

in important respects.
 State actors in IR cont’d…


They act in relation to other states, declaring war, concluding a peace,

negotiating a treaty, and many other things.


The states are the leading actors in international politics.

In relation to the primacy of the state, international politics come to be

defined in terms of interactions between states in an international system of

states.


These are sovereign entities, territorially bound and independent ultimately of

any external authority.

 2. Non-state Actors
• Non-state actors are also called transnational actors

1.Intergovernmental organizations (IGOs)

 It is an institution with membership drawn from two or more countries.

 Organizations whose members are national governments

 Fulfill a variety of functions and vary in size from just a few states to virtually the whole UN membership

2. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)

 International NGOs are essentially nonprofit private organizations that engage in a variety of international

activities (e.g. Amnesty International, International Committee for Red Cross, ..etc.).
3. Multinational corporations (MNCs)
Multinational corporations (MNCs) contribute significantly to

international relations.

It is a corporation or enterprise that expends ownership,

management, production and sales activities in to several

countries. It is a business enterprise that engages in Foreign

Direct Investments (FDI) and that owns or controls value added

activities in more than one country.

 Levels of Analysis in International Relations

• International phenomena are analyzed as

occurring on several levels of human activity.

1.The individual level

2. The group level

3.The state level

4.The system level

 1.The individual level
International relations can be analyzed from the perspective of individuals.

• This is a focus on perception, misperception, and communication of

individuals.

• Individual level of analysis focuses on the characteristics of

individuals who make decisions.

• People make decisions within nation states and therefore people make

foreign policy.


The particular mindsets and perceptions of political leaders and key actors

might influence their decisions and behavior.

 2. The group level

A group level analysis would try and break the analysis down into

certain kinds of groups; how they relate to the state level and where

they position themselves with respect to the global dimension of the

issues they are dealing with.

A group-level analysis focusing on foreign policy would

look, for example, at the role of lobbying groups and the way they

influence national decision making on an issue .

 3.The state level
The IR literature, the main focus remains on the state as the dominant unit of analysis.

 This enduring focus on the state, and therefore, on the state level of analysis is

referred to as the relative state-centrism of the discipline.

 From this perspective, the state acts as the arena in

which state officials, politicians and decision-makers operate.

 The state is seen as the framework that encapsulates society and as the

main point of reference for the individual.

 The state is being the main location of power within the international

sphere.
 4.The system level

This level focuses on the international system.

• System level analysis examines state behavior by looking at the international system. In this level of analysis, the international system is the

cause and state behavior is the effect.

• Characteristics of the international system cause states to behave the way they do and help determine the pattern of interaction among the

actors in social, economic and political.

• Change in the international system will cause change in state behavior, can be either global or regional in span.


It consider the global system as the structure or context within which states cooperate, compete and confront each other over
issues of national interest.
Taking international scenarios to analyze international relation.
Particularly important in that context is:
 The distribution of power amongst states, meaning, whether there is:
i. one main concentration of power (uni-polarity),
ii. two (bipolarity) or
iii. several (multi-polarity).
Global circumstances are seen to condition the ability and opportunity of individual states and groups of states to pursue their
• System level analysis adopted essentially a “top-
down” approach to study international relations.
• For example issues of Interdependence,
(Globalization), North-South gap, international
organization etc.
 The structure of international system

 International Relations scholars maintain that political power is

usually distributed into three main types of systems namely:

(i) uni-polar system,

(ii) bipolar system and,

(iii) multipolar system.


These three different systems reflect the number of powerful states

competing for power and their hierarchical relationship.

1. Uni-polar international system

 There is one state with the greatest political, economic,

cultural and military power and hence the ability to totally

control other states.

 In both bipolar and multipolar systems there is no one

single state with a preponderant power and hence ability to

control other states.

 Structure of IR cont’d…
2. Bipolar system

There are two dominant states (super powers) and the less

powerful states join either sides through alliance and counter

alliance formations.


It is vulnerable for zero-sum game politics because when

one superpower gains the other would inevitably lose.

One typical historical example where the world was under

bipolar system is the cold war period.

3. Multipolar system
 It is the most common throughout history.

 During the period around World War I, it was a typical world

system.

 It usually reflects various equally powerful states competing

for power.

 In such system, it is possible to bring change without gaining

or losing power.
 Structure of IR cont’d…
Power
 Power is the currency of international politics.

As money is for economics, power is for

international relations (politics).

In the international system, power determines the

relative influence of actors and it shapes the

structure of the international system.

Hans Morgenthau, a famous thinker of realism theory in IR,

argues that International politics, like all other politics, is a

struggle for power.

 It thus follows from this that power is the blood line of

international relations.

 Power can be defined in terms of both relations and material

(capability) aspects.
 Anarchy

Anarchy is a situation where there is absence of authority

(government) be it in national or international/global level

systems.


