Samenvatting
Analyzing international relations summary
- Instelling
- Universiteit Leiden (UL)
A combination of lecture notes and the reading notes with an attempt to answer the guiding questions for the readings.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 173 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 173 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Gekoppeld boek
Titel boek:
Auteur(s):
- Uitgave:
- ISBN:
- Druk:
Verkoper
VolgenVoorbeeld van de inhoud
Analyzing international relations:Lecture 1: introduction
➔ Goals of the course:
- To get behind the headlines
- To deepen to our understanding of IR
- To think critically about big important issues
➔ IR is a subfield
- We can’t cover it all
➔ Focus of course:
→ Conflict and cooperation between states
→ Focus on explanation (why and under what conditions)
- A little bit about description (inevitable) what/ when / how
- Prescription what is right or desirable (normative side)
( eg: what factors at national and international levels shape the likelihood and the form of
conflict and cooperation between states)
→ Helps us to understand:
- Why conflict is hard to seem to avoid?
- Which solution are chosen and why
- Why are some problems addressed and others not
➔ Key questions:
- Do international rules and organizations make a difference?
- Why is war so common ( but so horrible)
- Why is it so hard to protect the global environment?
- Can international law prevent human right abuse?
- Do economic independence promote growth or vulnerability or both
➔ Corona
- Part of the problem or new problem (transforming world politics?)
,➔ For readings:
- Find the core idea (value and limitations as a way of understanding of world politics)
compare to other resources (there are not truths simply arguments on how to
understand world politics)
➔ Thucydides and the Peloponnesian war (431-404 BC)
➔ 5th century BC among Greek city states
• Went of for 27 years in ancient Greece
• Sparta & allies vs Athens & allies
→ Sparta: Autocracy & major land power
→ Athens: democracy & growing power with overseas empire
→ Result: Sparta won reasserted its dominance over the Greek world
➔ Thucydides writing ( 460 – 400 BC)
• Athenian general in Peloponnesian war
• Blamed for Athenian defeat → exiled from Athens ( did not bring forces fast
enough)
• Wrote a historical interpretation of the war ( travelled through islands)
• Gave an explanation to why and what happened
→ Why people attribute him as the first modern ‘historian’
→ did not attribute events to god
➔ Thucydides explanation of the war
→ He said that war was inevitable because of the growth of Athenian power and the fear
caused in Sparta
- The Athenians made their empire more and more strong → Sparta felt the position to
be no longer tolerable and decided to provoke and employ all energies to destroy
power of Athens
- According to Sparta ( dominant power) Athenians ( rising power)
➔ Formed inspiration for contemporary idea
, → Thucydides trap: The claim that war is likely between rising power and declining
power
Eg: Destined for war china and USA (Graham Alison)
- Found 16 cases when a rising power rivaled a dominant power ( 12 resulted in war)
- He argued yes war can be avoided but it requires great political and psychological
flexibility
- There can be similar dynamics in other parts of the world in different times
➔ What do Thucydides study of war in ancient Greece and Allison book on US – China
relations have In common ?
1. They both talk about states as the key actors in international politics ( not to say that
there are no other actors → but that we understand a lot more by just focusing on
them
2. Differences in the growth of states ( have different economic growth rates → over
time that leads to some states rising and others failing relative to each other) → over
time leases to redistribution of power among states ( rising and falling) → that
produces conflict
• But Thucydides in not best known for this
➔ The siege of Melos (416 BC)
• Melos was helping Sparta (unofficial)but claimed neutrality
• Melos was originally a colony of Sparta
• Athens insisted that Melos should support them → they refused → Athens destroyed
Melos and killed man enslaved women
• What Thucydides was famous for was recreating a dialogue between representatives
of Athens and Melos before fighting ( Melian dialogue) ➔ diplomacy
➔ Melian and Athenian views on
➔ These are 3 big themes in international relations:
→ Neutrality: How do superpowers treat small states that seek neutrality
- That don’t want to join (choose sides)
- Melians argue that they have been independent for 700 years and that they have no
interest in picking sides in the dispute → Athenians (superpower) we cant afford to
let you stay neutral ( the message (signal) that will be sent to other small states) we
cant tolerate your independence
→ Alliances: will a super power help a small state
- Can these commitments be trusted ( eg NATO) ( to be natural ) → was not trusted by
Sparta → On the other hand Melos said they trusted Spartans to come to their aid →
, Athenians said we trust them to do what is best in their self-interest ( they are
skeptical about it) → they are expecting a Sparta first foreign policy
- Will a superpower help a small state?
→ Justice what is it place in international relations?
- Melanin’s are left with one card to play
- The favors of gods (now it be would about international law) → Melians argue that
they are right that’s why god will favor them in the confrontation → Athenians in our
experience god helps those that help them self (they find this reference meaningless
what matter is your abilities)
➔ Which modern cases appear similar?
(Great power a small power and their ability of the small state to follow its own course and
practice self-determination)
Examples:
1. US policy toward Mexico
→ two examples are enormous transformation of territory from Mexico
- Annexation of Texas ( 1845)
- Mexican cession (1848) → at the end of war even larger land to Mexico
2. US embargo on Cuba
- Socialist revolution → hesitated by US → the government argues that it’s a denial of
Cuba’s self determination ]
3. Russia actions in Chechenia
- Wanted independence → Russia really brutal reaction
4. Russian invasion of Ukraine
- Claimed Russian speaking wanted to join EU and NATO → threat to Russia (
annexed Crimea ( other than international law)
5. Israeli policy towards Palestinians
- Only grant as much autonomy as they want to give
( Echo across centuries)
➔ Is internal politics really about all about power
( do we just need to know who has power)
→ Athenians say
‘ Justice is enforced only among those who can be equally constrained by it and those who
have power use it while the weak make compromises’ ➔
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper salmamataich. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €5,39. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 66579 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen