NATIONAL SCHOOL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Department of International Relations and European Integration

Master’s Degree Program: “Security and Diplomacy”

Theory of International Relations

- World Politics -

Professor Vasile Secăreş, Ph.D.

SNSPA
Bucharest, 2018
II. International Relations: actors,
relations, principles and structure
1. A new era.
A series of events during the ’90s and early 2000:
1.1. The war in the former Yugoslavia (especially the war in Kosovo)
and the independence of Kosovo
1.2. The terrorist attacks of 9/11 2001 and the recent/the new wave of
attacks (2015-2016) in Europe generated by ISIS, with the result of
the US-led war on terrorism and now with the conclusion that: We
(France, the EU?) are at war!
1.3. The Georgian war of August 2008 and Moscow’s subsequent
extension of diplomatic recognition to South Ossetia and Abkhazia as
independent entities
1.4. The annexation of Crimea by Russia and the hybrid war in Ukraine
(the secessionist regions)
1.5. The so-called right to intervention
1.6. A new approach in national security strategies and military doctrines
(pre-emptive and preventive war)
1.7. These evolutions may represent a marker of a radical change in the
structure of the international system
→ a challenge for many mainstream theories = new concepts!
2. Changes in the structure of International Relations

2.1. New actors: post-modern entities (EU); the anti-state: Al Qaeda, now
ISIS (the global terrorist network); protectorates; failed-states; rogue
states
Consequences:the issue of the political and legal status of different
entities; the secessionist regions and the issue of non-viable entities;
the dilemmas of the UN: the case of the East Timor = the responsibility
“to protect”(humanitarian intervention) vs. power politics
2.2. Fragmentation and deterritorialization
→ the challenge of secession in the Euro-Atlantic area: Scotland and
Catalunia; the right to self-determination: an endless process?
→ what kind of deterritorialization: a) ISIS, terrorism and security; b)
the EU: a new political entity?
2.3. Modern and post-modern entities: the present dilemmas of the EU
→ federalism vs. intergovernmentalism and the EU as a global power
→ the Treaty of Lisbon: the death of the dragon (the European super-
state) and the institutional crisis of the EU
2.4. A new political and legal framework?
Changes affecting the arrangement of the parts (political entities) in the
structure and the way they are differentiated from each other
 Some arguments for a post-Westphalian evolution of the international
system or a phase representing a new “feudal” fragmentation of world
politics
→ some evolutions may be viewed as indicative of the fact that
constitutive norms of the international society (see Bull, Buzan) are
changing with the norms of global capitalism and neo-liberalism,
coming in place of those of state sovereignty etc.
→ the present crisis of global capitalism: consequences = different models
in competition? reinventing the role of the state?
3. The impact of the so-called “three revolutions” in
International Relations

3.1. The sovereign revolution: sovereignty was

“internationalized”; domestic jurisdiction and non-
interference became conditional on international
accountability

Consequences: who decides on what? When we

decide to do something and when we don’t, and
why?
3.2. The protection-of-order revolution: from the basic rule of the westphalian
system (non-intervention and mutual respect) to the right to intervention
(responsibility to protect) and judicial measures (ad hoc international tribunals)
+ international protectorates (BIH, Kosovo, East Timor)
→ the new use of Chapter VII powers of the UN Charter: the Security Council
resolutions of the ’90s = essential departures in terms of the management of
international peace and security; redefining the notion of threat to international
security; intervention and the regime change;
→ USA in Iraq: we will do that with or without a resolution of the Security
Council; the West and Russia in the war in Syria;
→ Russia and the Georgian case and now Eastern Ukraine.
3.3. The self-defence revolution: a new definition of self-
defence = defence of the state has to embrace the range of
new risks, in order to protect from disorder and disruption
emerging from within some other states!
→ defence against instability; what kind of instability?
→ Kosovo campaign of NATO vs. Russian intervention in
Georgia & the hybrid war in Ukraine; the civil war and
foreign intervention in Syria
→ new security and defence strategies (US:2002, 2006;
NATO and the EU; Russia): preventive and pre-emptive
war
4. Old and new concepts on International Relations

4.1. The “westphalian” definition: a system of sovereign

states; no supra-national authority / government
→ the realist assumptions on how IR work:
a) The state-centric assumption (states are the most
important actors)
b) The unitary rational – actor assumption (rational
pursuit of self-interest)
c) The anarchy assumption (the security dilemma and help-
yourself principle)
→ the Hobbesian forces of war and struggle for power among
states vs. the Kantian forces of transnational solidarity
and conflict
4.2. The impact of globalization and interdependence:
→ “it is increasingly problematic to distinguish between
international system, international society and world
society” - see Dunne
→ “international system”, “international society” and “world
society” are distinct systemic structures and consecutive
stages in the evolution of a culture of anarchy, reaching (in
the stage 4) “collective security” and the end of anarchy =
the world state (stage 5) – see Wendt: now we are
witnessing an “incomplete international society”
 Is this image of world politics real? See the real
characteristics of the present stage of transitions.
4.3. The international law vs. the role of great powers
→ the reshaping of the global structures of power: the role of
force (the use of force) and the habitual disregard of the
international norms of interstate behavior
→ a new hegemonic structure and the great power principle
→the Chinese model of great power politics and the strategic
relationship between the US and China.
→ the strategic deficit of global governance (see G20 and G8/
now G7 again and the present economic and financial
crisis)
NB: the world politics = still “modern”!
Bibliography
• V. Secăreş,”The New Cycle of Power in The 21st Century and
the Strategic Relationship Between the USA and China”, in
“Europolity Journal”, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2015
• K.J. Holsti, International Politics. A Framework For Analysis,
7th edition, Prentice Hall International, 1995 , pp. 42-50; 54-68
• H. Bull, The Anarchical Society, 3rd edition, Columbia
University Press, New York, 2002, pp. 13; 23-26; 39; 130; 200-
201; 207; 240-241; 248-249
• B. Buzan, From International to World Society?, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 2004, pp. 8-9; 45-62; 231
• A. Belamy (ed.), International Society and Its Crisis, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 2005, pp. 9-11; 65; 70-71
• A. Wendt, Why A World State is Inevitable, in “European
Journal of International Relations”, vol. 9, no. 4, 2003, pp. 491-
542