Within a country anarchy‘ refers to a breakdown of law and

order,


In relations between states it refers to a system where power is

decentralized and there are no shared institutions with the right to

enforce common rules.

Sovereignty
 Sovereignty is another basic concept in international
relations and it can be defined as an expression of:
I. A state‘s ultimate authority within its territorial entity
(internal sovereignty) and,
II. The state‘s involvement in the international community
(external sovereignty).
 In short, sovereignty denotes double claim of states
from the international system, i.e.,
*Autonomy in foreign policy and
*Independence/freedom in its domestic affairs.
 Theories of International Relations

 A theory of IRs is a set of ideas that explains how the

international system works.
1.Idealism/Liberalism
 Liberalism in IR was referred to as a utopian theory and is still
recognized as such to some degree today.
 This is because, its proponents view human beings as innately
good and believe peace and harmony between nations is not only
achievable, but desirable.
 Idealism/liberalism cont’d…

Believes in democratic peace theory, states that shared liberal values should

have no reason for going to war against one another or democracies do not go to

war with each other (Immanuel Kant). From 1919 - 1930s, the discipline was

dominated liberal internationalism.

The primary concern of this approach academic study of IRs had the potential

to contribute to the prevention of war and the establishment of peace.

Believes the prospects for the elimination of war lay with:

i. a preference for democracy over aristocracy

ii. free trade over autarky (economic self sufficiency)

iii. collective security over the balance of power system (Burchill, 1996).
 Idealism/liberalism cont’d…

 The creation of the League of Nations after the end of the

First World War was the culmination of the liberal ideal of IRs.
 Liberals also argue that international law offers a
mechanism by which cooperation among states is made
possible.
There are three competing views on this matter.

1. Some scholars say international law is not a law at all but a branch of
international morality.
2. IL is a law in all senses of the term.
3. It is a matter of definition.
 Theories of IR cont’d…
2. Realism
 Realism gained momentum during the Second World War

 International system is anarchic.

 Believe conflict is unavoidable and continuous and so war is

common and inherent to humankind.
 ‘All politics is a struggle for power’’.

 View that politics is primarily about domination as opposed to

cooperation between states.
 State need to maximize their security and chances of survival.
Focus of analysis Realism cont’d…
Liberalist Realist

Human nature Innately good and Act in their own self-

believe in peace interests and selfish.

Cessation of war is Conflict is unavoidable

War an attainable goal. and war is common and
inherent to humankind.

Magnifies areas of Magnifies instances of

World lens cooperation war and conflict.
Focus of Liberalist
Realism cont’d… Realist
analysis
Optimistic view (world Pessimistic view (war
IR View order can be improved, with and conflict is common
peace and gradually and peace are achieved
replacing war). when states are
preparing for future
conflict).
State and non state actors but
Major state is ultimate power State.
actor holder.
Assisting states in States partake in IO’s
IO’s formulating decisions and only when it is in their
helping to formalize self-interest to do so.
cooperation.
 3.Structuralism/Marxism

• Argues that a capitalist society is divided into two

contradictory classes –
– the business class (the bourgeoisie) and the working
class (the proletariat).

• They believe that economic structure determines politics

• The conduct of world politics is based on the way that the
world is organized economically
• They contend that the world is divided b/n
• “Haves” (Economically Developed Countries)
• “Have not” (Least developed Countries/ weak/poor)

• To change this, structuralisms form a radical

restructuring of economic system
• They suggest the design to end uneven distribution of
wealth and power
 4.Constructivism
 It’s a middle ground theory between mainstream and the
critical theories

 Argues that international system is created by a set of ideas,

a body of thought, a system of norms, which has been arranged
by certain people at a particular time and place.

 Argues that ideas, or norms have a power international system.

 Believes anarchy is what states make of it b/c IR exists in

the interactions between individuals or agents on the global
stage.
 5. Critical theories
This theories established in response to mainstream theories mainly

liberalism and realism.

 They oppose commonly held assumptions in the field of IR.

 Call for new approaches to understand the world we find ourselves in.

 They identify positions that have typically been ignored or overlooked

within IR.

 Provide a voice to individuals who have frequently been

marginalized example women and Global South.

 Critical theorists (Marxist angle) argue legitimacy of the state must be

questioned and ultimately dissolved.

• Generally;

 Liberalism depicts optimism by arguing that human beings are

good, cooperation is possible and conflict can be resolved peacefully

 Realism depicts pessimism by arguing that human beings are

bad, conflict is inevitable and war is the most prominent instrument of
resolving conflict

 Structuralism/Marxism focused on the structure of dependency

and exploitation caused by the international division of labor

 Constructivism/Critical Theories challenge the foundations of

the dominant perspectives and argue for the marginalized and the
voiceless