POLITICAL SCIENCE: INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

MODULE 1

4th July 2023

Significance

Everything is dynamic in world relation. Isolation and neutrality is not possible. In order to
encapsulate it in a more objective manner, the world affairs that affect us- need to be studied.

Definitions & Differences

International Relations:

Narrow Definition: Interactions/ relations between the governments of two or more nations are
called international relations. It then becomes a domain of a selected few. It used to happen in a
kind of secretive, behind the door manner. The citizens were not so involved.

Broad Definition: According to Painter & Jeffery- IR is a complex network of relationships

between the changing set of institutions and social groups and a product of their own processes
of institutional development and historical change. It is not limited to the government. There are
various things involved- MNCs, the people involved, trade, etc. Broader, larger and varied
interaction.

International Politics:

According to international politics, states are the building blocks. Whatever politics take place
between two states is called international politics. Two important concepts include:

- Concept of power

- Concept of national interest

The nations try to achieve national interest via power. Cooperation will also be there provided
the powers are similar.

Global Politics:
It gives an extended version of international relations. Two ways of defining global politics:

- It has a planetary or worldwide existence, not only international. Eg: climate change,
global warming, nuclear non proliferation, devastation by AI, social welfare, protection
against welfare, etc.

- Though it is not global, everything happening at national, sub- national, regional is

important. Each of these things co-exist.

“State is dead & sovereignty is irrelevant”

Origin & Evolution

o International relations as a discipline and academic activity have been there since history
– as long as recorded history, though not in a formalized manner.
o In a formalized manner, the study of international relations began in 1919 by University
College of Wales, London – which established the department of international politics.
o 1920- Department of international relations established in London School of Economics.
o The term was coined by Jeremy Bentham in his book – Principles of Morals &
Legislations.
o Peace of Westphalia – 1648 recognition of international politics started with this.
o Arthshastra & Mandara theory by Chanakya
o Few Works on origin and evolution of international relations
- Hobbes work on Labyrinth
- Mchivveli’s Work “The Prince”
- Thucydides – Peloponesian

5th July 2023

Great Debates of International Relations

1. First Debate – Between realism and idealism

The first debate between realism and idealism perhaps received the most attention in IR. World
War I left the political and psychological scars on the idealists and the narrative of peace and
harmony. The outbreak of another world war gave way to another pragmatic approach i.e.
realism. It started in the 1930s and 40s. The idealists created league of nations, chair, etc. But the
reality was far different. There was economic depression, failure of league of nations and the
world war second. This was a huge blow to idealists. Realist on the other hand preferred self
interest than anything else. Even if they decide to share power, they will negotiate in a way their
national interest are protected. EH Carr came up with a work – Twenty Years of Crisis (1939)
which was a major success in the international relations market. Through this work, realism
came by its name through this work. Thucydides, Hobbes, Machiavelli also worked on similar
lines- but the concept of realism had not been named yet.

Prof Carr does a public service in compelling those whom he terms the utopians to take stock
of their relief.

Carr made the idealists revisit their analysis.

Carr’s criticism on

1. Devotion of their energies to visionary projects rather than analyzing facts and causes.

2. Overestimation of law and morality taken up in politics and underestimation the role of power.

2. Second debate – Traditionalists and Behaviorists (Literates v Numerates)

Traditionalists support the idea of value laden approach, something which would not go by the
standards of scientific standards. It started in 1950s-60s. B’s believed in facts and figures,
scientific approach. T/s were not able to justify their stands.

T- Hedley Bull

B- Morton Kaplan Internation Theory: The Case for Classical Approach

Take from arshi few lines lol lmao

6th July 2023

3. Third Debate – Inter Paradigm Debate (Late 1960’s and early 1970’s)

This debate goes between neo realist and neo liberalist. Neo realists explained their ideas with
scientific approach.

Causes of the problem in realism

Détente – Thaw. There was dip in the antagonism between the two blocks. The leaders realized
its better to pacify. The relations were slightly improving. The liberalist were not able to explain
this.
A third narrative arose- Marxism. It came from concepts like international economic theory, etc.

