IIR Prelim Compilation

UNIVERSITY OF SAINT LOUIS
Tuguegarao City
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION, ARTS and SCIENCES

Second Semester
A.Y. 2021-2022
CORRESPONDENCE LEARNING MODULE

POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations
Prepared by:
KATHERINE GRACE ANN FERNANDO REYNANTE

Course Instructor
Revised by:
MARISOL U. BANGANAY
Course Instructor
Reviewed by:
RENZ MARION C. GAVINO, MP

General Education Area Head
Recommended by:
VENUS I. GUYOS, Ph.D.

Academic Dean
Approved by:
EMMANUEL JAMES P. PATTAGUAN, Ph.D.

Vice President for Academics

UNIVERSITY PRAYER
O God, wellspring of goodness and blessings, we give you thanks and praise as one Louisian community. The
graces You incessantly grant upon us and Your divine providence have sustained our beloved University
throughout the years of mission and excellence.
Having been founded by the Congregation of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, we pray that You keep us
committed and dedicated to our mission and identity to serve the Church and the society as we become living
witnesses to the Gospel values proclaimed by Jesus. For if we are steadfast in our good and beautiful mission,
our works will bring success not only to ourselves but also to those whom we are bound to love and serve.
Inspired by St. Louis our Patron Saint, who was filled with a noble spirit that stirred him to love You above all
things , may we also live believing that we are born for a greater purpose and mission as we dwell in Your
presence all the days of our life.
Grant all these supplications through the intercession of

Mother Mary and through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Tuguegarao City
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION, ARTS & SCIENCES

Department of Social Sciences
S.Y. 2021-2022
USL Vision-Mission
University of Saint Louis is a Catholic institution of higher learning. The CICM-RP Province as one effective
means of evangelization to be fully integrated with the church’s educational vision founded it. It is, therefore
essential that USL must address to the apostolic commitment and priorities of the RP-CICM province in its
educational apostolate.
 VISION
USL is a global learning community recognized for science and technology across all disciplines, strong
research, and responsive community engagement grounded on the CICM mission and identity for a distinctive
student experience.
 MISSION
USL sustains a Catholic academic community that nurtures persons for community, church and society
anchored on CICM’s Missio et Excellentia.
 EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY AND CORE VALUES
The University of Saint Louis upholds the philosophy that education is for building of self and persons for the
Church and the Society. Wisdom builds. To these ends, the following are University of Saint Louis’s core
values integral in the formation of every member of the Louisian community.
a. Christian Living. We are witnesses to the Gospel values as taught and lived by Christ thus
making God’s love known and experienced by all.
b. Excellence. We seek and maintain uncompromising standard of quality in teaching, learning,

service, and stewardship of school resources.
c. Professional Responsibility. We are committed to efficiently and responsibly apply the

learned principles, values and skills in the chosen field of discipline, taking initiative and command
responsibility in one’s professional advancement.
d. Social Awareness and Involvement. We engage ourselves with society by listening to the
prevailing issues and concerns in the society, thereby initiating and participating in constructive and
relevant social activities for the promotion of justice, peace and integrity of creation and for people’s
wellness and development consistent with the CICM charism.

e. Innovation, Creativity and Agility. We keep ourselves relevant and responsive to the
changing needs of our stakeholders by being flexible, solution oriented, and having cutting-edge
decisions and practices.
Course Information and Outline in POLS 1103
DESCRIPTIVE TITLE Introduction to International Relations

CREDIT UNITS: 3 units (Lecture 54 hours)
PRE-REQUISITE/S POLS 1013
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
This course will examine such concepts of the international system and determine whether or not a
bipolar or multipolar system is more conducive to peace and stability. It will also focus on the realist
and idealist approaches to world politics. This course will discuss the different instruments of
international relations. A discussion of the concept of the balance of power and its relationship to the
causes of war is also included. It will analyze various theories of the international political economy.
The course will conclude with a discussion of various scenarios for world society in the twenty-first
century.
COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES
COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES
After completion of the course, the students should be able to:
CLO 1: think theoretically about the basic principles and concepts of international relations
CLO 2: recognize that no single variable may cause an international event to occur CLO 3: demonstrate and
explain the multi-causal factors of international events CLO 4: apply the level of analysis approach to
international relations
CLO 5: analyze international events using the multi-causal approach
CLO 6: appraise the efforts of states and non-state institutions in the preservation of international cooperation.
COURSE OUTLINE:
I. Vision- Mission of USL
A.Classroom Policies
B.Overview of the course expectations

II. Understanding International Relations
III.Historical Setting of International Relations
IV.Actors in the International System
V. Theories on International Relations
VI.International System
VII.Instruments of International Relations
VIII.War & Strife
IX.Penetration Operations: Intelligence, Covert Acts & Propaganda
X.International Political Economy
XI. Struggle for World Order
XII. Sharing a planet and planetary experiences
XIII.Global Governance
XIV.Global Issues
REFERENCES:
Textbook:
Mingst, K. (2003). Essentials of International Relations.
Books:
Daddow, O. (2017). International Relations Theory. SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte Ltd.
Cassese, A. (2016). International law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Graham, G. (2008). Ethics and international relations. 2nd ed., Rev. and updated. Malden, MA :Blackwell.
Goldstein, J. (2002). International relations. Brief. New York: Longman.
Rourke, J. (2017). Taking sides : Clashing views on controversial issues in world politics. 11th. Iowa:
McGraw-Hill.
Rourke, J. (2015). International politics on the world stage. 9th. Sluice Dock, Guilford, Connecticut:
Dushkin.
Colaresi, M. (2007). Strategic Rivalries in World Politics: Position, Space and Conflict Escalation.
Daddow, O. (2018). International Relations Theory.
Kegley, Jr. & Charles W. (2009). World Politics: Trend and Transformation.
Mansbach, R. (2012). Introduction to Global Politics.
Babor, E. (2001). Logic. Manila C & E Publishing Inc., Philippines.

Henderson, C. (1998). International Relations, Conflict and Cooperation at the turn of the 21st Century,
McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.
Morales, N. (1995). Philippine Diplomacy: Meeting the Challenge of Development.
Salamanca, B. (1995). Toward A Diplomatic History of the Philippines
Online References:
Bernas, J. SJ. (1996). The 1987 constitution of the republic of the philippines.
www.gov.ph/aboutphil/constitution.asp. Date Retrieved: October 24, 2007.
Rourke, J. International politics on the world stage. From: www.goodreads.com/.../6949525.John_Rourke.

Retrieved: November 2013.
Mingst, K. Essentials of international relations. From: www.goodreads.com/.../8948755.Karen_Mingst.
Retrieved: November 2013.
Journals/Periodicals: (Philippine Political Science Journals)
Buendia, R. (2011). Multinational states in asia: Accommodation or resistance edited by Jacques

Piertrand and Audre Laliberte. Philippine Political Science Journal, Volume 32, No. 55 series of 2011
Montiel, c. & De Guzman, J. (2011). Social representation of a controversial peace agreement: Subjective
public meaning of the GRP_MILF moa. Philippine Political Science Journal, Volume 32, No. 55 series of
2011
Panao, A. (2011). State politics and nationalism beyond borders: Changing dynamics in filipino overseas
migration edited by Jorge V. Tigno. Philippine Political Science Journal, Volume 32, No. 55 series of 2011
Berkeley School of Law, University of California. (2013). United states labor law. Berkeley Journal of
Employment and Labor Law.

School of Education, Arts and Sciences
Department of Social Sciences
Curriculum 2020-2021

GENERAL INTRODUCTION:
WELCOME TO THE SECOND SEMESTER, SCHOOL YEAR 2021-2022! You are enrolled in the
Correspondence Learning Modality. I am Miss Marisol U. Banganay, your instructor in Introduction to
International Relations. Should you have further concerns regarding the course, please feel free to contact
me as I am ready to accommodate your queries. You may call me Ma’am Sol, and I wish to have a fruitful
encounter with you.
Stay Connected
For queries, please feel free to contact me through the following:

 Facebook account/ name: Sol Banganay
 E-mail : marisolbanganay22@gmail.com
Get Involved. USL expects you to do the following:
 Let your parents pick up your module on the first day of the week.
 Send back your accomplished lessons/learning tasks as your parent will pick up the next.
 Contact me for any query that you want to make about your lessons or procedures in school.
 Comply with all requirements (written outputs, projects/performance tasks examinations and the like.)
Remember:
 Individual work and required learning tasks must be done properly.

 Do not copy articles from the Net. Any plagiarized material will be automatically marked zero. (this
includes copy paste from internet and from your classmates)
 If you need to quote, you have to mention the author and properly cite your source. As a Louisian, we
uphold honesty and integrity in our work.
Academic Intellectual Property Rights: Materials posted over NEO-LMS are the properties of USL and the
Facilitators. Students are not allowed to share it to any third-party individuals not part of the class without any
permission from the owners.
I hope you find this flexible approach helpful. Continue to learn amidst this pandemic. Stay safe while learning.
Included in this module are the following:

1. Course Outline ( Read from your books, internet sources in advance)
2. The USL Vision-Mission and Values, Program Outcomes, Course Learning Outcomes
3. Weekly Study and Assessment Guide
4. Worksheets to be submitted to your teacher.

