Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 10

Notes on the English School Approach to International Relations.

1) International Relations ought to be considered a society of mutually recognizing states and not merely a system of competing and conflicting powers. Tis societys primary, but not only, members are sovereign states. Its principal actors are states people who are specialized in the practice of statecraft(human activity that encompasses foreign policy, military policy, trade policy, diplomacy, intelligence gather and espionage, and negotiations in any of these areas. 2) Hedley Bull: ...*it+ derives from history, philosophy and law it is characterized above all by the explicit reliance upon the exercise of judgment By exercise of judgment, Bull means that IR scholars should fully understand that foreign policy can present difficult moral choices to states people involved. 3) The English School reject the realist idea of international relations conceived as an unchanging state system that is completely anarchic and is prone to r ecurrent discord, conflict and eventually, war. At the same time, they reject the liberal idea of international relations as a developing world community that is inevitably in the direction of unparalleled human progress and perpetual peace. This makes the English School a middle ground approach compared to classical realism and classical liberalism. 4) Intl. Org., NGOs, and multinationals are also actors in the society of states, but they are subordinate to the sovereign states. The argument in favor of this idea is that sovereign states collectively govern all the territory of the planet. 5) An international system and an international society are different 6) International society needs to be understood as being a dynamic arrangement which is compatible with different ensembles of rules, values and institutions. At the more minimal end of the spectrum of international societies, we find an institutional arrangement that is restricted solely to the maintenance of order. In a pluralist international society, the institutional framework is geared towards the liberty of states and the maintenance of order among them. The rules of the game are complied with because, like the rules of the road, fidelity to them is relatively cost free but the collective benefits are enormous.

7) At the more maximal end of the spectrum of international societies we find an institutional arrangement that desires a form of order that is also just (and not just tolerable or efficient). Bull defined solidarist principles in terms of the collective enforcement of the rules and the guardianship of human rights. In a solidarist international society, individuals are entitled to basic rights. 8) This in turn demands that sovereignty norms are modified such that there is a duty on the members of international society to intervene forcibly to protect those rights. 9) World Society: Refers to the shared interests and values among all parts of the human community. With human rights at the center of the meaning of world society, it is apparent that the membership is universal and the institutions are not the agents of state authority. 10) Right to Protect (R2P): State sovereignty implies responsibility, and the primary responsibility for the protection of its people lies within the state its self. Where a population is suffering serious harm, as a result of internal war, insurgency, repression or state failure, and the state in question is unwilling or unable to halt or advert it, the principle of non-intervention yields to the international responsibility to protect. Notes on Green Political Theory 1) Environmental concerns were not a priority of in the study of IR until the 1970s, where transboundary ecological problems began to rise due to the overuse of resources, pollution, an exponential increase in population and an increase energy production/consumption caused by the post-WWII economic boom(This is dubbed as the modern ecological crisis). This causes the rise of a specialized sub-field in IR dedicated to the study of international environmental cooperation which is concerned with the common management of resources such as rivers, oceans, the atmosphere, and others. However, it is studied under a neoliberal framework, being treated as another problem. 2) By the end of the XX century, a critical green approach to IR started to rise, which was adopted from outside IR and called into question classical and contemporary IR theory from an ecological perspective. 3) It is primarily based on (and has develop upon and revised) Neo-Marxist International Political Economy and normative IR theories of cosmopolitan orientation.

4) It challenges traditional concepts of security, development, and international justice with new discourses of ecological security, sustainable development, and environmental justice. 5) Green scholarship has grown apace with increasing global economic and ecological interdependence and the emergence of uniquely global ecological problems, such as climate change, the thinning of the ozone layer and the erosion of the Earths biodiversity.

6) In political terms, green theory tries to address the neglected areas of environmental domination and marginalization such as: domination of non-human nature, the neglect of needs of future generations, and the skewed distribution of ecological risk among different social classes, states, and regions.

7) Distinctive green political and social thought emerges in the 1980s and it begins to give voice to interrelated concerns of new social movements that have shaped green politics (Environmental, Anti-Nuclear, Peace, Feminist among others). 8) Green political theory is not only concerned with the political aspects of the environment, but also contemplates other factors of importance in the history of political thought. Green theory has a normative branch concerned with questions of justice, rights, democracy, citizenship, the state and the environment and a political economy branch concerned with questions dealing with the relationship between economics, the state, and the environment It is said that green politics is based on four theoretical concepts (the four pillars of green politics): ecological responsibility, social justice, non-violence, and grassroots democracy. 9) Green IR theory shares many of the characteristics of the new IR theories emerging out of the so-called third debate or fourth debate. They are generally critical, problem-oriented, interdisciplinary and above all unapologetic about their explicit normative orientation.

