The 1648 Treaty of Westphalia? Established modern state-centric world order by acknowledging: a) Territoriality: States controlled particular geographies in which people are organized with fixed borders b) Sovereignty: The state exerted sovereign authority within its borders by having an entitlement to supreme, and exclusive political and legal authority C) Autonomy: People should have the freedom to make use of the benefits of sovereignty (Closely associated with 20th Century ideas of Self Determination which constructs as autonomous spheres within a countries borders)

Westphalian International Society/System 1) Diplomacy: Policies used as instruments to communicate amongst states. E.g. Economic sanctions and peace negotiations 2) Balance of Power: Focus on the distribution of “power” amongst states. E.g. Diplomacy and alliances used as strategies to manage insecurity by “balancing” , later came “Collective Security” 3) International Law: The creation of formal, acknowledged rules of conduct amongst states

Post-Westphalian World Territoriality, Sovereignty & Autonomy less important? a) Territoriality: borders becoming blurred, technology makes geography less important B) Sovereignty: transformed to incorporate global government and treaties C) Autonomy: interdependence forces countries to engage in global politics to satisfy domestic needs

An increased role for International Organizations/ International Non-governmental Organizations? the UN is certainly not the ideal institution for international security simply because it is the sum of its parts, states Yet, the world would undoubtedly be far more insecure without it.

The rise of new powers and the end of US dominated Western Centric World?

Does NGO’s have a positive or negative role on international security? Nongovernmental Organizations serve a variety of functions ranging from advocacy, protest, and mobilization of public support, to legal, scientific, technical and policy analysis Their greatests accomplishments have been their influence over states NGO’s are able to act in ways in which states often cannot or chose not to do In a world in which certain states still view one another as the greatest threat to their existence, it may not be politically feasible for a state to act unilaterally to address issues of human rights or arms reduction, for instance.

How non governmental military groups have affected the state actors with whom they iteract? Private Military Companies tend to be more evocative of the interests of the highest bidder illegal combatants,guerillas, rebels, insurgentsi or any other categorization of non-governmental fighters challenged the states monopoly on the legitimate use of force, their positive or negative role on international security can usually be directly correlated with the objectives of their patrons, Transnational Criminal Networks, flourish in failed states and can serve to further destablize failing states with fragile institutions, corrupt officials, and weak civil societies

New Security Threats Traditionally, the study of international security focused on the threat of attacks by other states’ military forces. These threats were managed through the acquisition of military capabilities and diplomatic strategies. However, much of the focus in the modern study of security emphasizes different kind of threats Threats from non-state actors E.g. “Terrorism” E.g. Threats posed by “Failed States” and intra-state conflict Non traditional security threats relating to globalization E.g. Health pandemics E.g. Environmental crises

New Strategies to new security threats? These threats seem to require different kinds of strategies . . . Strategies that may not “fit” well in the Westphalian focus on “diplomacy” and the “balance of power”.