AY 2021-2022
Lesson 1
Topics: Understanding International Relations
Learning At the end of this module, you are expected to:

Outcomes: 1. determine the nature of international relations as a discipline;
2. illustrate the role of international relations in attaining global peace; and
3. scrutinize the various approaches, tools and theories used in the study of
international relations.
Date Topics Activities or Tasks

January 12-15, 2022 Read the Lessons
January 14, 2022 Understanding International Due Date of Participation
January 18, 2022 Relations Quiz
January 21, 2022 Due Date of Learning Task
LEARNING CONTENT
INTRODUCTION:
No man is an island. This famed quote traces its root from the wisdom that man, as much as he is
rational, is a social being. While others prefer to be on their own, it is widely known that no one could
easily survive the vicissitudes of this world alone, especially that we face different challenges each
day, some of which prove to be more arduous than the last we overcame. It seems that we are riding
on a roller coaster where the destination is a blur, and we can only anticipate pressing issues and
predicaments as we go. Thus, we need each other. We need each other for strength and assurance.
We need each other to survive. Such is the foundation of any relations ever built, may it be personal,
or formal.

LESSON PROPER:
Above is a photo taken from Syria in the midst of the enduring Civil War. Surrounded by debris and
the frightful air of hostility, the child holds his toy and manage a smirk, perhaps hopeful of a peaceful
day— a day without bullets raining under people's head and killing thousands of innocent. It is such a
disheartening sight to behold. The world has become a cold and dangerous place for children who,
literally, have not started to live their lives yet. This scenario could not only be seen in Syria. The war
torn Sarajevo must have witnessed hundred thousands of this. How many children would lose their
dreams and future before we realize war is not the answer to our differences?
Why do wars happen? Why do skirmishes turn out to be a full blown political fight despite of
measures undertaken to remedy the differences? Why do people violate rights? Why do protesters
seem to grow in number in a day? Why do rebellions happen? Why do we have terrorists? What
bring about territorial disputes? These are only some of the questions that led to the idea of
international relations. In an attempt to address the abovementioned, international relations was
shaped into a discipline.
What is International Relations?
International relations, as a subfield of political science, is the study of the interactions among the
various actors that participate in international politics. It encompasses the study of the behaviors of
these actors as they participate individually and together in international political processes.
International relations is also an interdisciplinary field of inquiry, drawing concepts and substance
from history, economics, and anthropology, as well as political science.

Scope:
In modern world, the scope of International Relations has greatly expanded. Initially, it was the study
of diplomacy. Later, international law became the subject matter. Then it widened with the
establishment of league of nations. The study of international organizations was also included in IR.
The scope of IR expanded during the Second World War as USA and USSR emerged as super
power. The multiplications of nation states, the danger of thermo-nuclear war, increasing
interdependence of states and rising expectations in the people of the underdeveloped world
contributed to the expansion of the discipline.
Greater emphasis was made on the scientific study of IR which developed methodologies and
introduction of new theories. Today IR includes the study of behavior of political actors and groups
and it has an extensive scope.
Writers, on the other hand, seem divided on the scope of IR. For instance, Alfred Zimmern says that
IR is not a discipline but a combination of History and political science. It is heavily dependent on
other disciplines and has so far failed to develop a coherent body of knowledge.
According to Organski “as a science, IR today is in its infancy. It is still less a science than a mixture
of philosophy and history and its theories are shockingly unstable”
Do you think Alfred Zimmern and Organski are right? Let's find out by delving deeper
into the intricacies of this discipline.
Approaches to International Relation:
Political scientists develop theories or frameworks both to understand the causes of events that occur
in international relations and to answer the foundational questions in the field. While these are many
contending theories, they helped developed and refined the idea that is International Relations.
True to what Political scientist Stephen Walt explains, “No single approach can capture all the
complexity of con temporary world politics. Therefore, we are better off with a diverse array of
competing ideas rather than a single theoretical orthodoxy. Competition between theories helps
reveal their strengths and weaknesses and spurs subsequent refinements, while revealing flaws in
conventional wisdom.”
1. Idealism. The Idealist Approach holds that old, ineffective and harmful modes of behaviour such
as war, use of force and violence should be abandoned in favour of new ways and means as
determined by knowledge, reason, compassion and self-restraint. It stands for improving the course
of international relations by eliminating war, hunger, inequality, tyranny, force, suppression and
violence from international relations. To remove these evils is the objective before humankind.
Idealism accepts the possibility of creating a world free from these evils by depending upon reason,
science and education. According to Bertrand Russell, “Political idealism in international relations
represents a set of ideas

which together oppose war and advocate the reform of international community through dependence
upon moral values and the development of international institutions and international law. A world full
of human happiness is not beyond human power to achieve.”
Idealist approach derives strength from the general idea of evolutionary progress in society and the
spirit of liberal idealism which was at the back of American policies, particularly during the inter-war
years. During the inter-war years (1919-39), the U.S. President Woodrow Wilson became its most
forceful exponent.
The Idealist Approach advocates morality as the means for securing the desired objective of making
the world an ideal world. It believes that by following morality and moral values in their relations,
nations cannot only secure their own development, but also can help the world to eliminate
war,inequality, despotism, tyranny, violence and force.“For the idealists, politics is the art ofgood
government and not the art of possible. Politics provides for the good life and respectfor his fellow
humans, both domestically and internationally.” —Couloumbis and Wolfe. As such Idealism
advocates the need for improving relations among nations by removing the evils present in the
international environment.
Main Features of Idealism:
1. Human nature is essentially good and capable of good deeds in international relations.
2. Human welfare and advancement of civilization are the concerns of all.
3. Bad human behaviour is the product of bad environment and bad institutions.
4. By reforming the environment, bad human behaviour can be
eliminated. 5.War represents the worst feature of relations.
6. By reforming international relations, war can be and should be eliminated.
7. Global efforts are needed to end war, violence and tyranny from international relations.
8. International community should work for eliminating such global instruments, features and
practices which lead to war.
9. International institutions committed to preserve international peace, international law and order
should be developed for securing peace, prosperity and development.
The main supporters of idealism have been:
Mahatma Gandhi,
Bertrand Russell
Woodrow Wilson
Aldous Huxley
William Ladd
Richard Cobben
Margret Mead
They strongly oppose the realist view of international politics as struggle for power and national
interest and advocate the use of reason, education and science for securing reforms in relations and
for eliminating war and other evils from international relations.
2. Realism posits that states exist in an anarchic international system; that is, there is no overarching
hierarchical authority. Each state bases its policies on an interpretation of its national interest defined
in terms of power. The structure of the international system is determined by the distribution of power
among states.
Key Features of Realism:
1. History gives evidence that humanity is by nature sinful and wicked.
2. Lust for power and dominance has been a major, all important and all-pervasive fact of human nature.
3. Human instinct for power cannot be eliminated.
4. Struggle for power is the incontrovertible and eternal reality of international relations.
5. Each nation always seeks to secure the goals of national interest defined in term of power.
6. Self-preservation is the law that always governs the behaviour of all the states.
7. Nations always seek power, demonstrate power and use power.
8. Peace can be preserved only by management of power through such devices as Balance of
Power, Collective Security, World Government, Diplomacy, Alliances and the like.
3. Liberalism is historically rooted in several philosophical traditions that posit that human nature is
basically good. Individuals form groups and, later, states. States gen-erally cooperate and follow
international norms and procedures that they have agreed to support.
4. Radical theory is rooted in economics. Actions of individuals are largely determined by economic
class; the state is an agent of international capitalism; and the international system is highly stratified,
dominated by an international capitalist system.
5. Constructivists, in contrast to both realists and liberals, argue that the key structures in the state
system are not material but instead are social and dependent on ideas. The interests of states are not
fixed but are malleable and ever-changing.
Foundational Questions of International Relations
How can human nature be characterized?
What is the relationship between the individual and the society?
What are the characteristics and role of the state?
How is the international system organized?
*** END of LESSON ***
Lesson 2
Topics: Understanding International Relations

Outcomes: 1. determine the nature of international relations as a discipline;
2.illustrate the role of international relations in attaining global peace; and
3.scrutinize the various approaches, tools and theories used in the study of
international relations.

January 17-22, 2022 Read the Lessons
January 14, 2022 Understanding International Due Date of Participation
January 18, 2022 Relations Quiz
January 21, 2022 Due Date of Learning Task
LEARNING CONTENT
Lesson Proper:

How do political scientists find information to assess the accuracy, relevancy, and
potency of their theories?
To address the foundational questions laid down in the previous module, political scientists use
tools that include history, philosophy and the scientific method.
Let's explore each of these tools.
1. History
Inquiry in international relations often begins with history. We will all agree that history is very
significant in fields like Political Science. History narrates in details our collective memory of the past.
Thus, it is almost indispensable to various fields of discipline. It explains how and why a particular
event happened. Without any historical background, many of today’s key issues are
incomprehensible.
Take a look at the example below.