The liberalist realized the pacifist nature – and they were too idealist, they brought certain
changes in their theory. This was called the theory of complex interdependence. This was a
better explanation for world affairs.

Intra paradigm debate was also going on. Neo realism emerged- Kenneth Waltz

Neo realism and neo liberalism were coming together, almost becoming one.

4. Fourth Debate: Nationalist v Reflectivist ( explaining v understanding)

It is also called theorizing about theory itself. Nationalist were changed versions of
behaviourilist. They were called utility maximizers. States would always try to extract the
maximum possible benefits. Relativists had a series of theories. Social constructivism, post
structuralism, post modernism, feminism, green politics- all of these were value laden., not
completely abstract.

Realised irrelevance of complete philosophy and science in explaining international relations.

They altered their stance.

Actors of International Relations

1. State

State : The legal sanctity of the state was given by article 1 of Montevideo convention of 1933. It
reads state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications.

1. Permanent Population

2. Defined territory

3. Government

4. capacity to enter into relationship with other states

30 Years of War

It started in 1614 and ended in 1648. Westphalia war put an end to the corruptive practice of the
church. France, etc. were involved. “Peace was a series of treaties that brought an end to the 30
years of war and revolted against the corrupt practices of the church. This religious reform
movement actually represented the assertion of political authority by secular sources over the
spiritual authority of the church. The European princes questioned and defied the universal
authority and control of the pope.

Consequences:

- The sovereign jurisdiction of the state

- All states were legally equal

- It was not able to eliminate the control of popes, yet gave the sovereignity and autonomy
to the state.

State v Nation

State has a universal recognition and sovereignity. Absent in nation.

Eg: china , catalonia , Kurdistan.

The status of statehood will get legal recognition in the international forum.

7th July 2023

II. Non State Actors

Includes;

A. International Organizations

i. Multilateral

UN, NATO, EU

Problems:

: Consensus

: Superpowers dictate terms.

ii. Minilateral

Coalition of the Willing

Quad, BRICS, SCO

B. Multinational Corporations

They have huge resources and cross boundaries: strong role in international community

Eg: Tesla – India

C. Non Governmental Organisations.

Eg: Red Cross, Doctors without borders, Greenpeace, etc.

D. Others

Terrorist organizations like ISIS, Al Quaeda

People who have impacted/ will impact the international community.

Two Models on International Relations

1. State Centric Model

Figure 1 Billiard Balls represent states

 o It is also called Billiard Ball Model given by Arnold Wolfers (1892-1968). He was a
progressive realist. The state have clear boundaries. There are going to collisions between
states, just like billiard balls, and these are natural. These collisions will be based on
military or economic reasons. The kind of collisions will depend on the power. This
implies that all states are unequal
o Consequences:

: Self contained impermeable models will have a clear domestic- international divide.

: The conflict or collision will depend on the power. Patterns of conflict and cooperation will
be largely be dependent on the distribution of power of the states.

Examples: Russia Ukraine, MNC working on helm of State.

2. Mixed Actor Model

o This is also called the cobweb model given by John Burton. (1915-20
o Inferences:

: There will be a transnational flow of information, idea, money, etc. It signifies

interconnectedness and interdependence. This is important in the international relations.

: Complex Interdependence

In issues which cannot be dealt by any nation alone. Eg: covid, nuclear proliferation, etc.

Examples: Globalised world.

Both the models co-exist.

8th & 9th July ~ Holiday

10th July ~ Freeclass

11th July GD

12th July 2023

Globalization
Three different views on globalism
1. Hyperglobalists

They are also called believers. IThey believe that gloabalisation is a positive sum game where
everybody is winning. Any kind of resistance towards globalization is defeating. This is the way
in which the resources can be best put to their use. Emergence of global commodities, global
markets, etc. Liberalist would support this.

2. Sceptics

Thewy believe that globalism is nothing but a farce. It is only a strategic system created by the
powerful countries to create dependence. They create the core and the periphery- the developed
and the under developed. They are creating a hierarchical system eventually. It is the state
through which the entire system of gloabalisation has developed. Marxist and the realist would
support this.

