Ir312 Diplomacy Understanding Diplomacy and International Societies I Dr. Jared O. Bell, Assistant Professor of International Relations and Public Administration Faculty of Business and Administration International University of Sarajevo

What constitutes a society? In your opinion what’s a society? Can this class be considered a society? Why or why not?

A Society is…. A group of people that has consistent interaction and lives by certain rules, ideas, and regulations.

Can Societies function without governance? “ It is possible and probable, that even in the absence of a government or overarching authority, relations between peoples can develop a social character in the sense of shared understandings, conventions and rules about what is, and what is supposed to be, going on” (Sharp, 2009). Do you Agree? And how would this notion be relevant in the international arena?

What then is an International Society? International society is an association of member states who not only interact across international borders but also share common purposes, organizations, and standards of conduct. There are different historical versions of international society the most important of which is the contemporary global international society. In understanding international society it is important to keep in mind contrasting group relations, such as empires, which are far more common historically.

What are some examples of historical examples of International Societies? Roman Empire Yugoslavia Soviet Union What are some other historical examples?

Current examples of International Societies? What are some current examples of International Societies?

Origins of this concept This concept has it’s origins in the English School of International Relations Theory The English school stands for the conviction that ideas, rather than simply material capabilities, shape the conduct of international politics, and therefore deserve analysis and critique.

How the International Society Works Since these rules are not legally binding and there is no ordering institutions, speaking of norms would probably be more appropriate. States that respect these basic rules form an international society.  States thus follow their interests, but not at all costs.

Does the current global order resemble an International Society? So based on the definitions we just discussed does the current international order resemble an International Society?

Differing Ideas Plurist  Solidarists

Pluralist The pluralists argue that the diversity of humankind their differing political and religious views, ethnic and linguistic traditions, and so on - is best contained within a society that allows for the greatest possible independence for states, which can, in their forms of government, express those differing conceptions of the 'good life'.

Solidarists The solidarists, by contrast, argue that the society of states should do more to promote the causes of human rights and, perhaps, emancipation - as opposed to the rights of states to political independence and non-intervention in their internal affairs. 

Which opinion has more merit? Are you a Pluralist or a Solidarity? Why?

States & Membership in International Society Sharp (1990) maintains that we live in an international society whose rules still insist on only one kind of full member – sovereign, territorial states recognized by each other as such.

Another class of members International Societies There is no reason in principle or history, however, which forecloses on the possibility of international societies with a different class of membership, for example, certain tribes or cities; different categories of membership, for example, states and protectorates; or even mixed membership, for example, kingdoms, dioceses, and merchant trading companies (Sharp, 1990, p.115).

What do you think? In 2016 do we have an international society where states are the only full members? Or has this changed?

Mapping International Societies Sharp gives us three ways to map International Societies: integration-disintegration expansion contraction concentration-diffusion

Integration-disintegration International societies coming together and pulling apart along a continuum from complete separation and no contact to complete fusion and loss of member identity. Examples???

Expansion contraction International societies may be seen to expand and contract. Examples???

Concentration-diffusion This is between the complete diffusion of power among multiple weak actors at one end, and its complete concentration in the hands of a few great powers or one imperial authority at the other. Examples???

Dangers of Mapping Mapping international societies, however, draws our attention in quite a different direction, raising questions about boundaries and identities. If international societies have boundaries then this raises the question of what lies beyond them . Mapping limits us to considering other possibilities to what international society can and could be like. What is the example Sharp gives?

References Sharp, P. (2009). Diplomatic theory of international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Readings for Next Class Sharp(2009).pp.149-169