History of international relations
Introduction
• Why HIR? → because we chose for a political social science and not ‘history’?
- Because you can only understand the relations in the present if you understand the relations in the
past so to understand why certain social structures exist
- Learn from the past, it’s very difficult. Fe: it’s dangerous to appeace/ negotiate with a dictator. But we
keep repeat the mistakes in the past into the present (look the Middle East)
- To make a comparison. What’s the purpose? We need additional cases and these will be historical
cases
- To understand why certain social structures exist → we make historical comparisons in order to the
understand the natural norms and functions in the present
- Getting an historical perspective in order to understand why things work now the way they do → stolid
historical graz??
- Most historians will disagree that history repeats itself. Fe: Hitler, he was a charismatic political leader,
he office a sense of security, he gave selfconfidence and people need confidence in that situation. Now
it doesn’t have the same consequences. A dictator will not necessarily lead to world war bcs the history
doesn’t repeat itself
1. Bcs the present is laden with the past. The actions in the past influences the present. Fe: post-
communist societies: communism came to an end in the SU. Many years afterwards, people refer to
these lands (bv Poland) as post- communist societies/lands. Communism led to a distressed …
o Colonialism: people in Belgium, we used to have an empire and when we had it, we felt
superior the people who lived in these lands. (Bv British people felt superior the people in
India). People argue that apparently, it’s difficult to live in post superior lands, because this
people has still an arrogance attitude. These attitudes have influence to our policy.
2. Bcs history serves as a resource for political memories. Bv: Kiev and Russia: when they trying to
legitimize their actions, they use political memories. Russia says that Kiev had a important meaning for
Russia in the past so Kiev has to stay to Russia. On this way; Ukraine pushes also a narrative about Kiev
but another narrative because they interpret the past in a different way. Fe: America use 9/11 to
justify the war crimes in the ME.
o memories: (from text) → not everyone remembers the same things, we made a selection of
the memory. On this way, people can’t always understand each other.
o Political memories: leaders don’t remember all things from the past, they will only remember
parts/selections of a certain action/war in the past. Fe: Israel keeping the holocaust ‘alive’ to
justify the state of Israel: they have another vision about the holocaust. They push a certain
narrative about the holocaust. They will convince the audience that this is the best way etc
▪ Propagated by ‘memory activists’: people who study history and present a picture of
the history and will other people convince that this picture is the right picture of the
past. Fe: the Leopold II statues. As long as this alternative view of colonialism isn’t
institutionalized into books, school.. people will not remember what the activists
tried to do. Activisten zeggen dat het een slechte koning is en hij mishandeld enz is
en ze willen dat hun mening (de alternatieve mening) in boeken etc komt want
anders gaan mensen vergeten waarom de beelden weggehaald zijn.
▪ Based on ‘selection and exclusion’:
▪ Depends on the ‘efficiency of political pedagogy’
▪ Show a high degree of ‘homogeneity’
▪ Relies on symbols and rites that ‘enhance emotions of empathy and identification’
3. Bcs history reveals the fundamental contingency of contemporary social and political arrangements:
niet alles vanuit het verleden is op een natuurlijke manier tot stand gekomen, als de geschiedenis
, ander was verlopen, hadden bepaalde zaken op een andere manier tot stand zijn gekomen. → the
social and political arrangements could have been ended up different.
o Bv natural slavery: now we know that slavery isn’t natural. Bv: kastensysteem van India:
people are born into a ‘kast’ and can’t escape. So they have a certain ‘role’ and can’t change
their life. But that isn’t natural, it’s just an historical accomplishment.
o Fe: gender equality is an historical accomplishment and if we will change it, we have to fight
for it because it isn’t natural and we have to prove it.
4. History reveals the context-specificity of scholarly knowledge claims. A law of social science rules →
when a stranger came into an other new society then the society receives the stranger with a lot of
hostility (=vijandigheid).
o Bv: the balance of power: when a country became very powerful, other countries resist the
power (willen de macht dus beperken van het land dat machtig wordt)
o Bv: the democratic peace
• What is HIR?
1. A scholarly discipline who is presentist: is focused on the present and most of the research will
not have a strong historical base.
2. A scholarly discipline who is Eurocentric: most of the announces are being written by an
Eurocentric person.
Problem:
- in current politics is that western countries losing their values and non-western powers are re-
asserting themselves (=zichzelf opnieuw bevestigen)→ they are trying to achieve a dominant position
on global level. Fe India, they are still struggling but they are climbing on the diplomate stage. Fe
china: how will China behave, how will the regions around China behave? if we will understand that,
we have to look into the past and see how these regions react to China in the past. So it’s useful to
learn about the Asia history, not to predict the actions of the regions but to understand and to know.
o Countries outside of Europe are asserting themselves and the European role in the future is
likely to become less important.
o
- what is the logic of the international system?: we will to achieve knowledge how the int system works
by comparing the international systems.
- what is an international system? What is the logic?
A system is made up of units that act independently of each other. The behavior of one system always
depends on the behavior of another system. Because they are part of the same environment.
• Basic unit = state
o sovereign state = a state which exercises supreme authority within a given territory (=hoogste
gezag uitoefent binnen een bep gebied). It determines its own affairs in accordance with its
own interests and aspirations (so in the 16th with the own interests of the leader) (bepaalt
zijn eigen zaken in overeenstemming met zijn eigen belangen (vd leider)).
o There is no ‘world leader’ so states are the most important unites. They are independent so
they act on their own but also always together with and in relation to others.
• Social practices: borders, flags and national anthems to be sung. We need to make borders and to
defend our borders.
o On this way the people in a country can identify themselves. We have to prove that we are a
separate state in a world full of states.
• Rules and norms:
o sovereign equality → the logic of an international system is expressed in norms and rules.
These differences are the subject of a comparative study of international systems.
o Every state had self-determination (zelfbeschikking) they shouldn’t interfere in each other’s
affairs.
o They are functionally equal (are the same etnities, doing the same things and have the same
status as members of the same system) but there where states who were larger and more
powerful (in practice)
,Anarchy= There is no common authority and every state looks after itself → no one looks after for the system
as a whole. So the European international system= anarchial system
• Implications:
o anarchy (where people are stuck: without authorities) → permanently insecure and war is
always a threat
o security dilemma (they can never trust their neighbors)so they have to defend itself by buying
weapons. Then the neighbors feels insecure, so they also start to buying weapons.
o So the European system is extremely violent (bcs states can’t trust each other)
we draw fault conclusions how international relations works because we can’t compare such international
systems because there is only one= European system (as a result of the European colonism) → international
politics are European rules → entire world has been recreated in European’s image.
By non European systems (Asia) there is the territory distributed differently → much less borders to separate
the regions but they tell you about the features (kenmerken) off the land. So they have a more powerful
relationship to the whole state (de grenzen tussen 2 gebieden zijn veel minder belangrijk, ze vinden de relatie
tav de staat in zijn geheel veel belangrijker)
Non european systems are not anarchial systems but hierarchical
o Some entities are fully independent, others are fare less so
o Are not functional equal to each other
o Territory has been defined differently
o There is no non-interfere and no self-determination
o They are held together by means of common culture, shared values under a state who had imperial
ambitions (=keizerlijke ambities)
If we go back in time we will find non-european ways of organizing international politics
So we have to understand the non-Europeans experiences (fe Asia experience)
• How is HIR? → what shape will this course have and how we will be evaluated?
We will have to write a paper (assignment) → Zeger Verleye
Stateless societies
Every perspective allows us to notics things while making us blind to other things. Fe: we take it for granted
that states are the subject of history. That world history= the history of a state → we have to question this
assumption
All territory belongs to one state or to another state but no land belongs to more than one state.
States are mutually (onderling) exclusive and together exhaustive of political space
Before the states appeared, we were gatherers and hunters who moved around for searching food. Because
they were constantly moving, it was difficult for political authorities to exercise control over them =stateless
society
Moreover (bovendien) they had only temporary buildings so we couldn’t found things about them → they has
‘no history’
Farmers were easier to subdue (onderwerpen) bcs they lived in a particular place and cultivate a piece of land.
After the harvest, farmers went to the king and demand their due (Eisen wat ze verschuldigd zijn)= how the
first states were established.
The transition of agriculture was a great improvement on the condition of statelessness. Bcs only then, human
history could began. Questionable of the agriculture was really an improvement?
Stateless societies where more egalitarian (=gelijk) than people in state dominated societies
, Other kind of nomadic people (and it’s difficult for states to control them)= Pastoralists (=veehouders)= people
who keep animals (sheep etc) who graze the land and when they are out of land, the owners move in order to
find new pastures (weilanden)
Fe: Africa
Walls and bridges
Nomadic people destroyed fences of farmers and city walls of cities. And they destroyed culture. They weren’t
‘barbarian’ but had only an other outlook on life.
Culture refers to cultivate = tilling of the land (bewerken vh land) → to make it grow (fe a plant) → build fences
to separate what is ours from that which belongs to others.
Private property = good walls = good neighbors
And walls to create a home: on the side of the wall we are safe and on the other side we have to interact with
strangers.
So in this way we has to protect our culture → belongs to the people like us and the place where we live.
Some int systems had walls → interaction with the rest of the world is limited (bv America)
But they are int systems that has the opposite logic → are outward-looking and expansive and seek to connect
different parts of the world with eachother (fe the Mongol in 13 th and China and Africa..)
This is how we find Chinese pottery in Southern Africa → this is how civilization (=beshaving) spreads
When our society is connect to others, we are connected to other people → so we can compare things and
judge them. So because of civilization we have the choice to stick to our ‘old’ habits (gewoonten) and norms
and other things or we can pick up the new and the never-before-tried.
If we pick up the new, we give up our old ways and habits (=our culture). That’s the reason why civilization
destroys and determines culture.
China and East Asia
Introduction
What is China?
- a state in the continent of Asia with a own culture and language.
- A sovereign state → a state on his own, surround with multiple other states
- Dominant power in Asia but there were policy’s that escaped the influence of China fe: Japan.
What does it mean to identify a ‘Chinese’ international system? →
- China was dominant and because of that she could choose the rules of the international system. She
was the center of the international system. The international system concerned the external relations
(of Asia) to the empire (=China)
- China= suzerainty (=heerschappij) = a dominant state that has control over the international affairs of
a subservient state, while the subservient state retains (behoudt) domestic autonomy (binnenlandse
autonomie)
- overland system: how chinese dealt with neighbors to the north and west and to the south and east
o the people from the north to the west were nomads (=permanent threat)
o they lived on the steppes of inner Asia and had access to military technology (fast horses) so
they could easily raid (aanvallen) the Chinese farming communities
- Tribute system: how Chinese dealt with neighbors from the south to the east
o The Himalaya’s blocked any invasion from the south → no military threats
o Was good communication between the south and China (Korea, Japan)
What China is not: a nation-state
What China is: It’s a region where there were successful imperial dynasties. Because one family wanted to
achieve power in a specific place. They had pretence of being to ‘middle kingdom’ (=zhongguo) → bcs country’s
made a journey to China for giving gifts to the emperor.
