Appunti esame international relations, prof Marchetti

BALANCE OF POWER

 Balanced power relation between states, it is possible as

- PARITY, RESISTANCE to THREATS, system of collective RESISTANCE to the

woul-be HEGEMON

Problem : I do not feel secure, i arm myself. So my neighboud does not feel

secure, he arms himself more than me. So I arm myself more than him to

balance his power. And more and more. DO REALLY MORE AND MORE

WEAPONS MAKE STATES MORE SECURE? SECURITY DILEMMA



Explanation : it is not important the actual security, but the SECURITY

PERCEIVED (infact, paradoxically the more the states are armed the HIGHER is

the RISK)

- States do NOT balance the most POWERFUL state, but the most

THREATENING one (Threatening power defined by : Aggressive/non

aggressive intenctions, Offensive power, geography – my neighbour is

my enemy, the neighbour of my neighbour is my friend)

- Key DICHOTOMY : is balancing of power a voluntary (VOLUNTARISM-

importance of the AGENTS- people need to be active in order to

determine events and define the structure) or automatic (AUTOMATISM-

importance of the STRUCTURE- events decides for people) process?

Cririques : 1. the more the world is BALANCED, the more it is UNSTABLE, best

guarantee of PEACE is CLEAR ASYMMETRY (or consciousness of

reciprocal vulnerability)

2. with MASS POLITICS, LACK of the needed FLEXIBILITY to make

adjustments

HEGEMON STABILITY

 UNBALANCED power relations, which is however considered LEGITIMATE

by the actors. The hegemon PAYS the “management costs” (eg.IOs) of

the system.

The more UNBALANCED the more STABLE the system is ( high power

concentration – enormous inqualities in distibustion of power- high



ordered system )

CONCENTRATION OF POWER creates HIERARCHY (it reduces anarchy)

- Problem : What when the hegemon DECLINES? [WW1 : England

but

German , collision!] [today : USA China , too late for collision,

China is already too strong]

-

VITIOUS CIRCLE OF HEGEMONY,

Phases of hegemony : EMERGENCE (after a war), STABILIZATION (not state

deems profitable to change the system, the law of the system are setted by the

hegemon) ,DECLINE (management costs of the system> benefits) and CRISIS

(challenger states produce war, a new hegemonic cicle begin)

Realism is characterized by a CICILIC UNDERSTANDING OF HISTORY:

“war not war war”,

 PEACE does NOT exists at all

: power index

- HARD POWER (see above)

- a territorial and immaterial-

- SOFT POWER : creating IOs ( ability to

set the standards and the rules of the game), CULTURAL INFLUENCE – in

order to become SYMPATHETIC to other state- (investing in music, cinema

– Hollywood is the strongest American soft power instrument- , promoting

the language)

GRAMSCIAN notion of hegemony is based on SOFT POWER :

IDEOLOGICAL and CULTURAL dimension of hegemony : VALUES and SOCIO-ECONOMIC

models that other countries (unconsciously) consider as POIN OF REFERENCE

[American example in Italy]

DISTRIBUTION OF POWER



UNIPOLAR WORLD (end of cold war)

 MULTIPOLAR WORLD : according MODERN REALISTS this scenario tends to be

 more stable.

BIPOLAR WORLD : according NEOREALISTS this scenario is more stable. 1) Less

 smaller risk of buck-

problems of identification/interpretation of threats (

passing). 2)Smaller risk to enter in to a conflict by mutal defense

(smaller risk of chain-ganging).

clauses/alliances

GREAT POWER STRATEGIES



DEFENSIVE REALISM( status quo politics) :

 arming

- INTERNAL BALANCING, to increase the costs of a potential

invasion alliances

- EXTERNAL BALANCING, creating [strange alliance ongoing in the

middle east : Israel- Saudi Arabia to what extent can I trust my



alliances?]

