IR Flashcards
(171 cards)
basic social values that states are usually expected to
uphold
security, freedom, order, justice, and welfare
what are international relations
the study of relationships and interactions between countries, including the
activities and policies of national governments, international organizations (IO’s),
nongovernmental organizations (NGO’s), and multinational corporations. It can be
both a theoretical subject and a practical or policy subject, and academic
approaches to it can be empirical or normative or both
Cum definește autorul conceptul de “civilizație”?
Autorul definește o civilizație ca o entitate culturală. Sate, regiuni, grupuri etnice, naționalități, grupuri religioase, toate au culturi distincte la diferite niveluri de eterogenitate culturală. O civilizație este cel mai înalt grup cultural de oameniși cel mai larg nivel de identitate culturală pe care oamenii îl au, cu excepția a ceea ce distinge oamenii de alte specii. Civilizațiile sunt definite prin elemente obiective comune, cum ar fi limba, istoria, religia, obiceiurile, instituțiile, și prin auto-identificarea subiectivă a oamenilor
De ce susține autorul că identitatea de civilizație va deveni din ce în ce mai importantă în viitor?
Autorul susține că identitatea de civilizație va fi din ce în ce mai importantă din mai multe motive: în primul rând, diferențele dintre civilizații sunt reale și fundamentale, derivând din istorie, limbă, cultură, tradiție și, cel mai important, religie. Aceste diferențe nu vor dispărea. În al doilea rând, lumea devine mai mică, interacțiunile dintre popoare din civilizații diferite sunt în creștere, ceea ce intensifică conștiința de sine a civilizației și conștientizarea diferențelor dintre civilizații. În al treilea rând, procesele de modernizare economică și schimbare socială la nivel mondial separă oamenii de vechile identități locale și naționale. În al patrulea rând, creșterea conștiinței de sine a civilizației este îmbunătățită de dublul rol al Occidentului.
Ce se înțelege prin “linii de falie” între civilizații și de ce sunt ele susceptibile să fie locuri de conflict?
Prin “linii de falie” se înțeleg granițele culturale care separă civilizațiile. Aceste zone sunt susceptibile să fie locuri de conflict deoarece reprezintă puncte de interacțiune între civilizații diferite, unde diferențele în valori, credințe și interese pot duce la tensiuni și confruntări. Conflictele apar la două niveluri: micro, între grupuri adiacente de civilizații diferite care luptă, adesea violent, pentru teritoriu și control reciproc; și macro, între state din civilizații diferite care concurează pentru putere militară și economică, concurează pentru controlul organizațiilor internaționale și promovează competitiv valorile lor politice și religioase.
Care este “provocarea hispanică” descrisă în al doilea text și cum se leagă de conceptul mai larg de identitate națională și culturală?
Provocarea hispanică” se referă la imigrația continuă și semnificativă din America Latină în Statele Unite, în special din Mexic, care ridică întrebări cu privire la capacitatea societății americane de a asimila acești imigranți în cultura anglo-protestantă dominantă. Autorul sugerează că numărul mare, concentrarea regională, persistența imigrației și prezența istorică a populației hispanice în unele părți ale SUA ar putea duce la o societate din ce în ce mai biculturală și bilingvă, cu potențiale diviziuni culturale și politice. Aceasta se leagă de conceptul mai larg de identitate națională și culturală prin faptul că pune sub semnul întrebării ce înseamnă să fii american și dacă valorile și limba tradiționale americane sunt amenințate de această schimbare demografică și culturală.
Care sunt unele dintre implicațiile “provocării hispanice” pentru Statele Unite, conform celui de-al doilea text?
Unele implicații includ potențiale diviziuni lingvistice și culturale, presiuni asupra educației bilingve, posibila formare a unor blocuri politice bazate pe identitatea etnică, dificultăți în menținerea unei identități naționale unificate și provocări în ceea ce privește asimilarea economică și socială a noilor imigranți. Autorul sugerează că lipsa asimilării culturale și lingvistice ar putea duce la o fragmentare a societății americane și la o slăbire a coeziunii sale sociale și politice. De asemenea, menționează potențialul ca Statele Unite să devină o țară cu două limbi și două culturi principale (engleză și spaniolă, anglo și hispanică), cu implicații semnificative pentru politică, economie și societate.
Potrivit lui Huntington, de ce identitatea civilizațională va deveni din ce în ce mai importantă în viitor? Menționați două motive.