History tells us that the periodic bombings in Israel by Hamas are part of a dispute over territory between
Arabs and Jews, a dispute having its origins in biblical times and its modern roots in the establishment of the
state of Israel in 1948. Sudan’s 20- year civil war between the Muslim north and Christian/animist south and
the Darfur crisis beginning in 2003 are both products of the central government’s long- standing neglect of
marginalized areas, exacerbated by religious differences and magnified by natural disasters. Without that
historical background, we cannot debate the appropriate solution in the Arab-Israeli dispute, nor can we
understand why the establishment of the Republic of South Sudan in 2011 did not lead to a solution for the
Darfur crisis.
As illustrated above, history provides a crucial background for the study of international relations. In
fact, it has been so fundamental to the study of international relations that there was no separate
international relations subfield until the early twentieth century. Before that time, especially in Europe
and the United States, international relations were studied under the umbrella of diplomatic history in
most academic institutions. Having knowledge of both diplomatic history and national histories
remains critical for students of international relations. History invites its students to acquire detailed
knowledge of specific events, but it also can be used to test generalizations. Having deciphered
patterns from the past, students of history can begin to explain the relationships among various
events.
Example:
The ancient Greek historian Thucydides (c. 460–401 BCE), in History of the Peloponnesian War, used this approach.
Distinguishing between the under lying and the immediate causes of wars, Thucydides found that what made that
war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power. As Athens’s power increased, Sparta, Athens’s greatest rival,
feared losing its own power. Thus, the changing distribution of power was the under lying cause of the
Peloponnesian War.
Those using history, however, must be wary because it is not always clear what history attempts to
teach us. We often rely on analogies. For example, we compare the 2003 Iraq War to the Vietnam
War. In both cases, the United States fought a lengthy war against a little understood, often
unidentifiable enemy. In both, the United States adopted the strategy of supporting state building so
that the central government could continue the fight, a policy labeled Vietnamization and Iraqization in
the respective conflicts. The policy led to a quagmire in both places when American domestic support
waned, and the United States withdrew. Yet differences are also evident; no analogies are perfect.
Vietnam has a long history and a strong sense of national identity, forged by wars against both the
Chinese and French. Iraq, in contrast, is a relatively new state with significant ethnic and religious
divisions, whose various groups seek a variety of different objectives. In Vietnam, the goal was
defense of the U.S. ally South Vietnam against the communist north, backed by the Soviet Union. In
Iraq, the goal was first to oust Saddam Hussein, who was suspected of building weapons of mass
destruction, and second, to create a democratic Iraq that would eventually lead the region to greater
stability. In both, although we cannot ignore history, neither can we draw simple “lessons” from
historical analogies.

Lessons are often derived from one’s theoretical orientation. From the above mentioned, realists
might draw the lesson from both Vietnam and Iraq that the United States did not use all of its military
might; political actors constrained military actions; otherwise, the outcome may have been different.
Liberals on the other hand, might conclude that the United States should have never been involved
since the homeland was not directly affected and one country’s ability to construct or reconstruct
another state is limited.
2. Philosophy
Philosophy can help us answer questions in international relations. Much classical philosophy
focuses on the state and its leaders— the basic building blocks of international relations—as well as
on methods of analysis.
How did the Philosophers shape International Relations?
1. Plato (c. 427–347 BCE) , in The Republic, concluded that in the “perfect state,” the people who
should govern are those who are superior in the ways of philosophy and war. Plato called these ideal
rulers “philosopher- kings.”
Though he did not directly discuss international relations, Plato introduced two ideas seminal to the
discipline:
1. Class analysis
2. Dialectical reasoning
These two ideas later became bases for Marxist analysts. Radicals like Marxists see economic class
as the major divider in domestic and international politics; Marxists also acknowledge the importance
of dialectical reasoning— that is, reasoning from a dialogue or conversation that leads to the
discovery of contradictions in the original assertions and in political reality. In contemporary Marxist
terms, such analysis reveals the contradiction between global and local policies, whereby, for
example, local- level textile workers lose their jobs to foreign competition and are replaced by high-
technology industries.
2. Aristotle (384–322 BCE), lay both in substance and method the search for an ideal domestic
political system. Analyzing 168 constitutions, Aristotle looked at the similarities and differences
among states, thus becoming the first writer to use the comparative method of analysis. He
concluded that states rise and fall largely because of internal factors— a conclusion still debated in
the twenty- first century.
3. Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), in Leviathan, imagined a state of nature, a world without

governmental authority or civil order, where men rule by passions, living with the constant uncertainty
of their own security. To him, the life of man is solitary, selfish, and even brutish. Extrapolating to the
international level, in the absence of international authority, society is in a “state of nature,” or
anarchy. States in this anarchic condition act as man does in the state of nature. He believes that the
solution to the dilemma is a unitary state— a leviathan— where power is centrally and absolutely
controlled.
4. Jean- Jacques Rousseau (1712–78) addressed the same set of questions as Hobbes but, having
been influenced by the Enlightenment, saw a different solution. In “Discourse on the Origin and

Foundations of Inequality among Men,” Rousseau described the state of nature as an egocentric
world, with man’s primary concern being self- preservation— not unlike Hobbes’s description of the
state of nature.
The story of the stag and the hare: In a hunting society, each individual must keep to his assigned
task so the hunters can find and trap the stag for food for the whole group. However, if a hare
happens to pass nearby, an individual might well follow the hare, hoping to get his next meal quickly
and caring little for how his actions will affect the group. Rousseau drew an analogy between these
hunters and states. Do states follow short- term self- interest, like the hunter who follows the hare? Or
do they recognize the benefits of a common interest?
Rousseau’s solution to the dilemma posed by the stag and the hare: Creation of smaller
communities in which the “general will” could be attained. Indeed, according to Rousseau, it is “only
the general will,” not a leviathan, that can “direct the forces of the state according to the purpose for
which it was instituted, which is the common good.”
Rousseau’s vision: "Each of us places his person and all his power in common under the supreme
direction of the general will; and as one we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole.”
5. Immanuel Kant (1724–1804), envisioned a federation of states as a means to achieve peace, a

world order in which man is able to live without fear of war. Sovereignties would remain intact, but the
new federal order would be both preferable to a “super- leviathan” and more effective and realistic
than Rousseau’s small communities. Kant’s analysis was based on a vision of human beings that was
different from that of either Rousseau or Hobbes. In his view, though man is admittedly selfish, he can
learn new ways of cosmopolitanism and universalism.
The tradition laid down by these philosophers has contributed to the development of international
relations by calling attention to fundamental relationships: those between the individual and society,
between individuals in society, and between societies.
3. Behavioralism proposes that individuals, both alone and in groups, act in patterned ways. The
task of the behavioral scientist is to suggest plausible hypotheses regarding those patterned actions
and to systematically and empirically test those hypotheses.
Using the tools of the scientific method to describe and explain human behavior, these scholars hope
to predict future behavior.
The Correlates of War project permits us to see the application of behavioralism.
Beginning in 1963 at the University of Michigan, the political scientist J. David Singer and his historian
colleague Melvin Small investigated one of the fundamental questions in international relations: Why
is there war?
Motivated by the normative philosophical concern with how peace can be achieved, the two scholars
chose an empirical methodological approach. Rather than focusing on one “big” war that changed the

tide of history, as Thucydides did, they sought to find patterns among a number of different wars.
Believing that generalizable patterns may be found across all wars, Singer and Small turned to
statistical data to discover the patterns. The initial task of the Correlates of War project was to collect
data on international wars between 1865 and 1965 in which 1,000 or more deaths had been reported
in a 12- month period. For each of the 93 wars that fit these criteria, the researchers found data on its
magnitude, severity, and intensity, as well as the frequency of war over time. This data- collection
process proved a much larger task than Singer and Small had anticipated, employing a bevy of
researchers and graduate students. Once the wars were codified, the second task was to generate
specific, testable hypotheses that might explain the outbreak of war.
Is there a relationship between the number of alliance commitments in the international system and
the number of wars that are fought?
Is there a relationship between the number of great powers in the international system and the
number of wars?
Is there a relationship between the number of wars over time and the severity of the
conflicts? Which factors are most correlated over time with the outbreak of war?
How are these factors related to each other?
What is the correlation between international system– level factors— such as the existence of
international organizations— and the outbreak of war?
Although answering these questions will never prove that a particular factor is the cause of war, the
answers could suggest some high- level correlations that merit theoretical explanation . That is the
goal of this research project and many others following in the behavioralist scientific tradition.
Another example of research in the behavioral tradition can be found in human rights literature.
The question many scholars probe is why countries violate human rights treaties. Is it because states
never intended to follow the provisions? Is signing onto treaties just cheap talk? Is it because there is
no threat of direct international enforcement? Or is it because states often lack the capacity to
implement new standards?
Sociologist Wade M. Cole began with a hypothesis that “noncompliance with international treaty
obligations is neither willful or premediated.” Rather, it depends on a state’s bureaucratic efficiency.
Using data from each in dependent variable of state bureaucratic efficiency and dependent variables
of state empowerment and physical integrity rights data found in the Cingranelli- Richards (CIRI)
Human Rights Dataset, Cole uses sophisticated statistical models that confirm his expectations.
Improvements in a state’s empowerment and physical- integrity rights after the signing of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights depend on state capacity.
However, methodological problems occur in both projects. The Correlates of War data-base looks at
all international wars, irrespective of the different political, military, social, and technological contexts.
Can wars of the late 1800s be explained by the same factors as the wars of the new millennium?
Answering that question has led subsequent researchers to expand the data set to include
militarized interstate