10) The first wave of green political theory mounted a critique of both Western capitalist, and soviet communist societies and ideologies. Both were regarded as essentially two different versions of the same overarching ideology of industrialism, despite the difference concerning the views on the state/market relationship. The green critique of industrialism formed part of a broader re-examination of taken-forgranted ideas about progress and modernization inherited from the enlightenment period. Both liberalism and traditional Marxism were shown to have developed on the basis of the same remises: Earths natural resource base could support unbridled economic growth, and that increasing growth and technological advancement were both desirable and inevitable. They either explicitly ort implicitly accepted the idea that human manipulation and domination of nature through the further refinement of instrumental reason were necessary for human advancement. Green theorist have taken issue with these enlightenment legacies and have highlighted the ecological, psychological; and social cost of modernization. They have critically pointed out humanitys increasingly instrumental relationship with non-human nature, along with the sub-jugation of indigenous people and many forms of agriculture. 11) Green political theorists have called into question anthropocentrism or human chauvinism the idea that humans are the apex of evolution, the center of value and meaning in the world and the only beings that possess moral worth. Many green theorists have embraced a new ecology-centered or ecocentric philosophy that seeks to respect all life-forms in terms of their own distinctive modes of being, for their own sake, and not merely for their instrumental value to humans. 12) Some of these green themes, particularly the critique of the ascendance of instrumental reason, can be traced back to the days of the Frankfurt school of thought, who were the first western Marxist to problematize the domination of nature and explore its relationship to the domination of humans.

13) Whereas traditional Marxist had confined their critical attention to the relations of production, green theory has expanded this critique to include the Forces of production (technology and management systems) and the relations of definition that define, assess, distribute and manage the risk of modernization. 14) The second wave of green political theory has become more transnational and cosmopolitan in its orientation through its exploration of the relationship between environmental justice and environmental democracy.

15) Environmental Injustice- Arises when unaccountable social agents externalize the environmental cost of their decisions and practices to innocent third parties in circumstances when the affected parties (or their representatives) have no knowledge of, or input in, the ecological risk-generating decisions and practices. Environmental injustices also occurs when privileged social classes and nations appropriate more than their fair share of the environment, and leave behind oversized ecological footprints. 16) The five demands of environmental justice: a) Recognition of the expanded moral community that is affected by ecological risk. This including all peoples, future generations, and non-human species. b) Participation and critical deliberation by citizens and representatives of the larger community-at-risk in all environmental decision making. c) A precautionary approach to ensure the minimization of risk in relation to the larger community. d) A fair distribution of those risk that are reflectively acceptable via democratic processes that includes the standpoint of all affected parties and public interest advocacy groups e) Redress and compensation for those parties who suffer the effects of ecological problems 17) Ecological sustainable development: Sustainable development that doesnt rest on an instrumental orientation towards the non-human world while meeting the needs of the current generation without sacrificing those of the future one. Green economist have rejected the dominant paradigm neoclassical economics in favor of new theoretical frameworks based on ecological economics. For ecological economist, while the market can provide an efficient allocation of resources, it cant neither ensure a fair distribution of wealth and income relative to the present and future human need nor ensure that the scale of the economy operates within the ecological carrying capacity of socio-ecosystems. 18) Green IR theorists have explored the role of non-state forms of deterritorialized governance, ranging from the transnational initiatives of environmental NGOs to the private governance practices of industrial and financial corporations, including the insurance industry.

19) Green IR theory has self-consciously sought to transcend the state-centric framework of traditional IR theory and offer new analytical and normative insights into global environmental change. Notes on Post-Positivist Approaches in International Relations Post-Structuralism 1) Post-Structuralism reject the empiric view in IR and Social Science in general, that states that science is based merely on observable facts. Most importantly, pure objective observation is not possible; it requires previous ideas about what to observe and how to go about it. 2) Knowledge cannot and will not be neutral, either morally, politically, or ideologically. Dominant theories, for example, underpin and inform practice; this makes the hugely powerful. Defining Common Sense is the ultimate act of political power (Smith, 1996:13). All knowledge reflects the interests of the observer. Knowledge is always biased because it is produced from the social perspective of the analyst, Knowledge thus discloses an inclination, conscious or subconscious, towards certain interests, values, groups, parties, nations, and so on. This reasoning applies to IR theory.

3) Poststructuralisms entry into IR came in the 1980s through the work of Richard Ashley, James Der Derian, Michael Shapiro and R.B.J.Walker. Much of this early writing took on the dominance of realism. For realism, the state marked the border between inside/outside, sovereignty/anarchy, us/them, duty/indifference. Poststructuralism questioned how it came to be seen as natural and inevitable to privilege state-centric accounts of world politics (particularly ones which overlook deep questions about the state, such as its political formation, economic constitution, and social exclusions). Later work has engaged more directly with political events and representations of those events. 4) Problem Solving Knowledge V.S. Emancipatory Knowledge- Problem Solving Knowledge is conservative in the sense that it seeks to know that which exist at the present: it takes the international system of sovereign states for granted. It is therefore biased towards an international status quo which is based on inequality of power and excludes many people. Emancipatory Knowledge has the role of liberating humanity from the oppressive structures of world politics and world economics which are controlled by hegemonic powers.

