Some Understandings of Internationalism Chapter 11: To what extent should nations and nation-states be involved in international affairs? Related Issue III: To what extent should nations and nation- states be involved in international affairs?

Chapter Inquiry Questions: What are different understandings of internationalism? Why might nations choose to participate in international affairs? Why might nations choose not to participate in international affairs?

Internationalism Revisited Nations and nation-states are part of a larger community Most Canadians believe it means to be actively involved in the world’s political and economic affairs

Understandings of Internationalism What are different understandings of internationalism?

Halliday’s ”Three Concepts of Internationalism” Hegemonic internationalism Liberal internationalism Revolutionary internationalism

1. Hegemonic Internationalism The belief that world is being integrated based on unequal terms with the dominance of one nation or nation-state over others imperialism one language - English colonialism Globalization

Hmmm… To what extent do you feel that hegemonic internationalism is, in reality, one nation pursing its own national interests? Is this truly internationalism?

2. Liberal Internationalism The belief that, through greater interaction and co-operation, nations and nation-states can achieve common goals, especially peace and prosperity League of Nations UN NGO’s

2. Liberal Internationalism cont’d Economically: Liberal or free trade between nations is seen as key to reducing conflict between states Clearly benefits all people Supporters: Interaction and co-operation are on equal terms Mutually beneficial Critics: This approach assumes a level playing field where none exists Countries with stronger economies have an advantage

3. Revolutionary Internationalism The belief that conflicts within societies are determined by international factors and alliances It created: Economic and political alliances Modern nation-states Wars Even brought the world to the brink of nuclear war (indirectly). Revolution is a radical or extreme change but it need not be violent. Feminism, environmentalism.

3. Revolutionary Internationalism cont’d American Revolution French Revolution Bolshevik Revolution Cuban Revolution Environmentalism Feminism

Motivations behind Internationalism The needs and wants that motivate nation-states do not operate in isolation. They overlap, combine, and build on one another in a complex relationship Motivations behind Internationalism Why might nations choose to participate in international affairs?

Motivations for Internationalism Self-determination Humanitarianism and global citizenship Peace and security Economic stability

1. Self-Determination A nation’s ability and desire to fulfill its people’s economic, social, cultural and political needs so that the nation can continue to exist and grow. For some, it is perceived that this is best achieved via international involvement Examples: World Council of Indigenous Peoples; it seeks to ensure fair and just treatment, and a united voice, for over 370 million Indigenous people worldwide Brazil’s effort to fight poverty by granting land (forest) for people to make quick money by selling timber and land, or clearing it for farmland by way of setting fires. Severe impact on rainforest

2. Humanitarianism and Global Citizenship Many nation-states take action to relieve suffering and protect the innocent. Natural disasters, disease, war and conflict can all cause tremendous suffering In these situations, many countries offer humanitarian aid, which may include providing money and supplies, as well as accepting and sheltering refugees.

2. Humanitarianism and Global Citizenship cont’d Moral Imperative: Something one does because it is the right thing to do. This is considered, acting in a humanitarian way. Many people and nations choose to become involved in actions in a humanitarian way. Examples: The deaths of hundreds of thousands in the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004. The displacement of hundreds of thousands from New Orleans in 2005 due to Hurricane Katrina. The outbreak of violence in Lebanon in 2006, in which tens of thousands of people were evacuated.

2. Humanitarianism and Global Citizenship cont’d Responses: Individual generosity (donations, volunteering). Organized governmental & NGO initiatives. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada: Canada among the first countries to respond to official requests for international aid Provide critical financial and human resources Assets to support people in need.

2. Humanitarianism and Global Citizenship cont’d Peacekeeping: Preventing further conflict between parties. Occurs once a ceasefire has been negotiated. Requires the consent of the parties to the conflict. Oversee the resolution of the conflict.

