S2 - Actors, System, & Practices

Question 1

structure

Answer 1

rules (laws, social norms) that may limit your universal choices

Question 2

agency

Answer 2

how much freedom an actor has to act within the set of rules

Question 3

structure and agency

Answer 3

You have to make choices between structure and agency. Within the structure, there are only some choices you can make.

Agency is the room of manoeuvre. You can also think of it as context (structure) and the practice (agency).

Structure is fixed, but at a certain times: structure evolves following the choices of the agents over time. With pressure from actors out of the agency, rules may chance.

Question 4

the international system

Answer 4

realism is dominant

context = anarchy
actors = states
aim = survival
nature = polarity

Question 5

context of anarchy

Answer 5

no ordering princple

causes of war are structural realism and neorealism

Question 6

states as actors

Answer 6

Westphalian sovereignty and no perpetual allies, there are only perpetual interests. You can be allies regardless of ideals etc, the only thing that matters is survival.

Question 7

survival as aim

Answer 7

This can happen through offensive neorealism (expansion; Mearsheimer) and defensive neorealism (protection; Waltz)

Question 8

nature of polarity

Answer 8

Polarity is about distribution of power at the international level. How many powerful states you have at the international level will define the system.

Multipolarity is very difficult to maintain, because it leads to alliances where different blocks go to war with each other.

Unipolarity could be stable, because no one is able to challenge the only hegemon (hegemon stability theory).

Bipolarity depends; it combines the advantages of both systems. They both have the same things, so balance each other’s capacities to destroy each other.

how many power at internat. level defines system

uni / bi / multi - polarity

Question 9

Westphalian sovereignty

Answer 9

a principle in international law that each state has exclusive sovereignty over its territory. You cannot intrude a state and claim the state like it is yours. It made sure that we have boundaries and that there is a balance between the states, so that none of them is big enough to get too much power.

state has exclusive sovereignty over its territory –> cannot intrude and claim it

Question 10

internal sovereignty

Answer 10

the states’ ability to control what’s happening inside of the state

Question 11

features of sovereign negotiation

Answer 11

government to government

negotiation is an extension of national foreign policy

negotiatiors are representatives of a sovereign

negotiations are about state power, influence and authority

Question 12

Westphalian negotiation

Answer 12

If state A wants something and needs the help of state B. A has to negotiate with B to achieve this.

In the system before the Westphalian Negotiation, state A could intrude state B to take what they want. Intruding can happen again, when the states do not believe in the idea of balancing the power.

Change in conflict comes when states don’t see the system as restriction / legitimate anymore and they can challenge the system.

Example: Hitler did not consider the existing borders as legitimate, so Germany’s actions challenged the whole existing system by defying the existing laws (as in borders).

Difficult to negotiate with a state that does not want to play by the rules and does not respect international law

bilateral system

inter-state negotiation between state A en state B

Question 13

global changes

Answer 13

Since WWII and Cold War there has been a shift in the international system. There has been a rise and proliferation of new international and transnational actors: religious groups, social movements, Ios, corporations, NGOs, sub-state actors, rivals to existing states etc.

There also has been a changing scope of issues with more new postmodern concerns. Issues that are way more global than before, like climate / ideology / rise of new technologies.

Interdependence of states, not everyone can be solved the same way anymore (bilateral consultations. There are also permanent negotiation forums and new technologies

So in order to achieve results, sovereignty needs to be limited

new actors / new issues

Question 14

simple negotiation

Answer 14

State to state
Single issue
Single negotiation
One set of rules

Question 15

complex negotiation

Answer 15

Many diverse actors
Many diverse and interconnected issue
Iterative negotiations
Many different rules

Question 16

multilateralism and negotiations

Answer 16

multilateralism is increasing complexity over time, because there are many more actors. Negotiations take longer, because there are more forums that happen multiple times.

it causes a change from simple negotiation to complex negotiation

more actors –> complexity / take longer (more forums)

Question 17

track 2 negotiations

Answer 17

unofficial negotiations wherein nationals not closely affiliated with the government are deliberately chosen as negotiators. This are the ‘diplomats without diplomats’; professionals, experts, interest groups.

nationals not closely affiliated with government are the negotiators (expert / interest groups)

Question 18

state diplomacy

Answer 18

formal format = routine negotiations, track 1 negotiations

representatives of national governments = professional diplomats and political leaders

conveying messages = explicit (loud and clear) and implicit

Question 19

coalitions

Answer 19

result of interdependency

pooling of sovereignties (leverage + costs)

Question 20

issues with representatives: identity and ideology

Answer 20

State representatives are professionals

State representatives do not identify with
ideology or identity

But new international actors are often about
ideology and identity, like human rights movements / environmental movements

state representatives dont identify with ideology / identity, but new actors are often about those things

Question 21

decoupling of issues

Answer 21

States want to decouple issues. If you decouple issues, it is easier to negotiate on them issue by issue. This is easier because states are more powerful than movements, so item by item is easier.

New actors want to connect them (linking). Sometimes different issues are all part of the same things, so it is more challenging to the system.

Question 22

issues with representatives: identifying leaders

Answer 22

States want to retain the Westphalian system (want to identify leaders), but modern international actors often do not (don’t want to have a clear leader).

But figureheads often become representatives. States want a leader to have someone to talk to on behalf of the movement.

Question 23

issues with representatives

Answer 23

identity and ideology

identifying leaders