IR 203 Current ıssues ın ınternatıonal relatıons (2)
Bezen Balamir Coskun
office: 417
bezencoskun@zirve.edu.tr
bezenbalamir@gmail.com
IMPORTANT NOTE ON PLAGIARISM




•
Plagiarism is passing off the work of others as your own.
This includes ‘hard’ plagiarism which is a quite conscious attempt to deceive the
reader or
‘soft’ plagiarism where students have forgotten that something in their notes is not
actually their own work but is a verbatim quote from a source.
The University and the Department take plagiarism extremely seriously and a range
of sanctions may be imposed against offenders. For further information on how to avoid
plagiarism see PLAGIARISM NOTE (INTIHAL NOTU) on our wiki link.
http://wiki.zirve.edu.tr/groups/economicsandadministrativesciences/wiki/ba2f7/IR_203_Current_Issues_in_Internation
al_Relations.html
•
What do you remember from last week?
Ideas
1. The New World Order –multilateralism and the
effective use of the UN , George Bush I.
2. The liberal peace thesis – drawing upon liberalism
and IR, amongst others the ideas of E. Kant: “a
federation of free states”, liberal constitutions etc,
3. liberal democracies do not go to war against one
another
IDEAS
1. The end of history thesis – liberalism is the
dominant ideology (Fukuyama)
2. It is viewed to offer superior ideas about the
economy and democratic institutions and practices
3. does not mean that historical events have come to
an end, rather that there is no real alternative to
liberal ideology. TRUE OR FALSE, WHAT MIGHT
THAT IDEOLOGY BE?
Francis Fukuyama
1. The end of history thesis – liberalism is the
dominant ideology (Fukuyama)
2. Key assumption: liberalism offers superior ideas
about the economy and democratic institutions and
practices
3. Does not mean that historical events have come to
an end
4. rather that there is no real alternative to liberal
ideology.
5. TRUE or FALSE?
A new international order
new international order – emphasis on the idealist
principles of the inter-war period, multilateralism, cooperation, conflict prevention, free trade, opening up
of markets, democratic principles
A
 Liberal
principles of international and domestic
politics and economics become the dominant
ideology ( the liberalisation of Central and Eastern
Europe)
President George Bush I’s speech to Congress
March 6, 1991
‘Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in
which there is the very real prospect of a new world order.
In the words of Winston Churchill, a "world order" in which
"the principles of justice and fair play ... protect the
weak against the strong ..." A world where the United
Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfil
the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom
and respect for human rights find a home among all
nations.
 The Gulf war put this new world to its first test, and, my
fellow Americans, we passed that test.’

The Clash of Civilizations –Samuel Huntington
 Basic
idea, our Identity is rooted in nationality,
ethnicity and culture.
 There are different civilisations ( they are rooted in
different cultures)
 Civilisations differ in their offerings of ideas about
how we should conduct our lives
 The world is fragmented and disintegrated but on the
basis of culture rather than sovereign statehood
 The post-Cold War era - the West is at its height of
power, others resent its dominance, its institutions,
there will be continued divisions. (DISORDER?)
The Clash of Civilizations
states take issue with the West’s use of
international institutions, military power and
economic resources (military intervention, imposition
of strict financial reforms for example)
 “The great divisions among humankind and the
dominating source of conflict will be cultural”
(Huntington). often taken to mean religious
 Compare: Fukuyama argues that: “We remain at the
end of history because there is only one system
that will continue to dominate world politics”
 Non-western
The 1990s- what happened –
Order/Disorder
Central and Eastern Europe liberalised, the (prospect of
enlargement of the EU and NATO powerful discourses)
 The EU demanded states to observe liberal principles of
the market economy and liberal democracy brought a
sense of ORDER to Europe
 International financial institutions have and continue to
promote economic liberalism, developing countries have
to comply with such principles, ORDER BUT NOT
NECESSARILY JUSTICE

The 1990s- what happened –
Order/Disorder
The liberal peace thesis can explain the lack of conflict in
Western Europe
 and also the motives behind the EU enlargement process,
 one of the underpinning ideas was that European unity
would lead to perpetual peace,
 states need to comply to largely liberal entry criteria of the
EU and NATO. PRODUCING ORDER
 However there are many examples of DISORDER (civil
wars and genocide) in the 1990s.