disputes, conflicts that do not involve a full- scale war. And those data include not only international
and civil wars but also regional internal, intercommunal, and nonstate wars.
The human rights study also involves major problems of measurement and operationalization of key
variables. How can one measure concepts like state’s empowerment and state capacity? Many
different indicators need to be combined. And data may not be available for all states across all the
time periods studied. In each case, alternative explanations need to be investigated. Such studies are
never an end in themselves, only a means to improve explanation and to provide other scholars with
hypotheses that warrant further testing.
Disillusionment with behavioral approaches has taken several forms:
1. Data have to be selected and compiled. Different data may lead to substantially different conclusions.
2. Some critics suggest that attention to data and methods has overwhelmed the substance of their
research. Few would doubt the importance of Singer and Small’s initial excursion into the causes of
war, but even the researchers themselves admitted losing sight of the important questions in their
quest to compile data and hone research methods. Some scholars, still within the behavioral
orientation, suggest simplifying esoteric methods to refocus on the substantive questions.
3. Many of the foundational questions— the nature of humanity and society— are neglected by
behavioralists because they are not easily testable by empirical methods. These critics suggest
returning to the philosophical roots of international relations. Nevertheless, most scholars remain
firmly committed to behavioralism and the scientific method, pointing to the slow incremental progress
that has been made in explaining the interactions of state.
4. Alternative Approaches
Just like in other disciplines, some international relations scholars are dissatisfied with using history,
philosophy, or behavioral tools. Hence, they developed alternative approaches to further their
understanding in the field.
a. Constructivists turned to discourse analysis. They engage in analyzing culture, norms,

procedures and social practices to trace how ideas shape identities. In the process, they use texts,
interviews and archival material. The case studies found in Peter Katzenstein’s edited volume The
Culture of National Security use this approach. Drawing on analyses of Soviet foreign policy at the
end of the Cold War, German and Japanese security policy from militarism to antimilitarism, and Arab
national identity, the authors search for security interests defined by actors who are responding to
changing cultural factors. These studies show how social and cultural factors shape national security
policy in ways that contradict realist or liberal expectations.
b. Postmodernists seek to deconstruct the basic concepts of the field, such as the state, the nation,
rationality, and realism, by searching texts (or sources) for hidden meanings underneath the surface,
in the subtext. Once those hidden meanings are revealed, they seek to replace the once- orderly
picture with disorder, to replace the dichotomies with multiple portraits. Cynthia Weber, for example,
argues that sovereignty is neither well defined nor consistently grounded. Digging below the surface
of sovereignty, going beyond evaluations of the traditional philosophers, she has discovered that
conceptualizations of sovereignty are constantly shifting, depending on the exigencies of the moment

and the values of different communities. Karen T. Litfin shows how norms of sovereignty are
shifting to address ecological destruction, although the process remains a contested one.
Note:These analyses have profound implications for the theory and practice of international
relations, which are rooted in state sovereignty and accepted practices that reinforce sovereignty.
They challenge conventional understandings.
Postmodernists also seek to find the voices of “the others,” those individuals who have been
disenfranchised and marginalized in international relations. Christine Sylvester illustrates her
approach with a discussion of the Greenham Common Peace Camp, a group of mostly women who
in the early 1980s walked more than 100 miles to a British air force base to protest plans to deploy
missiles at the base. Although the marchers were ignored by the media— and thus were
“voiceless”— they maintained a politics of resistance, recruiting other political action groups near
the camp and engaging members of the military stationed at the base.
REFERENCES
Reference:
Mingst, K. (2003). Essentials of International Relations.
Online References:
researchgate. net/introduction to international relations
UNIVERSITY OF POLS
SAINT1103-Introduction
LOUIS to International Relations
Tuguegarao City

Second Semester
A.Y. 2021-2022

Prepared by:

Course Instructor
Revised by:
MARISOL U. BANGANAY
Course Instructor
Reviewed by:

Recommended by:

Academic Dean
Approved by:


UNIVERSITY PRAYER


AY 2021-2022
Week 3-4
Topics: Historical Context of Contemporary International Relations

1.The Emergence of the Western Westphalian System 2.Europe in
the Nineteenth Century
The Aftermath of Revolution Core Principles
The Napoleonic Wars
Peace at the Core of European System

Outcomes: 1. analyze the historical foundations of contemporary international relations;
2. describe the origin of sovereignty;
3. explain the role of legitimacy and nationalism in the creation of the states;
4. evaluate the importance of balance of power in upholding peace and
unity; and
5. enumerate factors that explain why international relations scholars use the
Treaties of Westphalia as a benchmark.

January 25- Historical Context of Contemporary Read the Lessons
February 4,2022 International Relations
1. The Emergence of the
January 28,2022 Western Westphalian System Accomplish Participation 2
January 31, 2. Europe in the Nineteenth Century Quiz
2022  The Aftermath of Revolution Accomplish Learning Task 2
February 4,2022 Core Principles
 The Napoleonic Wars
 Peace at the Core of European
System

Week 3
LEARNING CONTENT
INTRODUCTION:
In the previous module, we discussed the approaches to international relations as a science and
discipline. In this week’s lesson, we will try to explore the historical foundations of the core concepts
that helped developed contemporary international relations, and understand the wisdom behind the
establishment of legitimacy and nationalism and how these led to the creation of independent states.
LESSON PROPER:
The Emergence of the Westphalian System
Theories mostly locate the beginning of the contemporary states in Europe in 1648 after the Treaties
of Westphalia concluded the Thirty Years’ War. What is the significance of these treaties?
The Treaties of Westphalia ended the religious authority in Europe and marked the rise of secular
authorities. The establishment of secular authority paved way to the principle that has set forth the
foundation of international relations.
The Formulation of the Concept of Sovereignty
Sovereignty is a core concept in contemporary international relations. It was one of the most
important intellectual development that led to the Westphalian revolution.
According to the French philosopher Jean Bodin (1530-96), sovereignty is the ‘’absolute and
perpetual power vested in commonwealth’’. It resides not in an individual but in a state, thus, it is
perpetual. It is ‘’the distinguishing mark of the sovereign that he cannot in any way be subject to the
commands of another, for it is he who makes law for the subject, abrogates law already made, and
amends obsolete law.’’
Bodin provided the conceptual framework of sovereignty. He stated that sovereignty, though ideally it
is perceived to be absolute, has its limits. Leaders are limited by divine law and natural law. “All
princes on earth are subject to the laws of God and of nature.’’ In addition, they are also limited by the
type of regime—“the constitutional laws of the realm’’—be it monarchy, an aristocracy, or a
democracy. Leaders are limited by covenants, contracts with promises to the people within the
commonwealth, the treaties with other states, though there is no supreme arbiter in relations among
states.
It could be remembered that the Thirty Years’ War emerged as a dispute between Catholics and
Protestants and was ended by exhaustion and bankruptcy of both parties. It ruined Europe. Princes
and mercenaries sacked the central European countryside, frequently fought battles, undertook
sieges and plundering for supplies.
The Treaties of Westphalia had three key impacts on international

POLS relations:
1103-Introduction to International Relations
1. The Treaties of Westphalia embraced the notion of sovereignty.
The death of the Roman Empire also brought the demise of the pope and the emperor. After they
were stripped of their power, the small states in central Europe attained sovereignty. Without the
supranational church, monarchs also gained the authority to decide which version of Christianity
would best suit their subjects.
The Treaties did not only legitimized territoriality and the right of the states as sovereign. It also
established the rights of the states to determine their own domestic policies, without external
pressure. The Treaties afforded states the full jurisdiction in their own geographic space. The Treaties
introduced the principle of noninterference in the affairs of other states.
2. The Treaties of Westphalia paved the way for leaders to seek the establishment of their own
permanent national militaries.
After the havoc resulted from the Thirty Years’ War, the leaders of the most powerful countries in
Europe began to seek the establishment of their own armies. And because they had to finance these
growing number of forces, the state had to collect taxes. The leaders assumed absolute control over
the troops. Militarization became a basis for power. The state with a national army came to be
recognized as a powerful force, its sovereignty is acknowledged, its secular base firmly established.
Larger territorial units gained an advantage as armaments became more standardized and more
lethal.
3. The Treaties of Westphalia established a core group of states that dominated the world.
Austria, Russia, Prussia, England, France, and the United Provinces (the area now comprising the
Netherlands) dominated the world until the beginning of the nineteenth century. Those in the west—
England, France, and the United Provinces underwent an economic revival under the shield of liberal
capitalism. Those in the east, on the other hand, Prussia and Russia reverted to feudal practices.
In the west, private enterprise was encouraged. States improved their infrastructure to facilitate
commerce. Great trading companies and banks emerged. In the feudal east, serfs remained on the
land. Economic development was suppressed. In both regions, states were ruled by monarchs with
absolute power (called absolutist). Louis XIV ruled in France (1643-1715), Peter the Great in Russia
(1682-1725), and Frederick II in Prussia (1740-86).
The Scottish economist, Adam Smith (1723-90) was the most important social theorist of the time. In
An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of the Nations, Smith argued that the notion of a
market should apply to all social orders. Individuals, laborers, owners, investors, consumers alike
should be permitted to pursue their own interests, unfettered by all the most modest state regulations.
According to him, each individual acts rationally to maximize his own interests. With group of
individuals pursuing their interests, economic efficiency is enhanced, and more goods and services
are produced and consumed. At the aggregate level, the wealth of the state and that of the
international system are similarly enhanced.
The so-called invisible hand of the market is the force behind the system. When individuals pursue
their rational self-interests, the system operates in a way that benefits everyone. This explanation
from Smith has profound effect on states’ economic policies and political choices.
Key developments after the Westphalia:
Concept and practice of sovereignty develops.