OFFENSIVE REALISM (increase in ower) :

 prestige politics

- WAR OF THREAT : show off, central node

- DIVIDI ET IMPERA : being the in a network of countries that

cannot communicate conquest

- IMPERIALISM : military/economic

in realism, states act according to bilateralism, the hegemon state is

IMP! :

the only one that can pursue its interest through multilateral agreements given

that he is the creator of the int order.

THUCIDIDES TRAP CASE

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS



- Arenas when to MATERIALIZE POWER RELATIONS [in the UN relation

between the UNGA and the UNSC]

- Instument to CRYSTALLIZE NATIONAL POWER [ winner of WW2

develped the UN, P5-VETO POWER- in the UNSC (5 permanent

members+ 11 elected one). Given that all the other IOs are subordinated

to UN, and the UN is effectively ruled by the P5 all IOs are



SUBORDINATED to P5]

However : the P5 states are the TOP 5 in MILITARY EXPENDITURE of the

whole world. DE IURIS ET DE FACTO leader of the UNSC . Any change

affecting the P5 would be possible only when ANOTHER STATE would trump one

of them in military expenditure. [fail of the attempt to reform –from 5 to 10 PM-

the council in 2005][ But in 2005 R2P big threat to state sovereignity!]

- In IOs power in never given, it is only LENT (logic of CONSENSUS linked

to sovereignity)

- IOs rests on power : CHANGES in POWER generates CHANGES in

INSTITUTIONS [ eg : AIIB, Asia Infrastructure Investement Bank, born

as an alternative to the WORLD BANK-where American has veto power 

new power : new institution]

NPT (non proliferation treaties) : another classical mechanism to

 CRYSTALLIZE POWER

WHAT IS THE ROLE OF IDEOLOGIES?



They are NECESSARY TOOLS to make the PUBLIC engaged in the fight for

power as they offer : MORAL JUSTIFICATION and PSYCHOLOGICAL SUPPORT

GEOPOLITICS

 : the study of relationship between the

TERRITORY and the POLITICS

- Core : SEA POWERS (TALASSOCRACY) vs LAND POWER

(TELLUROCRACY)

USA,UK,JAPAN. Ideal type: fluid and FRANCE,GERMAN,

RUSSIA. Ideal type:

strong society- week state. Individual- strong, stable and

hierarchical state-

centric weak societ

have DOMINATED the world in the last 3 centuries!

Hint : 1) Is Trump moving US from a talassocracy to a tellurocracy? Are

the two WW2 just an attempt of the sea power to penetrate in to land?

- GEOPOLITICS OF EMOTIONS (MOISI) : how culture of FEAR (western

world), HOPE (asian world) and HUMILIATION (arab world) is re-shaping

the world. [is it really so far from reality?]

Disambiguation : Geopolitics also as the POLITICAL INTERPRETATION of the

role of an actor in a SPECIFIC TIME and SPACE (not a neutral explaination of

facts) WHAT ABOUT JUSTICE?



- NATIONAL INTEREST >> IMPARTIAL JUSTICE, but it can be

dissimulated ( Justice is just a weak ideological instrument in the hands of

the weak one)

- MORAL assessments are usefull ONLY when states have to decide goal

different than national interest but still compatible to it

Conclusion : the only moral principle that realists accept is the “ETHIC OF

RESPONSIBILITY” of the governments towards its citizens.

PRATICA

GLOBAL GOVERNANCE

THE RULES OF GLOBAL GOVERNANCE

 Institutional Framework of global politics

DEFINITION OF GLOBAL GOVERNANCE:

“set of REGULATORY MECHANISMS that do not originates from a single

political autonomy, but by the PROLIFERATION of NETWORKS in a more

and more INTERDEPENDENT WORLD”

BRIEF HISTORICAL VIEW :

 The institution of “CLASSIC SOVEREIGNTY” incurred in a distinct BREAK

with the establishment of the UN:

- EXPROPRIATION of states RIGHT to use FORCE

- Adopting of the MAJORITY VOTING (no more “unanimity” as for LoN,

ruinous attempt)