Identitatea civilizațională va deveni mai importantă din două motive principale: în primul rând, diferențele dintre civilizații sunt reale și fundamentale, implicând aspecte precum istoria, limba, religia și valorile; în al doilea rând, lumea devine mai mică datorită interacțiunilor crescute, intensificând conștiința de sine a civilizațiilor și conștientizarea diferențelor dintre ele.
Ce este “sindromul țării de origine” (kin-country syndrome) și cum se manifestă în contextul conflictelor intercivilizaționale?
“Sindromul țării de origine” se referă la tendința țărilor aparținând aceleiași civilizații de a se alia și de a sprijini statele implicate în conflicte cu țări din alte civilizații. Acest sindrom poate exacerba conflictele intercivilizaționale.
Ce rol joacă limba spaniolă în argumentul lui Huntington despre potențialul de divizare culturală în Statele Unite?
Limba spaniolă joacă un rol central în argumentul lui Huntington, deoarece el vede menținerea pe scară largă a limbii spaniole de către imigranții hispanici ca un factor cheie care împiedică asimilarea culturală completă în cultura americană predominantă, bazată pe limba engleză.
clash of civilisations critics
Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations thesis has faced widespread criticism for its reductionist and essentialist approach to global politics. Critics argue that it portrays civilizations as monolithic and internally homogenous, ignoring the vast diversity and internal dynamics within them. The theory selectively interprets Western history to reinforce a binary of “us vs. them,” ultimately perpetuating negative stereotypes about non-Western societies. This oversimplified worldview has led some scholars, such as Edward Said, to label it a “clash of ignorance” rather than a legitimate scientific analysis, suggesting that Huntington’s work reflects ideological bias more than objective scholarship.
culture in IR
Culture in International Relations refers to the shared values, beliefs, and norms that shape how states understand themselves, others, and the world. It influences national identities, foreign policies, and international norms, helping to explain why states behave the way they do—not just based on power or economics, but also on ideas and meaning. For example, countries with similar political cultures may form closer alliances, while cultural misunderstandings can lead to conflict. Constructivist scholars highlight the importance of culture in shaping global politics, while realist theories tend to overlook it. Overall, culture is a key factor in how international relations are constructed and experienced.
utopian liberalism (Wilsonian idealism)
Wilsonian idealism can be summarized as follows. It is the conviction that, through a rational and intelligently designed international organization, it should be possible to put an end to war and to achieve more or less permanent peace. The claim is not that it will be possible to do away with states and statespeople, foreign ministries, armed forces, and other agents and instruments of international conflict. Rather, the claim is that it is possible to tame states and statespeople by subjecting them to the appropriate international organ- izations, institutions, and laws.
14 points and Briand-Kellog pact
liberal causes of war
regimurile non-democratice, liderii iraționali, diplomația secretă și naționalismul expansionist ca principale cauze ale războiului.
norman angel view on war
Norman Angell argues that war is no longer profitable because it disrupts international trade and is too costly. He believes modernization makes states more dependent on resources, credit, and markets from other countries, increasing economic interdependence. As a result, war and force become less important, and international law evolves to manage these growing connections. Ultimately, modernization and interdependence lead to a world where war becomes obsolete.
! Norman Angell’s high hopes for a smooth process of modernization and interdepend- ence also foundered on the harsh realities of the 1930s. The Wall Street crash of October 1929 marked the beginning of a severe economic crisis in Western countries that would last until the Second World War and would involve hard measures of economic protectionism. World trade shrank dramatically, and industrial production in developed countries declined rapidly. In July 1932—at the trough of the Great Depres- sion—American production of pig iron reached its lowest level since 1896. In ironic contrast to Angell’s vision, it was each country for itself, each coun- try trying as best it could to look after its own interests rather for international cooperation and aid.
how did willson and angel looked at human nature?
Wilson and Angell’s ideas reflect a liberal belief that humans are rational and capable of creating institutions that benefit everyone. They argued that public opinion is a positive force and that diplomacy should be transparent to ensure fair agreements. These ideas influenced international relations in the 1920s, leading to the creation of the League of Nations and agreements like the Kellogg–Briand Pact of 1928, which sought to abolish war except in self-defense. Liberal ideas had already shaped international efforts before World War I, as seen in the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.
What was E.H. Carr’s main critique of liberal idealism in international relations?
E.H. Carr argued that liberal idealists misunderstood international relations by assuming a harmony of interests between nations. Instead, he believed IR is fundamentally about conflict, as some countries and people seek to maintain their privileged positions while others struggle for change. He labeled liberalism “utopian” and contrasted it with his “realist” perspective, which he viewed as a more accurate analysis of global politics.
at best liberal utopians are at best naive but actually they have a hidden agenda for imperialism (the way that the security council works, it is priveledged)
What was Hans J. Morgenthau’s main argument about human nature in international relations?