Centralized control of institutions to facilitate the creation and maintenance of military; military
power grows.
Capitalist economic system emerges (stable economic expectations facilitates long-term
investment).
***
Week 4
LEARNING CONTENT
Lesson Proper:
Europe in the Nineteenth Century
The nineteenth century saw two revolutions—the American Revolution (1773-1785) against British
rule and the French Revolution (1789) against absolutist rule. Both were products of Enlightenment,
as well as a social-construct theory. Enlightenment thinkers regarded individuals as rational—capable
of understanding laws governing them and capable of working to improve their condition in society.
Core Principles that Emerged from the
Revolutions 1.Legitimacy
The absolutist rule is subject to limits imposed by man. The English philosopher, John Locke (1632-
1704), in his Two Treaties of Government, attacked absolute power and the notion of the divine right
of kings. He argued that the state is a beneficial institution created by rational men to protect both
their natural rights (life, liberty, and property) and their self-interests. Men freely enter into this political
arrangement, agreeing to establish government to ensure natural rights for all. The most important
point POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations
of Locke’s argument is that political power ultimately rests with the people, not with a leader or a
monarch. The monarch derives legitimacy from the consent of his subjects.
2. Nationalism
People came to identify with a common past, language, customs, and territory. Individuals who share
similar characteristics are motivated to participate actively in political process as a nation. During the
French Revolution, a patriotic appeal was made to the masses to defend the French nation and its
new ideals. This appeal forged an emotional link between the people and the state, regardless of
social class.
The Napoleonic Wars
Nationalism has profoundly impacted Europe. The nineteenth century started with war in an
unprecedented scale. France’s revolutionary power status attracted other European states with intent
on stamping the contagious idea of government by popular consent. France appeared disorganized
and weak, a result of years of internal unrests. Following its revolution, France became caught in a
series of wars with Austria, Britain, and Prussia. This brought about the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte
into power. From being an artillery officer to leader of the military, and then finally, to the rank of an
emperor of France.
Napoleon, with the help from other talented officers, set to reorganize and regularize the French
military. Making skillful use of French national zeal, Napoleon fielded large, well-armed, and
passionately motivated armies. Changes in technology was seen. More efficient cultivation of the
potato—made the advent of magazine system possible. This meant war supplies could be stored in
pre-positioned locations, along likely campaign routes so troops could retrieve them on the move and
avoid having to stop and forage for food.
Nationalism and the magazine system made it possible for France to field larger, more mobile and
more reliable armies that could employ innovative tactics unavailable to the smaller professional
armies like that of its rivals. Through a series of famous battles, including those at Jena and Auerstedt
(1806), in which Napoleon’s armies smashed those of invincible Prussia, Napoleon was able to
conquer nearly the whole of Europe in a few short years.
The same nationalism that has brought about the successes of Napoleon however, paved the way to
his downfall.
In Spain and Russia, Napoleon’s armies met nationalists who fought a different sort of war. Rather
than facing French forces in direct confrontations, Spanish guerillas used intimate local knowledge to
mount hit-and-run attacks on French occupying forces. The Spanish guerillas also enjoyed the
support of Britain. When local French forces attempted to punish the Spanish into submission by
barbarism, resistance to French occupation rose.
When Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812 with an army of 422 000, the Russians also refused to give
direct battle. Instead, they retreated to areas of supply, destroying all available food and shelter
behind them in what came to be known as a scorched death policy. The advancing French began
to suffer from severe malnutrition, with the entire army slowly starving to death as it advanced to
Moscow.
By the time the French reached the Russian capital the government had already evacuated. The
French army occupying Moscow has declined to 110 000. Napoleon waited in vain for the tsar to
surrender. After realizing the magnitude of his vulnerability, Napoleon attempted to return to France
before Russia’s harsh winter set in. It was already too late. By the time French troops crossed the
original line of departure at the Nieman River, Napoleon’s Grande Armee has been reduced to a
mere 10 000. The proud emperor was finally defeated in 1815 when he met the Prussian forces at the
Battle of Waterloo.
Peace at the Core of the European System
After the defeat of Napoleon in 1815 and the establishment of peace by the Congress of Vienna, the
five powers of Europe, Austria, Britain, France, Prussia, and Russia, aka the Concert of Europe, a
period of relative peace began in the international political system. No wars were fought after the
defeat of the Corsican emperor. In 1854, nevertheless, the Crimean War broke in which both Austria
and Prussia remained neutral. Other local wars were fought in brief duration. In these too, the five
major power remained neutral.
The Concert met more than 30 times before the outbreak of WW1, at a series of ad hoc conferences
making them club-like minded leaders. Through these meetings, the independence of new European
states and the division of Africa among colonial powers were legitimized.
The fact that peace among great powers prevailed during this time seems surprising since major
economic, technological, and political changes were radically changing power relationships.
Industrialization became the critical development during the nineteenth century. It was a double-
edged sword. The powers focused their attention on the process of industrialization during the second
half of the nineteenth century. Great Britain was the leader, outstripping all the rivals in its output of
coal, iron and steel and the export of manufactured goods. Moreover, Britain became the source of
finance capital, the banker of the continent and, in the twentieth century, for the world.
Industrialization spread through all areas of western Europe as the masses swarmed to the cities and
entrepreneurs and middlemen moved for economic advantage. Industrialization led the middle
classes to capture political power at the expense of the aristocrats. Unlike the aristocratic classes, the
middle classes did not depend on land for wealth and power. Their ability to invent, use and improve
industrial machines and processes gave them power. As machine power gained paramount
importance to the security and prosperity of states, the middle class began to seek more political
power to match their contributions.
The population of Europe soared. Commerce surged as transportation corridors across Europe and
the globe were strengthened.
Here are the dramatic Political changes that took place:
 Italy was unified in 1870

 Germany was formed out of 39 different fragments in 1871
 The United Kingdom of the Netherlands was divided into Netherlands and Belgium in the 1830’s
 The Ottoman Empire gradually disintegrated. Greece was liberated in 1829, Moldavia and
Wallachia (Romania) in 1856
In spite of the political changes above, what could possibly be the explanation to the absence of war?

Here are three factors that discouraged war:
1. Unification of Europe’s Political Elite
The unification resulted from fear of revolution from the masses. At the Congress of Vienna, the
Austrian diplomat and architect of the Concert of Europe, Count Klemens Metternich (1773-1859),
believed that returning to the age of absolutism was the best way to manage Europe. Elites
envisioned grand alliances that would bring European leaders together to fight revolution by the lower
classes. These alliances were not successful during the 1830’s. in 1848, all five powers faced
demand for reform from the masses. But during the second half of the century, European leaders
acted in concert, ensuring that mass revolutions did not spread from state to state. In 1870, in the
turmoil following France’s defeat in the Franco-Prusssian War, the leader Napoleon III was isolated
quickly for fear of a revolution that never occurred. Fear of revolt from below united European
leaders.
2. The Unification of Germany and Italy
Both German and Italian unification had powerful proponents and opponents among European
powers. Britain supported Italian unification. This made possible Italy’s annexation of Naples and
Sicily. Austria Did not actively oppose what may have been against its national interest which is the
creation of two sizable neighbors out of myriads of independent units. It was preoccupied with the
increasing strength of Prussia.
German unification was acceptable to Russia, as long as Russian interests in Poland were respected.
Britain’s dominant middle class also supported German unification. The view was stronger Germany
is a potential counterbalance to France.
These concentrated struggles to form single contiguous territorial states and the precise impact of
newly unified states on European balance of power made possible the aversion of a wider war.
3.Supporting peace in Europe was the complex and crucial phenomenon of imperialism-colonialism.
Key Points:
From revolutions emerged two concepts: the idea that legitimate rule requires the consent of the governed,
and nationalism.
A system managed by the balance of power brings relative peace to Europe.
Elites are united in fear of the masses, and domestic concerns are more important than foreign policy.
***

*** END of LESSON **
REFERENCES
Printed Reference:
Mingst, Karen, Essentials of International Relations, Seventh Edition, 2017, W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.,
500 Fifth Avenue, New York
Online References:
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. "Sovereignty". Encyclopedia Britannica, 18 Nov. 2020,

https://www.britannica.com/topic/sovereignty
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. "Napoleonic Wars". Encyclopedia Britannica, 18 Mar. 2020,
https://www.britannica.com/event/Napoleonic-Wars
Learning Materials
Module (teacher-made)
Worksheets (teacher-made)

Tuguegarao City

Second Semester
A.Y. 2021-2022

Prepared by:

Course Instructor
Revised by:
MARISOL U. BANGANAY
Course Instructor
Reviewed by:

Recommended by:

Academic Dean
Approved by:


UNIVERSITY PRAYER


AY 2021-2022
Week 5-6
Topics: Europe in the Nineteenth Century

Imperialism and Colonialism in the European System before 1870
Balance of Power
The Breakdown: Solidification of Alliances
The Interwar Years and World War II
The Cold War
Origins of the Cold War

Outcomes: 1. summarize the waves of European imperialism and colonialism in Asia and
Africa;
2. illustrate how balance of power was played out in the midst of imperialism
and colonialism;
3. break down the series of events that resulted to the formation of various
alliances that would soon lead to World Wars 1 and 2;
4. examine the origins of Cold War;
5. asses the impacts brought about by World Wars 1 and 2 and the Cold War
to the contemporary international relations; and
6. hypothesize the political effects of World Wars 1 and 2 and the Cold War
if they broke out today.