- LEGAL SUPREMACY of the UN CHARTER to every other subsequent

treaty

MAIN CHARACTERISTIC OF GOVERNANCE :

 - WIDER system : MULTILAYERED and CONTINUUS process,

simultaneously affected by

national/regional/global influences

- LIMITED participation : only STAKEHOLDERS, mandate only over

PRECISELY DEFINED

AREAS/issues

- MULTILATERAL : produces GENERAL PRINCIPLES of CODUCT, requires

RECIPROCITY

- POLIARCHIC , rather than hierarchic

- HYBRID : it may entail the PRIVATIZATION of AUTHORITY

5 MEGATRENDS DUE TO GLOBAL GOVERNACE :



1. Emergin of the INTERMESTIC REALM :

Intense overlapping btw the national and international sphere! [ Eg. War

in SYRIA, domestic factions supported by a variety of international

players- Us, Russia, Turkey, Iran]

2. Increasing role of NON-STATE ACTORS:

- NGOs :

LOBBYG ACTIVITIES [Eg. international campaign leading to the

institution of the ICC, international campaign leading to the DEBT

CANCELLATION of the 3 World countries]

rd

PROVIDING FUNDS (to gov/ non-state actors)

PROVIDING SERVICES : sub-contracting to private actors is one of the

MAIN characteristics of NEO-LIBERAL states [LAW ENFORCEMENT]

-WTO :

Private actors also in the LAW ADJUDICATION field, significant role of the

PRIVATE ARBITRATION CHAMBERS in international commercial disputes

3. Emergin of PLURALISTIC GOVERNANCE : STATE+NON-STATE actors

IOs can be : Intergovernmental (public)

Privete

Hybrid (public+private)

4. New models to OBTAIN COMPLIACE : setting of TRANSNATIONAL

STANDARDS

- Shift from “COMMAND AND CONTROL” public authority [enforcement

through SANCTIONS] to a “MANAGERIAL APPROACH” [enforcement

based on ACCOUNTABILITY, RECOMANDATIONS,BEST PRACTICE and

NORMATIVE PERSUASION]

- If we do not accept standards we could incur in the big problem of

MARGINALIZATION

5. Development of a completely NEW CONCEPT OF AUTHORITY :

- TRADITIONAL model : INSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC AUTHORITY (delegated

by the institution)

- CONTEMPORARY MODEL : EXPERTISE [eg. Standard setting bodies]

PRINCIPLES [moral authority of

Religious leaders/NGOs] CAPACITY TO DELIVER [market

authority of TNCs]

IMP : often the DEMOCRATIC process is MIMED with the creation of COUNCIL OF

EXPERT/STAKEHOLDERS with the task of assessing the TRANSPARENCY,

OPENESS and

ACCOUNTABILITY of the system [above all STANDARD SETTING BODIES]

Fundamental for GATHERING NORMATIVE CONSENSUS, that’s the only

way to ensure COMPLIANCE [NO enforcement mechanisms]

GLOBAL POLITICS

 POLITICS OF NORM CHANGE [Constructivist view]:

 DISCOVER OF NEW issues/REINTERPRETATION of long-standing ones (eg.

Role of women in society) in order to REFORMULATE PUBLIC

UNDERSTANDING in order to make that issue : PROBLEMATIC, URGENT

but yet SOLVABLE

Three step process:

1. Production of KNEW KNOWLEDGE

2. External DISSEMINATION of knowledge

3. Acquiring the LEGITIMATE REPRESENTATION of the issue (legitimately

speak on behalf of the IC)

CLEVAGE OF GLOBAL POLITICS:

 - TRADITIONAL : Left vs Right

- CONTEMPORARY : Globalists (pro-globalization) vs Localists (counter-

globalization)

[EU politics is a clear example]

4 MASTERFRAMES



1. GLOBALISTS can be:

- NEO-LIBERALS : individuals with GLOBAL HOMOGENEO