3. Transformationalist

We cannot deny the changes in the economy, culture, etc. But, borders still matter. Larger view
adopted by current scholars, academia, etc. They don’t take a polarized view.

Aims of IR
1. Foreign Policy

A state’s decision on how it should maintain relations with other states. Diplomacy is nothing but
an honourable spine – communication, negotiation, image building, information gathering, etc. It
is a tool for foreign policy.

2. Decision Making

Does not always happen according to a particular view. Many reasons influence this process.

Four models of decision making:

A. Rational Actor Model

 Also called economic man model or the utilitarian model

 Nature of the problem, identify the problem, identify the alternatives, pick up the best
alternative, implement and evaluate.
  Mechanical

 Sometimes decisions are based on values or beliefs or pressure. In such a scenario, it is

time taking to apply such a model. So, thereotecially it seems best- but in practice it is
time taking.

 We don’t maximize, we satisfice. This is also called bounded rationality.

B. Incrementalism

 Conservatist

 Status Quoist

 More towards inertia than innovation

 Bringing in changes incrementally happening.

C. Bureaucratic Organizational Model

 Graham Allison 1971

 Called these above models as black fox model: don’t pay attention to precedents,
anticedennt, etc.

 This model highlights how process influences the model. It highlights the impact of
values, assumptions, patterns of behaviour found in any organization. Actions are
considered as an output of collective subsistence based on organosation routines and
decisions are seem to reflect the entrenched culture of the regime/ governance. It also
emphasizes on the bargaining capacity of the bureaucracies, personnel’s , agencies
concerned. The actors enter the game with various preferences, ability and political
powers.

D. Cognitions

There are decision makers on an individual/group levels. At times, there are reasons beyond
logical understanding which have been taken. It can lead to problems like ethnocentricism, group
think.
 13th July 2023

This can be understood on 4 levels. The person who gave this was Waltz. However, he identified
only the first three ones. They are:

1. Individual level – great leaders, learning patterns, accidents of history, perceptions, decision
making in crisis, assassinations

2. National/Domestic level – nationalism, types of government, domestic coalition, public

opinion, military industrial complex, bureaucracies, political parties

3. Inter-state/systemic level – power dynamics, alliances, wars, treaties, IOs, diplomacy,

bargaining, etc.

4. Global level – religious fundamentalism, terrorism, technology, environment, information,

effect of history, North-South divide

Individual level:

o India after independence would have been different if Gandhi was not there
o Hitler and WW2
o There are so many things in world history which are attributed to some specific people.
o The perception of the leader, or the one in the prime position affect history.
o Brinkmanship: take a particular policy to its absolute limit before it breaks into disaster
o There have been certain actions of the leaders which have led to particular episodes and
particular chapters in history.

National/domestic level:

o Aggregate of individuals who function within domestic politics but the decisions and
actions there have a nationalist tendency. The kind of government you have will affect
your domestic politics as well as your international relations. When it is time for
elections, democracy will function differently. What goes on in the nation will impact the
international front also.
o Assuming Nation A has adopted a lot of protectionist policies because it comprises of a
lot of domestic manufacturers. So the electoral base consists of these people and to
promote domestic trade, adopt protectionist policies to limit imports. So these domestic
policies that they come up with will not just impact domestic but also international
relations.
o What goes on within the nation impacts not just the nation but the international system as
well.
Inter-state/systemic level:

o The entire cold war era is a good example of this. The entire world order was affected by
the 2 blocs. So what are the power dynamics between small power, great power, etc.
o Your geopolitical position would be affected.
o During the Obama regime, there was a deal between the P5 regime and the EU where
Iran would strike its program and sanction relief would be given to Iran. This is another
example of the inter-state level.

Global level:

o This can only be dealt with when countries work together.

All these 4 levels are different. But there is one factor which collects them all together i.e.
POWER.

14th July 2023

Presentation.

15th July 2023

Collective Interest & Collective Goods Problem

Tragedy of the commons, burden sharing, free riding, mixed interest game, etc. are terms that
describe collective interest.

