POLI 140: Mar. 7, 2017 Lecture #3: Liberalism

Announcements First paper is on the question: “Which is a more compelling theory of International Politics, Realism or Liberalism?” There will be some additional reading on the website, you will have two more weeks. Due 3/21 No Class this Thursday (3/9) Watch the two remaining parts of “Commanding Heights”, episodes 2 and 3

Paradigms in International Politics Realism Balance of power theory Human nature as basically hostile Liberalism Liberal institutionalism Human nature as basically peaceful

What is liberalism? liberalism is "a paradigm predicated on the hope that the application of reason and universal ethics to international relations can lead to a more orderly, just, and cooperative world, and that international anarchy and war can be policed by institutional reforms that empower international organizations and laws“ – Kegley and Wittkopf liberals believe that significant global cooperation is possible and that we can move beyond the power politics at the heart of the realist paradigm.

Are the realists correct? Does the realist view of international politics match reality? Perhaps somewhat, but not entirely Theory of international relations known as “liberalism” argues that while there is mistrust between states, there is also commerce and international cooperation in many areas, which Hobbes would not have predicted. Why?

Liberalism Liberals argue that it is possible to overcome the consequences of anarchy. While folks might not be naturally peaceful, they aren’t as awful as Hobbes thinks We do care about others and desire peace Self-interest leads people to recognize value in cooperation Liberals agree that states are self-interested/rational Logic of prisoner’s dilemma remains true, but liberals want to “change the game”

Liberal Institutionalism The dangers of anarchy provides strong incentives to find a way out. Negotiation, diplomacy can lead to cooperation Treaties/Orgs create “repeated games” that provide incentives for fairness & trustworthiness Norms influence behavior Multi-player game, not two-player – defecting is a signal that you are a defector Reciprocity allows for accountability Monitoring is possible to check for cheating

Institutions International Organizations seek to enforce global norms While there is no “global government” there are arenas for global politics G-7, United Nations, World Trade Organization, World Bank, etc… Liberalism focuses on power as collaborative and institutional power, not merely coercion.

Liberal Institutionalism in Action “Concert of Europe” after Napoleon Diplomacy helped create peace and prosperity in Europe But….degenerated and led to First World War But! Isn’t that liberal’s point? Breakdown led to war. Cold War – even bitter rivals could cooperate SALT treaties to lower nuclear warhead count

SALT Treaties

Global Warming Very hard to see this stopping from a realist perspective Liberal is more hopeful Self-interest leads to cooperation Monitoring allows for enforcement Norms allow for pressure Liberalism does not posit need for altruism, but argues that self-interest leads to cooperation.

Complex Interdependence Theory Realist perspective too simplistic according to CIT Multiple channels connect societies IGOs and NGOs connect below gov-to-gov level No clear hierarchy of issues Security is not always dominant goal Military force is often considered not viable Many issues w/ allies have little to do w/ security Humanitarian missions, health issues, for example Complex interdependence focuses on broader range of actors and interests Realist focuses on single actor (state), single goal (security), single driving force (power).

IGO’s IGO’s (International Governmental Organizations) exist to facilitate diplomacy, promote dialogue, and enforce internationally agreed to global norms United Nations World Trade Organization International Criminal Court World Bank European Union (basically an international government)

Complex Interdependence Theory Whereas realism pictures states as billiard balls, CIT pictures them with a web of connections Many issues less difficult than security, allows for easier collaboration “liberal” democracies have a common interest in pushing for “liberal” values Trade, human rights, democracy, peace Globalization, in large part, a result of liberal success Based on Immanuel Kant’s “Perpetual Peace” Wilson’s 14 points European Union Democratic Peace Theory – liberal democracies don’t go to war against each other

Democratic Peace Theory Among proponents of the Democratic Peace Theory, several factors are held as motivating peace between liberal states: Democratic leaders are forced to accept culpability for war losses to a voting public; Publicly accountable statesmen are more inclined to establish diplomatic institutions for resolving international tensions; Democracies are less inclined to view countries with adjacent policy and governing doctrine as hostile; Democracies tend to possess greater public wealth than other states, and therefore eschew war to preserve infrastructure and resources.

Democratization around the world

Is liberalism just hidden realism? In the 19th century, “trade followed the flag”. In other words, colonialism would lead to trade between colonized countries and colonizer. Commerce and international organizations are examples of “liberalism” in international politics, but are they merely another form of realism. Are they another form of hidden colonialism that the powerful use to control the weak? WTO enforces free trade rules on countries, World Bank enforces austerity measurements on countries, United Nations is controlled by security council

International Liberalism Liberalism and globalization Reactions against globalization are often reactions against “liberal values” that place individual self-interest and the rights of individual self-expression above others threatening to erode traditional values. Realism and power politics may preserve traditional difference and division better Realists see liberalism as misguided, dangerous idealism CIT misses big picture, power underlying dynamic still When power and other issues are at stake, power will win States that put their faith in institutions and not self-help will eventually regret it

The End