Genocide in Rwanda 1994
Mass graves in Srebrenica, Bosnia 1995,
8000 men and boys killed
A Bosnian concentration
camp
Liberal Peace Theory
Liberal peace theory – less successful in terms of
explaining conflict in the former Yugoslavia
 Also difficult to apply to conflict in Africa (often intra-state
war/ethnic conflict rather than war between liberal states).
 Rwanda was completely ignored –a genocide that the
international community ignored DISORDER
 Towards the 1990s a strict interpretation of sovereignty
started to give way to humanitarian intervention
discourses, the right to intervene for humanitarian
purposes. Kosovo a good example (more recently Chad,
Sudan) ORDER AND DISORDER

Post-September 11 (2001), a period
of disorder?
 The
New World Order severely challenged by
September 11, away from multilateralism to the
coalition of the willing against the axis of evil.
 American Foreign Policy ( George W Bush),
emphasis on the threat that terrorism constitutes to
individual freedom and points to US leadership (at
times unilateral),
Post-September 11 (2001)
 American
ideas are universally applicable (emphasis
on liberal freedoms for all)
 “When it comes to the common rights and needs of
men and women, there is no clash of civilisations”
“The peoples of the Islamic nations want and
deserve the same freedoms” (Bush, 2002, Remarks
by the President at the 2002 Graduation of the
United States Military Academy, West Point)
George Bush State of the Union Speech January 28,
2008
 Since
9/11, we have taken the fight to these
terrorists and extremists. We will stay on the offense
… we will deliver justice to our enemies. (Applause.)
 We are engaged in the defining ideological struggle
of the 21st century. The terrorists oppose every
principle of humanity and decency that we hold dear.
 In Afghanistan, America, our 25 NATO allies, and 15
partner nations are helping the Afghan people
defend their freedom and rebuild their country
The Liberal Peace Theory postSeptember 11
Events post -September 11 pose great challenges to the
theory
 Global terrorism is not necessarily state bound but transnational, it does not constitute a war in the traditional
sense, thus the theory can offer little explanatory value.
 The US led interventions into Afghanistan and Iraq both fit
and do not fit the Liberal Peace Theory,
 these conflicts are not fought between Western liberal
states but between the “West and the Rest”

The Liberal Peace Theory postSeptember 11
However, it is in line with the democratisation objective of
US and other Western states’ foreign policy(ies)
 The idea that spread of liberal freedom across the globe
will bring order, peace and stability to IR, this is part of the
“official” explanation for recent US led interventions.
 At the same time the theory cannot provide much insight
into the “real” reasons for intervention?
 What about oil and other economic gains?
 Were the US and its allies forces for good spreading their
democratic message or disguising their thirst for power
and influence?

The End of History Thesis postSeptember 11
Is liberalism the only dominant ideology?
 Is it supported across the international system?
 To what extent does global terrorism constitute a threat to
liberal democracy?
 Are we moving away from one ideology and one world
order to multiple regional orders and insecurity/ies?
 Has warfare changed in character?
 Has order been replaced by disorder?
 Are interventions damaging to the international order?


The End of History Thesis postSeptember 11
 Is
Huntington correct in talking about several coexistent civilisations/cultures?
 Against the backdrop of his ideas how might we
assess Fukuyama? Is there a global international
ideology embracing all states?
 Is there some reason for optimism, which is a
central theme in liberalism.
 Are democratically held elections in Iraq and
elsewhere a sign of the success of liberal political
principles?
Concluding remarks for you to
consider
 How
successful are international institutions,
organisations and the conduct of multilateralism in
bringing order to international relations?
 Are we moving away from a New World Order based
upon multilateralism to unilateralism (NOT THE
SAME THING AS ISOLATIONISM) (SEE THE US
NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGIES of the US,
2002, 06)
 How damaging have September 11, unilateral
interventions and a weak UN been to the New
International Order, as it emerged in the early
1990s?