Theories and Approaches to International Security & will it help us in terms of climate change PDF

Preview

Summary

Lecturer: Steve Chisnell...

Description

Theories and Approaches to International Security & will it help us in terms of climate change? Context

a. b. c.

What are the main theories and approaches? What do they seek to explain? What are the challenges in applying them?

Quick Quiz

1. 2. 3. 4.

5.

What do we mean by ‘referent object’? That we are trying to secure or as Buzan says that which is existentially threatened and seeking to secure. Who plans to build 22 new coal burning power plants and why? Japan is doing so as a result of a tsunami that destroyed Fukuyama nuclear power station and effected stocks in nuclear power ● Nuclear power is theoretically a clean form of energy ● Largest coal mines in the world is in Canada because it earns a lot of income for the nation Over what issue have Ukraine and Iran stopped cooperating? ● The issue: The airline that was shot down by Iran and Ukrainians were on board in the plane and during the investigation they found out Iran intentionally shot the airliner down through a recording (where they lied/denied responsibility beforehand).

Realism At the heart is the nation state and would act individually but where that is not enough they would seek alliances to form the balance of power. To a Realist, the most stable world is a bipolar world where it is run by two super power nations (e.g. US and USSR in Cold War) and that a multi-polar world would be an unstable world because it disrupts the balance of power in the world. Characteristics of what Realists would think: ● ● ● ● ●

● ●

States most important actors Anarchy distinguishing feature of IR Security principal interest States seek to maximise power A world of strength and power where there are winners and lsoers. ● Thucydides quote: “Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” States act rationally An assumption within realism ● Will be discussed in reference to nuclear deterrence ● Also if we face a collective security crisis then we may argue that the best way to tackle this is rationally and realists assume states would act this way

● ●

Threat or use of military force a key tool Distribution of power most important cause of insecurity

Classical readings of Realism

●

●

●

History of the Peloponnesian war by Thucydides ● “Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” ● Between Athens and Sparta in 431-404BC ● The Prince by Machiavelli Intention of book is to demonstrate how a Prince should rule ● Better to be feared than loved [but not hated] ● Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes Start of the Realist thought in England ● The Leviathan is the state = without the state, man is in a state of nature which is brutish and short and is not a state of being. Only the state can bring a state of being where there is order and life and can stop life being brutish, short and chaotic. In exchange for the state to give this we sign a social contract to obey the state. ● Is nature really like this? Some may argue we need to revert back to a state of nature as climate change becomes worse due to mankind and some say this worsening is due to the state.

Realism – some offshoots Classical realism • Human nature root cause of state behaviour ● ● ●

The state is fragile and human nature is the root cause of how states behave States must pursue national interest and maximise power Hobbes, Machiavelli, Morgenthau, Carr, Niebuhr

Structural (neo-realism) • Not so interested in human nature but is to do with the structure of the world, so states must use self-help to gain security rather than power in itself. ● ● ● ●

International anarchy forces states to use self-help States seek security, not power as end in itself Dist of capabilities determines stability Waltz

Defensive realism ● ● ● ● ●

They believe you can remain secure without threatening other states, so what you focus on is your own security and if you protect that that should make you secure by such. Shares basic principles of structural realism. Emphasises survival States can remain secure without threatening other states – balance of power Van Evera, Walt, Glaser

Offensive realism

• They think security is scarce so you have to maximise your power and that state seek regional hegemony (to be the most powerful regional state). ● ● ● ●

Shares basic principles of structural realism Security is scarce, so states must maximise power States seek regional hegemony Mearsheimer, Zakaria

IN EXAMS: DONT SAY “ALL” REALISTS BUT USE PHRASING SUCH AS “MOST” OR NAME SPECIFIC AUTHORS/PHILOSOPHERS ‘Thucydides Trap’ in Destined for War by Graham Allison • ● ●

Focused on America and China from the lessons of Thucydides regarding Athens & Sparta

A rising power (China) and relatively declining power (US) and that the US will not allow China to rise as the main hegemon so the US will impose war to prevent this. Is this a trap? ● They are not destined for war but is likely.