5) Meaning is created by discourse. Discourse refers to a specific series of representations and practices through which meanings are produced, identities constituted, social relations established, and political and ethical outcomes made more or less possible. For example, states are made possible by a wide range of discursive practices that include immigration policies, military strategies, and cultural debates about normal social behavior, political speeches and economic investments. 6) Empirical theories are myths. Every theory decides for its self what counts as fact. There is no objective reality and anything that involves humans is subjective. Hence, a major contribution of post-structuralism to IR is the critical examination of the disciplines dominant theories and concepts and its skepticism of universal truths that are said to be valid for all times and places. All theories have a history: they can be located in terms of space, time, and cultural attachment. In this sense, theories are not separated from the world, they are part of it. Hence, all theories make assumptions about the world, on the ontological scale, and epistemological scale. There is no such thing as being atheorical or pragmatic. For this reason, a proliferation of theory is always desirable because a larger number of competing views open up and enhance our understanding.

Post-Colonialism 1) Post-colonialism is mainly inspired by post-str5ucturalism. Post-colonialism adopts its critical attitude and turns it in a specific direction: the relationship between, on the one hand, Western countries in Europe and North America, and on the other hand, the areas of Africa, Asia, Latin America, and elsewhere that were colonized or dominated by Western Countries. 2) Post-colonialist argue that the logic and ideas underpinning the relationship between the West and these areas continues to be one of hierarchy. Reflecting western concepts and understandings. Therefore, intellectual strategies of decolonization are needed in order to liberate our thinking from that of western dominance.

3) Postcolonial writings highlight that in celebrating reason, science and technology and in wanting to write the history of humanity in their own image, the Westerns have degraded the culture, arts and science in non-Western societies. Without the permission of non-Westerns, they have assigned themselves as the keepers of values, desires and interests. Academic disciplines have contributed to this process. 4) In making these arguments, post-colonial IR theorist draw on studies from other disciplines including history and literature. 5) The Power and Knowledge debate us intimately connected in the view of the human vs. the other the human being the western and civilized and the other being those that are incapable and uncivilized (according to western views, of course). Ir is constructed around the exclusionary premise of an imagined Western subject of world politics. Decolonising stratagies are those that problematise this claim and offer alternative accounts of sunjecthood as the basis for inquiry. The recognition of possible alternative subjects of inquiry is the essential precondition for a dialogic mode of inquiry in IR. without challenging the implicit and assumed universality of a particular subject, the possibility for genuine dialogue, rather than simple conversation, in the discipline become remote (Sabaratnam, 2011:785) 6) Post colonialism does not seek to entirely reject the Western canon of thought, but it advances critical examinations of reason, history and culture within this tradition. In reading Kant, for example, post colonialists note the prejudices characteristic of this cosmopolitans thinking.

7) Overall, Post-colonialst criticize the western view because where it rules supreme, genuine dialogue is not possible. A new situation can be created only by making different voices heard in world politics, in particular the marginalized voices from the developing world who have not so far received any representation. Post-colonialism is not interested in a win or lose debate between theories, on the contraire, the idea is that established IR theories and post-colonialism can both benefit from engaging i\with each other.

Feminism 1) IR feminist focus on basic inequalities between men and women and the consequences of such inequalities for world politics. 2) Gender refers to socially learned behavior and expectations that distinguish between masculinity and femininity. (Peterson and Runyan 1999:5) 3) According to feminist, we live in a world where qualities associated with masculinity (rationality, ambition, strength) are assigned higher value and status than qualities associated with femininity (emotionality, passivity, weakness). This amount to gender hierarchy: a system of power where maleness is privileged over femaleness. 4) Conventional approaches contain conventional gendered thinking: the feminist critique points out that the realist idea of security, for example, is a masculine way of looking at the world. Realist security is based on military defense of states in an international anarchy; but that conceals the continued existence of a gender hierarchy in world politics in the sense that protection from outside threat is also protection of domestic jurisdiction that underwrites a persisting subordination of women.

5) Many IR feminists define security broadly in multidimensional and multilevel terms as the diminution of all forms of violence, including physical, structural, and ecological. According to IR feminists, security threats include domestic violence, rape, poverty, gender subordination, and ecological destruction as well as war. 6) IR feminists have also broadened who is guaranteed security and started much of their analysis with the individual or the community. They have demonstrated how the security of individuals is related to national and international politics and how international politics impacts the security of individuals even at the local level. Those at the margins of states may actually be rendered more insecure by their states security policies.