Suez Canal Crisis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETOUALw2EIs In 1956, Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser seized control of the Suez Canal, a critical shipping route, which was run by French and British interests. In October, despite American opposition, Britain and France, together with Israel launched attacks on Egypt. Nasser went to the Soviet leader Khrushchev, who threatened to shower the west with nuclear weapons if the British and French did not withdraw. At the United Nations, Canadian Lester B. Pearson called for the British and French to withdraw but would allow for a UN force to remain in the area, stabilizing the situation. First large international peacekeeping force which included 6000 peacekeepers from 10 nations. Helped to create peace in the Middle East until Egypt demanded that they leave the area in 1967.

Suez Canal Crisis--Aftermath Some argue that this crisis ultimately transferred power to the new superpowers. USSR & U.S.A. Ultimately would lead to heightened tensions in the Cold War.

2. Humanitarianism and Global Citizenship cont’d Peacemaking: Peaceful intervention to stop a conflict or prevent its spread by bringing hostile parties to an agreement. Occurs before or during a conflict. Incorporate diplomatic techniques. Examples: Bosnia-Herzegovina. Palestine & Israel. Israel & Egypt

3. Peace and Security How does a country achieve this? In Canada, we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. What about Internationally? How does Canada achieve Peace and Security internationally? Canada belongs to a number of different International Organizations that help protect her citizens at home and citizens of the world Security Alliance Organizations: Aim to provide member nations with greater ability to maintain secure borders United Nations (est. 1945): An organization of independent states To promote peace and security

3. Peace and Security--NATO NATO is a military alliance in which member countries – including the US, Canada, most of Western Europe and parts of Eastern Europe – agree to help defend each other. It was originally an organization of mutual defense for its members, it has now evolved into an international military alliance designed to engage in measures to ensure general global security.

3. Peace and Security cont’d UN High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change (2004) determined 101 proposals for dealing with the “greatest security threats in the 21st century” in 6 areas: Continued poverty Environmental degradation Terrorism Civil war Conflict between states The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) Organized crime How are humanitarian efforts integrally linked to security issues?

4. Economic Stability People and nations face the same kind of questions when it comes to dealing with the economy. Money? Employment? Education? Internationalism can also be linked to ensuring economic stability within a nation-state. Examples: The Blood Nation of Southern Alberta produces agricultural products that are sold in Japan, creating dozens of jobs in the process. Economic interdependence is a national interest NAFTA; seeks to break down barriers and improve the economies of member nations, such as tariffs, that restrict trade

Motivations against Internationalism Begin here on Tuesday Why might nations choose not to participate in international affairs?

Isolationism Foreign policy Nation-state chooses not to become involved in the affairs of other nations Either militarily or through trade

American Isolationism during the World Wars Reluctant to become involved in European affairs WWI: Involved after German aggression against American ships WWII: Involved after Japanese naval forces bombed the US base in Pearl Harbour Did not join League of Nations Post WWII: Played a major role in international affairs Reconstruction of Europe (Truman Doctrine, Marshall Plan, etc.) Creation of United Nations Cold War (Korea and Vietnam War)

American Isolationism cont’d September 11 In recent years, the US, again, had tended toward isolationism, until 9/11 US and NATO allies chose to attack Afghanistan, the nation that harboured Al Qaeda. Intent: punishing and deterring further terrorism “War on Terror” and Involvement in Iraq USA broadened its “war on terror” to include Iraq Nation perceived to be a threat to the US and its allies in the region. President Bush pressed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to disarm. His refusal was followed by the invasion and subsequent occupation of the country. No weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. UN joined the US to search for and destroy the “suspected” weapons. Canada supported the US through NATO to fight in Afghanistan. Canada did not support the incursion in Iraq, along with many other nations.

Rwanda Revisited: The Role of the International Community There were definite links between ultranationalism and the genocide in Rwanda The lack of response from the UN by way of intervention has been roundly condemned Had the UN Security Council acknowledged what was happening was indeed a genocide, they would have been legally obliged to act. However, countries including France, Belgium and the US declined to intervene UNAMIR (UN Assistance Mission in Rwanda) was not given a mandate to intervene or use force Is it possible to to reconcile the US response to Iraq with its response to Rwanda? Why was invasion necessary in one country but not involvement in the other country?