Climate Change & The Nation State: The Realist Case by Anatol Lieven • Argues that we can only crack climate change with a realist approach, i.e. go back to a state of self-help and not rely on other nations to help us on climate change

●

● May explain why so many climate change conferences don’t get substantial things done Some argue that what we have to do on a government level is go to a place of state - planning, e.g. Marshall Plan approach during WW2/Cold War

Challenges to Realism

● ●

● ●

● ● ● ● ● ●

Did not predict end of Cold War, nor can it explain retrospectively Gained a lot of interest post-WW2 and was the dominant approach for decades, especially in the West. ● Why would the Soviet Union voluntarily give up its position as a world power to end the Cold War? Contradicts Realism. Democratic peace theory = Democracies don’t go to war with each other Probably since WW2, DPT has been proved ● Golden Arches Theory = Any country with McDonalds don’t go to war with each other ● Theory failed when Russia invaded Ukraine Ignores importance of identity and culture Unacceptable moral principles Exaggerates importance of states and distribution of power – terrorism? Climate change? Not explain much of foreign policy decisions Does not explain change in IR Especially massive systemic changes

Liberalism • ●

It is a belief system

Roots in Enlightenment, Locke, Kant ...WW1 and Wilson

●

● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ●

Period driven by a scientific revolution but went to other disciplines, e.g. Scottish Enlightenment by David Hume, a move away form a religious god and that rationalism and critical thinking can answer the world’s problems. Eclipsed by rise of fascism and WW2 Optimistic approach – peace and security is attainable, cooperation, no security dilemma through the power of institutions that allow cooperation of states Dont state that liberalists are optimists but that liberaliSM is optimisitic Nation states important actors, but also individuals, NGOs, international regimes ● Just not as important as realists believe (Realists argue that institutions can exist but is not more important/powerful than the state) Emphasise international trade and spread of democracy Not a unified theory Critics – thin in ideas; Western imperialism; future? Focus on modernisation and progress and cooperation Climate change activists steer away from the promotion of progress to survival

Neo-Liberalism argues for free market forces, limited state intervention and is an economic theory that is SEPARATE from political liberalism. It is very hard-nosed in its economic theory. Towards Perpetual Peace And Other Writings On Politics, Peace And History By Immanuel Kant • German thinker ● ●

Key thinker and influencer of democratic peace theory if you allow people to vote of going into war, most people would vote against going to war so if you changed as many nations to a democratic republic as possible will decrease substantively the prospects of war.

The End Of History And The Last Man By Fukuyama • The end of the Cold War has shown that we have now found the political structure for better health and happiness, as communism is annihilated all that is left are democratic liberal nations that will run the world. ●

However, recent current affairs show countries turning more authoritarian, e.g. American student survey show support for militaristic authoritarianism

Global Trends in Governance 1800-2016 Anocracies = A political system which is neither fully democratic nor fully autocratic, often being vulnerable to political instability. • e.g. Myanmar, Russia Cambodia, Thailand Marxist Tradition • capitalism. ●

● ● ●

Marxism isn’t necessarily a theory of international security but a theory of class warfare and

The world in which Marx saw was of class interest and that all states go through a number of stages to reach socialism and that capitalism is a stage on the way to socialism. Capitalism is full of contradictions where the rich get rich and the poor get rich and this state of living is unsustainable and will result in the collapse of capitalism and socialism will spring. Focus on conflict and revolution associated with economic change Revolution is the great source of political change 2008 financial crisis re-energised interest in Marxist explanations because it gave example of the contradictions of capitalism and give question of the capitalist system.

What is a theory? A model, i.e. made up, that seeks to explains how the world operates. • Never use the phrase “therefore, this proves that” because things are not fixed. ● ● ● ●

No one theory can explain it all. Sometimes we have to take bits of each theory. In some periods of history, realism can well explain things and other period of history liberalism can explain things. The Liberal order is Rigged by Keohane and Colgan: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/world/2017-04-17/liberal-order-rigged The elite has hijacked the liberal order where wealth is in their favour ● Liberalism cannot explain the wealth inequality of the world

Constructivist approach • ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

WE INVENT THE WORLD WE LIVE IN!

States are principal units of analysis Core aspects of IR are socially constructed Structures determined by shared ideas Importance of ideas and interests Emphasises the meanings given to material objects Alexander Wenn = Anarchy Is What The State Makes Of It. Security and some of these big issues are ideas we have constructed. This is a world driven by ideas and interests.

Example of how we give meaning to material objects in matter of security Both pictures of military weapons are equally destructive but we decided and assigned that the British warship is less of a security threat. Critical security studies • ● ● ●

●

How do we make a more peaceful world?