February 7- Europe in the Nineteenth Century Read the Lessons
19,2022  Imperialism and Colonialism in the
European System before 1870
 Balance of Power
 The Breakdown: Solidification of
Alliances
 The Interwar Years and World
War II
The Cold War
 Origins of the Cold War
Week 5
LEARNING CONTENT
INTRODUCTION:

In the previous module, we discussed about the benchmark used by scholars in studying the
beginnings of International Relations. We also illustrated the importance of balance of power in
maintaining peace and unity between the world powers as well as the role it played in laying down the
future of international politics. In this weeks’ lesson, we will try to analyze the influences behind the
formation of alliances and prominent organizations we have come to know today. We will evaluate the
factors that greatly impacted the foundation of contemporary international relations and examine the
implications of each to the developing world of politics.
LESSON PROPER:
Imperialism and Colonialism in the European System before 1870
The Discovery of the New World
The discovery of the New World led to the establishment of a rapidly expanding communication
between Europe and America. The first to set foot on the land were explorers seeking discovery,
riches and personal glory; merchants seeking raw materials and trade relations; and clerics seeking
to convert savages to Christianity. The astonishing wealth they acquired brought about extreme
competition among European powers, most of which became empire claiming lands occupied by
indigenous tribes as sovereign territories, thus the birth of the term imperialism.
The term imperialism is often interchanged with colonialism perhaps because the latter normally
followed or accompanied the former. These two, nevertheless are subtly different.
Imperialism refers to the annexation of distant territory (most often by force) and its inhabitants to an
empire.
Colonialism is the settling of people from a home country (like Spain) among indigenous peoples of
a distant territory (like Mexico).
The process of annexation by conquest or treaty prevailed for 400 years. With the improvement of
travel and communication, along with the development of vaccines and cures for tropical diseases,
the waves of imperialism and colonialism became more persistent. Europeans were able to overcome
native resistance with little cost or risk. They met spears with machine guns; horses with heavy
artillery. In the advent of machine age, the Europeans frequently targeted the indigenous civilians
which often led to near genocidal results. By the end of the nineteenth century, almost the whole of
the globe has been ruled by European states. Great Britain became the largest and most successful.
Small states such as Portugal and the Netherlands also maintained important colonies abroad.
The process also led to establishment of a ‘‘European’’ identity, a concept that created a faction
between them and the rest of the world. European states enjoyed a solidarity among themselves
based on their being European, Christian, ‘‘civilized’’ and white. The rise of mass literacy and
increasing contact with the colonial world due to industrialization, Europeans saw their commonalities,
the uniqueness of being ‘‘European’’. This identity was, in part, a return to the same kind of unity felt
under the Roman Empire and Roman law, a secular of medieval Christendom, a larger Europe as
Kant and Rousseau had envisioned. The Congress of Vienna and the Concert of Europe gave more
concrete form to these beliefs. The flip side of these beliefs was the ongoing exploration, conquest,
and exploitation of people in the non-European world and the subsequent establishment of colonies
there.
The Industrial Revolution, Imperialism and Colonialism

The industrial Revolution paved the way for European states to have the military and economic
means to engage in territorial expansion. Some imperial states were motivated by economic gains,
seeking new external markets for manufactured goods and obtaining, in turn, raw materials to fuel
their industrial growth. The others on the other hand, were encouraged by cultural and religious
reasons. The goal was to spread Christianity and the ways of white ‘‘civilization’’ to the ‘‘dark’’
continent and beyond. There were also those fueled by political gains. Since the European balance of
power thwarted direct confrontation in Europe, European state rivals were played out in Africa and
Asia.
Two Essential Questions:
1. Why did territorial expansion only happen in Asia and Africa and not Latin America?
2. How did Germany and Italy, two European powers who unified late, react to having so few of
their own colonies as compared to, say, Portugal, a much smaller state?
The Monroe Doctrine
This is a US policy of defending the Western Hemisphere from European interference. It protected
Latin America from late nineteenth century European colonization and imperial attention.
The Case of Italy and Germany
To gain international respect, the need for the newly unified Italy and Germany to annex or colonize
countries was imperative. Italy attempted to conquer and colonize Ethiopia, a Christian empire in the
horn of Africa. However, it suffered a humiliating defeat at the Battle of Adowa in 1896.
As for Germany’s imperial ambitions, the major powers, during the Congress of Berlin (1885) gave it
a Sphere of Influence in east Africa (Tanganyika), west Africa (Cameroon and Togo), and southern
Africa (Southwest Africa). European imperialism seemed to provide a convenient outlet for Germany’s
aspirations as a great power, without endangering the delicate balance of power within Europe itself.
By the end of the nineteenth century, 85 percent of Africa was under the control of European
states. In Asia, only Japan and Siam (Thailand) were not under direct European or US influence.
China and the Opium War
Under the Qing Dynasty, China had slowly been losing political, economic, and military power for
several hundred years. During the nineteenth century, British merchants began to trade with China for
tea, silk, and porcelain, frequently paying these products with smuggled opium.
In 1842, the British defeated China in the Opium War. This astounding defeat forced China to cede
various political and territorial rights to foreigners through a series of unequal treaties. European and
Japan were able to occupy large portions of Chinese territory, claiming to have exclusive trading
rights in particular regions.
The United States as an Imperial Power POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations

After emerging as a winner in the 1898 Spanish-American War, the United States acquired its own
small empire. It pushed the Spanish out of the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Cuba.
‘‘Thank God that we have got the Maxim gun, and they have not.’’
The struggle for power led to heedless exploitation of colonial areas, particularly in Africa and Asia.
Advance European weaponry and communications technology proved very difficult for indigenous
peoples to resist. European states and their militaries became accustomed to winning battles against
vastly numerous adversaries. These victories were attributed to their military technology.
Colonial and Imperial Fate
The Second Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902)
This is also known as the South African War. In this extremely expensive war, the British fought
against Boer commandos (white descendants of Dutch immigrants to South Africa in the 1820’s). It
was a lengthy and bitter counterinsurgency war that claimed the lives of more than 20, 000 Boer
women and children. The British failed to provide sanitary internment conditions, sufficient food, and
fresh water. The war cost 230 million pounds and lasted two years and eight months. It was the most
expensive war, by an order of magnitude, in British colonial history. It led to increased tensions
between Britain and Germany because the Boers had purchased advanced infantry rifles from
Germany and sought German diplomatic and military intervention during the war.
Important Points:
1. Much of the competition, rivalry, and tension have been fueled by the waves of imperialism and
colonialism.
2. Colonialism served as safety valve that reinforced unity and identity among Europeans and
prevented the outbreak of a full-blown war.
3. By the end of the nineteenth century, the toll of political rivalry and economic competition had
become destabilizing.
 The unification of Germany, along with its rapid industrialization and population growth resulted
to an escalation of tension.
 In 1870, France and Germany fought a major war, in which France suffered defeat. They
ended up putting forth a peace treaty where France was forced to surrender the long-
contested provinces of Alsace and Lorraine which became part of the new Germany.
4. Colonialism laid the groundwork for enduring resentment of Europeans by Asians and Africans.

Balance of Power
During the nineteenth century,

colonialism fulfilled the
common interests of the
European elite. It also served
as a distraction from the
troubled unifications of
Germany and Italy. The
underlying situation however,
was contained in the throes of
one essential factor: balance
of power.
The independent European

states with relatively equal
power feared the emergence
of a hegemon, or any
predominant state among
them. To address this fear, they formed alliances intended to counteract any potentially more
powerful faction. This stabilized the balance of power.
Important Points:
 State will hesitate to start a war with an adversary whose power to fight and win wars is
relatively balanced (symmetrical), because the risk of defeat is high.
 When one state or coalition of states is much more powerful than its adversaries
(asymmetrical), war is relatively more likely.
 The treaties signed before 1815 were put forth to quell the emergence of a hegemon.
Britain and Russia’s Roles in the Balance of Power
Britain:
 Played the role of an off-shore balancer.

 It intervened on behalf of the Greeks in their struggle for independence from the Turks in the
late 1820’s, on behalf of the Belgians during their war of independence against Holland in
1830, on behalf of Turkey against Russia in the Crimean War in 1854-56, and in the Russo-
Turkish War in 1877-78.
Russia:
 Russia was the builder of alliances.

 The Holy Alliances of 1815 kept Austria, Prussia, and Russia united against revolutionary
France.
 Russia used its claim on Poland to build a bond with Prussia.
 Russian interests in the Dardanelles, the strategic waterway linking the Mediterranean Sea
and the Black Sea, and in Constantinople overlapped with those of Britain.
During the last three decades of the nineteenth century, the Concert of Europe wore out beginning
with the Franco-Prussian War (1870) and the Russian invasion of Turkey (Russo-Turkish War, 1877-
78). Alliances began to solidify as the balance of power system began to weaken.
The development of the railroad gave continental powers such as Germany and Austria-Hungary an
enhanced level of economic and strategic mobility equal to that of maritime powers such as Britain.
This reduced Britain’s ability to balance power on the continent.
For Russia, it began to lag behind the industrialization race. The relatively few railroads meant its
massive manpower advantage would be less and less able to reach a battlefield in time to undermine
an outcome. Russia’s power began to wane compared with that of France, Germany and Austria-
Hungary.
***
Key Points:
European imperialism in Asia and Africa helps to maintain the European balance of power.
The balance of power breaks down due to imperial Germany’s too rapid growth and the
increasing rigidity of alliances, resulting in World War I.
***
The Breakdown: Solidification of Alliances
By the waning years of nineteenth century, the

balance of power system had weakened. Alliances
became increasingly rigid.
Two Camps Emerged:
a. Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria-Hungary, and

Italy), 1882
b. Dual Alliance (France and Russia), 1893
In 1902, Britain broke from the balancer role and

joined in a naval alliance with Japan to forestall
Russian and Japanese collaboration in China.
This alliance marked a significant turn: European state