Hans J. Morgenthau argued that human nature is fundamentally self-interested and driven by the pursuit of power. He believed that this inherent desire for power leads to conflict rather than cooperation in global politics. Morgenthau’s realism was shaped by historical events, particularly the aggressive expansionist policies of Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan in the 1930s. These regimes demonstrated that international politics is not guided by moral ideals or cooperation but by the ruthless struggle for power.
Morgenthau’s perspective was rooted in classical realism, which sees the international system as anarchic—lacking a central authority to enforce order. Because of this, states must rely on their own power for survival. He also drew from psychological and religious interpretations of human nature, referencing thinkers like Sigmund Freud, who believed in an innate human impulse toward aggression, and Reinhold Niebuhr, who spoke of humanity’s original sin and temptation toward evil.
Ultimately, Morgenthau dismissed liberal idealism, which assumed that reason and institutions could create a harmonious international order. Instead, he argued that conflict is inevitable because states, like individuals, act primarily in their own self-interest, seeking to maximize their power in a world where security is never guaranteed.
main elements in realism
- human nature is ingerently bad
- international politics is a struggle for power, meaning that the international arena is an anarchy where armed states try to survive and up their own interests (The quest for power certainly character- ized the foreign policies of Germany, Italy, and Japan. The same struggle, in response, applied to the Allied side during the Second World War. Britain, France, and the United States were the ‘haves’ in Carr’s terms, the ‘status quo’ powers who wanted to hold on to what they already had, and Germany, Italy, and Japan were the ‘have-nots’, who wanted to change the status quo. So it was only natural, according to realist thinking, that the ‘have-nots’ would try and redress the international balance through the use of force)
- Contrary to the optimistic liberal view that qualitative change for the better is possible, realism stresses continuity and repetition ()
What is behaviouralism in IR?
Behaviouralism in international relations emerged after World War II as a new methodological approach focused on making IR more scientific. Unlike earlier scholars who studied IR through history, law, or philosophy, behaviouralists used empirical data and scientific methods to analyze international relations. They aimed to identify measurable patterns and generalizable laws governing state behavior, similar to how natural sciences explain physical phenomena.
Behaviouralists prioritized data collection, classification, and hypothesis testing to understand recurring trends in international politics. They believed that facts are separate from values, meaning that IR should focus on observable, measurable behaviors rather than subjective moral or ideological perspectives. This approach transformed IR into a more systematic, data-driven discipline, especially in the United States, where government agencies and private foundations supported research that was seen as serving national interests.
What is their scientific procedure?
Their scientific method is a structured process used to test hypotheses through observation and empirical data collection. To validate a hypothesis, researchers must design experiments or gather data systematically. The collected data is then carefully recorded and analyzed. Based on the results, the hypothesis may be confirmed, modified, reformulated, or discarded. Findings are shared with the scientific community, allowing others to replicate the study and verify or challenge the conclusions. This process ensures that knowledge is continuously tested and refined through objective investigation.
What are the key differences between the traditional and behavioral approaches to International Relations?
The traditional approach to IR is holistic and humanistic, emphasizing historical context, diplomacy, ethics, and the complexity of international relations. It seeks to understand the motives and dilemmas of statespeople rather than reducing IR to scientific laws. E.H. Carr is an example of this approach, rejecting empirical testing of IR theories.
The behavioral approach, on the other hand, aims to study IR scientifically by gathering data and identifying patterns in state behavior. It avoids moral or ethical considerations, treating human relations as objective phenomena that can be analyzed like natural sciences. Critics argue that human affairs are too complex and value-laden to be studied in the same way as the physical world. Some scholars, like Morgenthau, attempt to blend both approaches by acknowledging moral dilemmas while also formulating general political laws.
Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism is a renewed form of liberalism that emerged after World War II as an alternative to realism. Unlike early liberal idealism, neoliberals focus on progress and change but reject utopian thinking. They aim to apply scientific methods and theories to the study of international relations, emphasizing cooperation and interdependence rather than conflict.
What is regional integration, and why was it important for neoliberals?
Regional integration refers to deep international cooperation, particularly in areas like trade and investment. In the 1950s, neoliberals observed the growing economic and political integration in Western Europe and theorized that cooperation in one area would lead to further cooperation in others. This idea influenced early studies of how economic ties promote long-term stability and peace.