Originated in Canadian thinking following Rwandan Genocide, Yugolsavia War and other wars in the 90’s. Not just what is security? But whose security and how is this referent to be secured? Buzan’s 4 key questions: ● who is the referent object? ● Internal and external threats? ● More than the security sector and use of force? ● More than threats, dangers and urgency? Move away from scientific approach to more critical social analysis – Emancipation, Community

Societal security and Copenhagen School • ● ● ● ● ●

Society is the referent object and that what this does is politicises society

Alternative concept of security within European context Society is the referent object Issues – politicises security Also – migration through this lens can be seen as a challenge to security as the society is the referent object and migration changes society. ● Some critics see possible racist consequences

“What really makes something a security problem?” (Waever)

“...the state can claim a special right...Power holders can always try to use the instrument of securitisation of an issue to gain control over it. By definition, something is a security problem when the elites declare it to be so.” Securitising things does not mean it is a legit security issue. An example of this is the Iraq War that was a process of securitisation because President Bush said it was a security issue. Or migration or se In someway, we have to convince the elite to declare climate change as a security problem for it to be declared so and taken seriously as one. (Security: A New Framework for Analysis 1998) Securitisation

● ● ●

●

Designating a security issue not just a theoretical question, but carries real world significance Securitisation happens to gain financial aid to carry out their agenda on the issue they have securitised and to gain political legitimacy for action e.g. 2013 = Obama declared that Syria use of chemical weapons as a red line and David Cameron attempted to securitise it but MPs voted against going to war due to the memories of the Afghanistan War. ● Realists tend to securitise military issues Copenhagen School uses methodology of ‘speech act’ to define a security issue ● Speech Act = things are securitised by poltiicians saying so

Security Dilemma

● ●

Security of one’s own state likely to be enhanced at expense of another How do you enhance your own security but make yourself vulnerable by doing so? If it goes wrong for example, we end up back in an Arms War (like Cold War days)

Environmental security Highly contested area - Some believe the environment cannot be secured and some say otherwise and that it can be secured. 4 types of disaster: 1.

2. 3. 4.

slow onset; ecological loss such as endangered species ● Sixth Extinction: There were 5 mass extinctions in history and will we [human race] be the sixth? ● Anthropacy era = the planet is being shaped by human activity rapid onset hydro-meteorological; rapid onset geo-physical; man-made

Does resource scarcity lead to conflict? Role of sustainable development in environment and human security as they go together Human security • Human security should be the focus and is wrapped up in economic, health, political and social security. ● ●

Grew mid-90s: realisation that much insecurity come from civil war, failed states, disease etc Maintaining security also depends on social, economic, environmental, moral and cultural issues

● ● ● ●

No consensus on definition–refUNDP1994 (Snyder p91) Samuel Muyel: Human rights are a bit made up thing and is utopian and the human rights agenda has been hijacked by the elite Freedom from fear and want ‘Responsibility to protect’ - when people are subject to genocide, the international community must intervene regardless of the sovereign decision of the state in question ● This has not always played the case in Syria 2013

Gender and Security • There are female issues in regards to security have been failed to be recognised as males have largely dominated the security agenda and literature. ● ● ● ● ● ●

Realism is seen as a male oriented theory. Specific female issues in relation to security War has different impact on women ● e.g. rape Female suicide bombers Female soldiers

Collapsologie How civilisations collapse is what we should be examining in security and there are a mosaic of collapses going on beyond climate change including lack of belief in democracy, wealth inequality, etc. and can lead to civilian collapse. “We are experiencing a mosaic of collapses” “Our society is based on the myths of competition, progress, infinite growth”. (Neo-liberalism believes in infinite progress and growth of the market fundamentally) The only thing that will lead to systemic change is war - is this really the case? Key Points

● ● ● ●

Traditional approaches prioritise the state as the key referent object A key division between Realists and Liberals is over the ‘security dilemma’ Critical Security Studies criticise the narrow focus of traditional ideas Post - Colonial approaches criticise the whole field for marginalising the problems facing the developing world

Reading 1

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Jack Snyder, ‘One World, Rival Theories’, Foreign Policy 145 (Nov-Dec 2004) John Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: Norton, 2001) ch 2 John Mearsheimer, ‘Why We Will Soon Miss the Cold War’, in Betts Conflict After the Cold War F Zakaria, ‘Is Realism Finished?’, The National Interest,(1992-93) 30 Stanley Hoffman, ‘The Crisis of Liberal Internationalism’, Foreign Policy 98 (Spring 1995), pp 159-177 Alexander Wendt, ‘Anarchy is What States Make of It’, in Betts Conflict After the Cold War Michael Doyle, Ways of War and Peace, London: Norton - yes R Paris, ‘Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air?’, International Security, vol 26, no 2, Autumn 2001

●

Peter Hough, Environmental Security: An Introduction, London, Routledge 2014 - no

Reading 2 ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

A C Crocker, O F Hampson, P All, eds, Leashing the Dogs of War: Conflict Management in a Divided World, Washington - no Mary Kaldor, New and Old Wars, Stanford 2007 – yes U 21.2 Mary Kaldor, Global Insecurity, - yes Mary Kaldor, The Handbook of Global Security Policy, Wiley 2014 – yes Jean Bethke Elshtain, Women and War – yes Michael Doyle, ‘Liberal Internationalism: Peace, War and Democracy’ nobelprize.org...