(Great Britain) turned to an Asian one (Japan) to hinder a European power (Russia).
In 1904, Britain Joined with France in an alliance called the Entente Cordiale. In this same year,
Russia and Japan went to war (the Russo-Japanese War). Japanese defeat was widely expected as
it entered to industrialization late. Also, it has been an enduring belief that white Europeans are more
superior. The result however was an astounding defeat for Russia.
In May 1905, the Russian and Japanese fleets clashed in Tsushima Bay. The clash resulted to the
greatest naval defeat in history: Russia lost eight battleships, some 5 000 sailors were killed and
another 5 000 were captured as prisoners of war. The Japanese on the other hand, lost three torpedo
boats and 116 sailors.
Impacts of Japan’s victory
1. An Asian power’s defeat of a white colonial power compromised a core ideological foundation of
colonialism.
2. The Russian defeat spurred Japanese expansion.
3. Germany discounted Russia’s ability to interfere with German ambitions in Europe.
4. Russia’s defeat severely compromised the legitimacy of the tsar, setting in motion a revolution that
toppled the Russian empire after 1917, and replaced it with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
(USSR, or the Soviet Union).
World War 1
World War 1 of the Great War as it came to be known saw the introduction of aerial bombing and
unrestricted submarine warfare.
Important Points:
 Germany’s rapid rise in power intensified the destabilizing impact of the hardening of alliances.
By 1912, Germany had exceeded France and Britain in both heavy industrial output and
population growth.
 Germany feared Russian efforts to modernize its relatively sparse railroad network.
 Many Germans felt that Germany had not received the diplomatic recognition and status it
deserved.
 The supposed lack of recognition in part, explains why Germany encouraged Austria-Hungary
to crush Serbia after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand (heir to the Austro-
Hungarian Empire) who was shot in Sarajevo in June 1914.
 Under the tight system of alliances, the fateful shot set off a chain reaction. What Germany had
hoped would remain a local war soon escalated to continental war, after Russia’s tsar ordered
a pre-mobilization of Russian forces.
 Once German troops crossed into Belgium (a violation to the British-guaranteed Belgian
neutrality), the continental war escalated to a world war when Britain sided with France and
Russia.
 The Ottoman Empire, a long rival of Russia, entered into war on the side of Germany and
Austria- Hungary.
 Both sides’ anticipation of a short war did not happen when Germany’s Schlieffen Plan failed
almost immediately. Schlieffen Plan is a two-front war strategy against Russia.
 Between 1914 and 1918, soldiers from more than a dozen countries endured the persistent
degradation of trench warfare and the horrors of poison gas.
 More than 8.5 million soldiers and 1.5 million civilians lost their lives.
 Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire were defeated while Britain and France, two of
the three victors were weakened.
 Only the United States, a late entrant into the war, emerged relatively unharmed.
 The dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire by France and Britain which resulted to the
creation of new states subject to control and manipulation continues to affect the interstate
peace in the Middle East today.
Week 6
LEARNING CONTENT
Lesson Proper:
The Interwar Years and World War 2
The end of World War 1 saw critical

changes in international relations.
1. The three European empires were

strained and finally broke up. With those
empires went the conservative social order
of Europe. In its place emerged a
proliferation of nationalisms.
 Russia withdrew from the war when

internal unrest broke in 1917. The Tsar
was
overthrown and eventually replaced by not only a new leader (Vladimir Ilyich Lenin) but also a
new ideology: Communism.
 The Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires disintegrated.
 Arabia rose against Ottoman rule.
 British forces occupied Palestine (including Jerusalem) and Baghdad.
 Turkey became the largest of the successor states that emerged from the disintegration of the
Ottoman Empire.
 The end of the empires intensified nationalism.
2. Germany emerged from World War 1 as an even more dissatisfied power.
 Germany had been defeated on the battlefield, but German forces ended the war in occupation
of enemy territory.
 Germany’s dishonesty to the public led to the proliferation of the myth that German military had
been stabbed in the back by liberals and later, Jews in Berlin.
 The Treaty of Versailles which ended the war POLS 1103-Introduction
imposed an obligation totoGermany
International Relations
to pay an entire
$32 billion for wartime damages.

 Germans suffered from hyperinflation, causing widespread impoverishment of the middle and
working classes.
 Germany was no longer allowed to have a standing military and French and British troops
occupied its more productive industrialized region, the Ruhr Valley.
 The abovementioned harsh penalties paved way to the formation of the National Socialist
Worker’s Party (Nazis), led by Adolf Hitler.
3. The enforcement of the Treaty of Versailles was given to the ultimately unsuccessful League of
Nations
 The League of Nations was an intergovernmental organization designed to prevent all future
interstate wars.
 The organization did not have the political weight, the legal instruments or the legitimacy to
carry out the task.
 United States’ president Woodrow Wilson, the principal architect of the League of Nations
refused to join.
 Russia refused to join as well. The vanquished states were not permitted to participate.
 The League’s legal authority was weak and the instruments it had for enforcing the peace
proved ineffective.
4. The blueprint for a peaceful international order enshrined in Wilson’s Fourteen Points failed
 Wilson had called for open diplomacy, ‘‘open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after
which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall
proceed always frankly and in public view.’’
 Point three was a reaffirmation of economic liberalism, the removal of economic barriers
among all the nations consenting to the peace.
 The League, a ‘‘general association of nations’’ that would ensure war never occurred again,
would maintain order.
 The principles stated above, however were not adopted.
***
Key Points:
Three empires collapsed during the interwar years: Russia by revolution, the Austro- Hungarian Empire y
dismemberment, and the Ottoman Empire by external and internal turmoil.
Nationalism emerged.
German dissatisfaction with the World War 1 settlement leads to the rise of Fascism in Germany. Germany
finds allies in Italy and Japan.
A weak League of Nations is unstable to respond to Japanese, Italian , and German aggression. Nor can it
prevent or reverse widespread economic depression.
***

World War 2
In the perspective of most Europeans and many in the United States, Germany, Adolf Hitler in
particular started World War 2. But Japan played major roles in the breakdown of interstate order in
the 1930’s.
Mukden Incident
It was staged by the Japanese in 1931 as a pretext for assaulting China and annexing Manchuria.
The Japanese invasion of China was marked by horrifying barbarity against the Chinese people,
including the rape, murder, and torture of Chinese civilians, and the increasing inability of Japan’s
civilian government to restrain its generals in China.
Japan’s record in Korea was equally brutal.
Rape of Nanking
This incident marked the zenith of Japan’s reputation for savagery. When news of the massacre and
rapes reached the United States, a diplomatic crisis ensued, the result of which was war after the
Japanese forces attacked Pearl Harbor.
Third Reich
This (still) proved to be the greatest challenge to the

interstate order. Adolf Hitler rose to power with the promise to
restore Germany’s economic and national pride. The core of
his economic policies, however, was an over-investment in
armaments production.
Germany could not actually pay for the foodstuff and raw
materials needed to maintain the pace of production, so it
bullied its neighbors, mostly much weaker new states to the
east such as Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania, into ruinous
trade deals.
With the economic damages both Britain and France suffered

in World War 1, these European powers did little to thwart
Germany’s resurgence.
The Third Reich’s fascism effectively mobilized the masses in support of the state. It capitalized on the
idea that war and conflict were noble activities from which ultimate civilizations would be formed.
In autumn 1938, Britain agreed to let Germany occupy the westernmost region of Czechoslovakia, in
the hope of averting a general war, or at least delaying war until Britain’s defense preparations could
be sufficiently strengthened. This proved to be a false hope.
In spring 1939, the Third Reich annexed the remainder of Czechoslovakia, and in September 1939,
after having signed a peace treaty with the Soviet Union that divided Poland between them, German
forces stormed into Poland from the west while Soviet forces assaulted from the east.
Hitler’s real intent was to secure his eastern flank against a Soviet threat while he assaulted Norway,
Denmark, the Netherlands, and, ultimately, France, intending to force Britain to neutrality.
His grand plan: turn east and conquer Soviet Union.
Poland was quickly overcame, but because Britain and France had guaranteed Polish security, the
invasion prompted a declaration of war: World War 2 began.
In 1940, Hitler set his plans into motion and succeeded in a series of rapid conquests, culminating in
the defeat of France in May. In the late summer and fall, after being repeatedly rebuffed in its efforts
to coerce Britain into neutrality, the Third Reich prepared to invade and the Battle of Britain ensued.
Britain won the battle with a combination of extreme courage, resourcefulness, and luck.
In June 1941, the Third Reich undertook the most ambitious land invasion in history: Operation
Barbarossa, its long-planned yet ill-fated invasion of the Soviet Union. The surprise attack led the
Soviet Union to join sides with Britain and France.
The power of fascism in German, Italian, and Japanese versions led to an uneasy alliance between
the communist Soviet Union and the liberal United States, Great Britain, and France, among others
(the Allies).
During World War 2, those fighting against the Axis powers (Germany, Italy and Japan) acted in unison,
regardless of their ideological disagreements.
The End of the War
The Allies prevailed.
Italy surrendered in September 1943. The imperial Japan lay in ruins. In Europe, the Soviet Union
paid the highest price for the Third Reich aggression. In the Pacific, the United States, China, and
Korea paid the highest price for Japan’s aggression. POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations
Two other features of World War 2 that demand attention:
1. The Third Reich’s military invasion of Poland, the Baltics, and the Soviet Union was followed by
organized killing teams whose sole aim was the mass murder of human beings, regardless of their
support for, or resistance to.
Jews were singled out but Nazi policies extended to communists, gypsies, homosexuals and
even ethnic Germans born with genetic defects such as cleft palate or a club foot.
In East Asia, Japanese forces acted with similar cruelty against Chinese, Vietnamese, and Korean
noncombatants.
Victims were tortured or subjected to gruesome experiments. In many places, women were
forced into brothels, or ‘‘comfort stations’’.
The unprecedented brutality of the Axis Powers during World War 2 led to war crimes tribunals and
ultimately to a major new feature of international politics following the war.
The Geneva Conventions of 1948 and 1949 formally criminalized many abuses, including torture,
murder, and food deprivation, all perpetrated against noncombatants in areas of German and
Japanese occupation during World War 2. The conventions are collectively known as international
humanitarian law.
In the side of the Allies, US, British and Australian forces fighting in the Pacific viewed the Japanese
as ‘‘apes’’ or ‘‘monkey men’’. They rarely took prisoners and were comfortable in undertaking
strategic massive air assaults on Japanese cities.
In the United States in 1942, citizens of Japanese descent were summarily deprived of their
constitutional rights and interned for the duration of the war.
2.Although Germany surrendered unconditionally in May 1945, the war did not end until the Japanese
surrendered in August of that year.
Japan, though it had no hope of winning the war, made it clear as early as January that it might be
willing to surrender provided that the Allies would not try to imprison emperor Hirohito. The Allies,
nevertheless, had already agreed they would not accept no less than unconditional surrender. So,
Japan prepared for an invasion by US and possibly Soviet Union, hoping to still turn the tables.
Unfortunately, an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, and then three days later, on Nagasaki,
causing huge havoc that finally brought imperial Japan to its knees. It surrendered unconditionally on
August 15, 1945.
Effects of World War 2 to International Relations
World War 2 resulted to a major redistribution of power. The victorious United States and Soviet
Union emerged as the new world powers.
The war changed political boundaries. The Soviet Union virtually annexed the Baltic States (Latvia,
Lithuania, and Estonia) and portions of Austria, Finland, Czechoslovakia, Poland and Romania.
Germany and Korea were divided. Japan was ousted from much of Asia.
Each of the aforementioned changes contributed to the new international conflict: the COLD
WAR. The Cold War
The leaders of the victors of World