In domestic scenario, we have robust mechanism to ensure compliance. We have authority, in

the form of the government. In the international system :

 we don’t have a world govt.

 every state is sovereign and legally equal

 the issues are usually zero some situation (somebody’s gain is somebody else’s loss)

 its anarchical system.

These kinds of problems will be less in the smaller groups in international relations. For eg: G7,
Quad (bilateral, trilateral, minilateral).
  Consensus is easy to reach

 they are aligned towards their shared interest

 Defection in smaller groups is easy to identify

 redressal of the problem is easy.

Core Principles for Solving Collective Goods Problem

Principle Explanation Advantage Drawback

1. Dominance It creates a power hierarchy. i. Order i. Oppression

Some nations are at the top of
the list and these decide the ii. Stability ii. Resentment
rules of the game. iii. Predictability iii. Conflict over
For eg: Creation of Bretton position in hierarchy
iv. Enforces can harm the group’s
Woods Institution: Some members to
powerful nations decided the stability and well
contribute to a being.
entire monetary functioning. common goal.
These top players are trying to v. Minimizes open
fight for ‘status in hierarchy’ conflict.
and ‘sphere of influence’. They
don’t fight for resources
because they would eventually
come to these.

They want symbolic

submission by other members
which kind of reiterates there
hegemony. These states will
accept this brute force.

These are powerful because of

military, economic resources
and soft power.

Thomes Hobbe’s theory on

 Brute Force supports this.

2. Reciprocity Human societies thrive on this Incentives for -Downward spiral

principle and this is kind of a mutual If one happens to
behvourial norm to follow. cooperation harm one nation, it
Within international relation, would continue on-
this provides a very robust has an negative side.
mechanism to deal with the
collective goods problem. States pay back the
Diplomacies, arms reduction negative actions. It
treaties, trade agreements are can also lead to
based on. This is linchpin for a fuelling arms race.
number of collective initiatives Eg: India – China
by the states. It has a direct standoff post 2020.
benefit. It does not require a
central authority or world
government.
-Complex
Since it is mostly between accounting
states, it requires policing.
It is a tricky
Eg: Post 2003, when Libya business.
decided to go on a non nuclear
There are a lot of
zone- sanctions by the west
power differences
were relaxed.
and a number of
other factors are to
be considered.

-Fundamental
Attribution Error

Always discounting
other nations’
attributes. Complex
calculus in play.
Over-estimate/
under- estimate the
other nations
 attributes.

Eg: Severe sanctions

faced by Pokhran
tests- India
blacklisted.

-Security Dilemma

Eg: Cold war era.

3. Identity When the actions are taken in Redefine interest Demonizing an out
the larger interest of the community group
community. Broken down to interest
roots, cultural identity,
historical, etc.

Eg: Scientist donating his

study after retirement to a
person from another nation.

Believe in humanitarian
domination.

Eg: Richer nations taking onus

of pollution and taking steps to
cater to these, Scandavian
Countries, Mother Teresa,
Japan going non nuclear after
Hiroshima Nagasaki, non state
actors, UNICEF, UNDP,
UNHCR, etc.

Cosmopolitan and universal

aspect of justice, morality, etc.

Q. Why would nations forego their self interest for collective interest?

International Law vis-à-vis International Relations

Domestic Laws v International Law: Domestic Law is hard law while international law is soft
law.

Peace of Augsburg, 1555 reaffirmed the independence of German principalities from the holy Roman empire and allowed them to choose thier own religion.
This was the first step on the road towards a European system of sovereign states.

Peace fo Westphalia, 1648

Recognised nation states
Soverign and equal
Church dominance somewhat reduced

Treaties of Utretch, 1713 These were series of peace treaties which ushered in a stable period of civilisation marked the end of French monarchy and consolidated the principle of sovereignty by linking sovereign auhority to a fi
territorial boundary.

Theory: On the Law of War & Peace.

He gave four reasons for when a war is just.
i. Self defence
Hugo Grotius (1538-1645 )
ii. Enforce rights
iii. Seek reparation for injury
iv. Punish a wrong doer.

17th July 2023

(Included in the table above)

18th July 2023

Presentation