War 2, Britain’s prime minister,
Winston Churchill, the United States’
president, Franklin Roosevelt, and the
Soviet Union’s premiere, Joseph
Stalin, planned during the war for a
postwar order.
The Atlantic Charter of August 14,

1941 called for collaboration on
economic issues and prepared for a
permanent system of security.
These plans were consolidated in

1943 and 1944 and came into fruition
in the United Nations in 1945.
Origins of the Cold War
Important Outcomes of World War 2
1. Emergence of two superpowers, United States and Soviet Union
This resulted to the decline of Western Europe as the epicenter of international politics.
2. Intensification of fundamental incompatibilities between United States and Soviet Union in both
national interests and ideology.
Differences in geopolitical national interests surfaced immediately. Having been invaded from
the west on several occasions, USSR used its newfound power to solidify its sphere of
influence in Eastern Europe, specifically in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, and
Romania.
Soviet Union believed that ensuring friendly neighbors on its western borders was vital for the
country’s national interests. POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations
In the United States, there raged a debate between those favoring an aggressive rollback
strategy, pushing the USSR back to its own borders, and those favoring less-aggressive
containment strategy.
The United States put the notion of containment into action in the Truman Doctrine of 1947.
Containment as policy, essentially the use of espionage, economic pressure, and forward-deployed
military resources, emerged from a comparative asymmetry of forces in Europe. After the Third
Reich’s surrender, US and British forces rapidly demobilized and went home. Soviet army did not.
In 1948, the Soviets blocked western transportation corridors to Berlin. The United States realized
that even though it was the sole state in possession of atomic weapons, it did not have the power to
coerce the Soviet Union into retreating into its pre-World War 2 borders.
In August 1949, the Soviets successfully tested their first atomic bomb.
The containment, based on US geostrategic interests and a growing recognition that attempting
rollback would lead to another world war, became the fundamental doctrine of US foreign policy
during the Cold War.
Clashing Ideologies
The United States
Democratic Liberalism
It was based on a social system that accepted the worth and value of the individual; it is a political
system that depended on the participation of individuals in the electoral process.
Capitalism
It is an economic system that provided opportunities to individuals to pursue what was economically
rational with minimal government interference.
Soviet Union
Vladimir Lenin’s Vanguard of the Proletariat Amendment
This partly resolved the crisis in Marxist theory. Here, Lenin argued that the masses must be led or
sparkled by intellectuals who fully understand socialism. The end result, however, was a system in
which any hope of achieving communism, a utopian version in which the state withered away along
with poverty, war, sexism, and the like, had to be led from the top down.
Its implications?
The United States and its liberal allies viewed Soviet system like a dictatorship under the guise of
worldwide socialist revolution.

Popular sovereignty vanished in every state allied to the Soviet Union (Czechoslovakia, Hungary,
Romania, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland and so on). Soviet leaders felt themselves surrounded by
hostile capitalists.
Mutual Misperceptions: Both sides tended to view each other’s policies as necessarily threatening.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
The formation of NATO became a contentious worldwide issue. On the Western side, NATO
represented a desperate effort to defend indefensible Western Europe from the fully mobilized
Soviet Army. In the Soviet perspective, NATO is an aggressive military alliance aimed at
depriving the USSR of the fruits of its victory over the Third Reich.
***
Key Points:
Two superpowers emerge in the Cold War: the United states and the Soviet Union.
They are divided by national interests, ideologies, and mutual misperceptions.
These divisions are projected into different geographic areas.
***

REFERENCES
Printed Reference:
Mingst, Karen, Essentials of International Relations, Seventh Edition, 2017, W.W. Norton & Company,
Inc., 500 Fifth Avenue, New York
Online References:
Royde-Smith, John Graham and Showalter, Dennis E.. "World War I". Encyclopedia Britannica, 2 Nov.
2020, https://www.britannica.com/event/World-War-I
Royde-Smith, John Graham and Hughes, Thomas A.. "World War II". Encyclopedia Britannica, 10 Sep.
2020, https://www.britannica.com/event/World-War-II
Image Sources:
https://steemit.com/education/@a24houreschool/balance-of-power
https://20thcenturyhistory11a.wordpress.com/2015/10/18/triple-alliance-and-triple-entete/
https://www.britanica.com/biography/Vladimir-Lenin
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/05/21/hitler-teeth-test-dispels-myths-nazi-leaders-
survival
https://kids.britanicca.com/students/article/World-War-II-Chronology//606523
https://www.britanicca.com/events/Warsaw-Pact
Learning Materials
Module (teacher-made)
Worksheets (teacher-
made)

IIR Prelim Compilation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IIR Prelim Compilation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY OF SAINT LOUIS

SCHOOL OF EDUCATION, ARTS and SCIENCES

CORRESPONDENCE LEARNING MODULE

KATHERINE GRACE ANN FERNANDO REYNANTE

RENZ MARION C. GAVINO, MP

VENUS I. GUYOS, Ph.D.

EMMANUEL JAMES P. PATTAGUAN, Ph.D.

POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations

Grant all these supplications through the intercession of

POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations

SCHOOL OF EDUCATION, ARTS & SCIENCES

 EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY AND CORE VALUES

b. Excellence. We seek and maintain uncompromising standard of quality in teaching, learning,

c. Professional Responsibility. We are committed to efficiently and responsibly apply the

POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations

Course Information and Outline in POLS 1103

DESCRIPTIVE TITLE Introduction to International Relations

COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES

COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES

After completion of the course, the students should be able to:

I. Vision- Mission of USL

B.Overview of the course expectations

Mingst, K. (2003). Essentials of International Relations.

Cassese, A. (2016). International law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Goldstein, J. (2002). International relations. Brief. New York: Longman.

Daddow, O. (2018). International Relations Theory.

Mansbach, R. (2012). Introduction to Global Politics.

Babor, E. (2001). Logic. Manila C & E Publishing Inc., Philippines.

POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations

Morales, N. (1995). Philippine Diplomacy: Meeting the Challenge of Development.

Salamanca, B. (1995). Toward A Diplomatic History of the Philippines

Rourke, J. International politics on the world stage. From: www.goodreads.com/.../6949525.John_Rourke.

Journals/Periodicals: (Philippine Political Science Journals)

Buendia, R. (2011). Multinational states in asia: Accommodation or resistance edited by Jacques

POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations

CORRESPONDENCE LEARNING MODULE

For queries, please feel free to contact me through the following:

Get Involved. USL expects you to do the following:

 Individual work and required learning tasks must be done properly.

Included in this module are the following:

POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations

Topics: Understanding International Relations

Learning At the end of this module, you are expected to:

Date Topics Activities or Tasks

POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations

What is International Relations?

POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations

Approaches to International Relation:

POLS 1103-Introduction to International Relations

Main Features of Idealism:

2. Human welfare and advancement of civilization are the concerns of all.

4. By reforming the environment, bad human behaviour can be

eliminated. 5.War represents the worst feature of relations.

6. By reforming international relations, war can be and should be eliminated.

The main supporters of idealism have been:

Key Features of Realism:

1. History gives evidence that humanity is by nature sinful and wicked.

3. Human instinct for power cannot be eliminated.

7. Nations always seek power, demonstrate power and use power.

How can human nature be characterized?

What is the relationship between the individual and the society?

What are the characteristics and role of the state?

How is the international system organized?

* END of LESSON *

* END of LESSON *

* END of LESSON *