International Politics for the 21st century
Lecture 1: Introduction ⅓
What: This lecture aims to provide background for both the case classes and the portfolio
assignment
Why: The lecture revisits a number of key concepts relevant to understanding international
politics in the 21st century to provide an initial sense of the complexities the EU faces when
presenting itself as an international actor in today’s worlds.
How: The lecture uses an event that most of you are already familiar with before class as
stepping-stone
- In examining why this anniversary might be considered a rather unhappy one, the
lecture suggests that contestation of the LIO, both from outside and within (Trump
administration), has been a complicating factor. Additionally, the increasing prevalence
of regime complexes should be considered when explaining why international
organisations are challenged (particularly the assumption that policy- and
decision-making are concentrated within single bodies).
- Both the ‘contestation of the LIO’ and the concept of ‘regime complexes’ will be
explored further later on, so these are important concepts to study.
What?
Unravelling complexity - Complex EU in a complex world of international relations
Why?
The complexity is often seen as a burden seen as a negative thing, it creates a lot of anxiety
often
UN General Assembly - Worlds parliament → in negative connotation because they only
present their views on how the world is turning, however the binding power is very minimal →
referred to as a talking show.
On their 80th anniversary it will be very difficult meeting - world cup of diplomacy
- war and recognition of gaza
- soudan
- war ukraine - russia
- the (de)funding of the UN
→ a move to Africa, seems nice but its a vail for cost benefit motivations
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION:
Organization that include at least three states as members, have activities in several states and
are created through a formal intergovernmental agreement (such as a treaty, charter or statute)
→ States are (often) main actors for international organizations
l-> challenging times for IOs
, - Reason 1: one of many
- international policy is no longer made in a single organizations but in regime
complexes
- Regime complex; IO; global governance; globalisation
- Reason 2: contestation
- contestation of IOs as cornerstones of Liberal International Order
Not only from the outside, but also from the within
- liberal international order; liberalism; realism; realpolitik; geopolitics
REGIME COMPLEX (new concept):
What? international policy is no longer made in single bodies/organization
1. More actors: proliferation of forums
(overlapping functions and memberships)
2. Less ‘classic’ actors: proliferation of informal clubs, public-private arrangements…
Why? Diverging interests push actors toward each other and away from integrated regimes.
GLOBAL GOVERNANCE:
Context of the 1990s - systematic changes (end of the Cold War, globalisation, new technology)
inspire reflection on how the world works.
→ not a global government, but global governance - not simple but complex, not one body, but a
lot of actors
“The multi-level collection of governance-related activities, rules, mechanisms, formal and
informal, public and private, existing in the world today.”
→ globalisation as a reason global governance
GLOBALISATION
The process of increasing interconnectedness between societies (more and deeper
connections/contacts)
Waves: Thick globalisation, but questions (deglobalisation, slowbalisation,...)
,Contestation —-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIBERAL ORDER - LIBERAL INTERNATIONAL ORDEL; ILO
Rules-based world order (decision very black/white in the media), created after WW1 under US
leadership based on liberal ideas, aimed at peace and prosperity - institutions (cooperation) as
key feature/tool. → three versions of liberal internationalism
“For many years, the EU has been strongly invested in the liberal international order and many
of its core approaches to security have been heavily dependent upon it.
The EU underpinned liberal order as part of its own core, founding identity. The EU was
prominent in its support for many of the key advances of the multilateral architecture, including
Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, the Human Rights Council and the International Criminal
Court, and provided about half of the UN’s budget.
From an early stage, European governments saw support for multilateral organisations as a
natural extension of the same principles that informed the EU integration project itself.”
LIBERALISM:
emphasizes cooperation, interdependence, and the role of international institutions,
norms, and law in promoting peace and stability. It assumes that states, while pursuing their
interests, can overcome anarchy through dialogue, trade, and shared values such as
democracy and human rights.
Theoretical tradition (theories as lenses to understand overall politics)
- linear reading of history (progress)
- beyond political interaction
- state and society
- positive impact of institutionalisation, but cooperation not guaranteed/successful
→ idealism & institutionalism
REALISM - theories of international politics and zombies
views states as the main actors in an anarchic international system, where no
overarching authority exists above them. States are seen as rational, power-seeking actors
primarily concerned with their own survival and security. Cooperation is possible but limited, as
power and national interest ultimately drive state behavior.
- Cyclical reading of history (no progress) - understanding the world as it is
- political interaction (states)
- international level
- cooperation limited/difficult
- explanatory in nature (monopoly)
REALPOLITIK (first a theory and then a practice)
“Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable - the are of the next best” - Otto von Bismarck
pragmatic way of practicing (international) politics
That takes ‘reality’’ (the actual cost-benefit situation) as starting-point (rather than ideology)
→ Hans Morgenthau was inspired by Bismark
, GEOPOLITICS (theoretical tradition)
the study of how geography—such as location, natural resources, borders, and strategic
spaces—shapes the power relations, strategies, and foreign policies of states and other
international actors. It examines the link between physical space and political influence in global
affairs.
That emphasizes geographical variables when explaining politics
Relic of the past (19th century) or back for good (spheres of influence)?
Revenge? geography does matter, borders matter → “the world is not one (happy) global
village”
Lecture 1: Introduction ⅓
What: This lecture aims to provide background for both the case classes and the portfolio
assignment
Why: The lecture revisits a number of key concepts relevant to understanding international
politics in the 21st century to provide an initial sense of the complexities the EU faces when
presenting itself as an international actor in today’s worlds.
How: The lecture uses an event that most of you are already familiar with before class as
stepping-stone
- In examining why this anniversary might be considered a rather unhappy one, the
lecture suggests that contestation of the LIO, both from outside and within (Trump
administration), has been a complicating factor. Additionally, the increasing prevalence
of regime complexes should be considered when explaining why international
organisations are challenged (particularly the assumption that policy- and
decision-making are concentrated within single bodies).
- Both the ‘contestation of the LIO’ and the concept of ‘regime complexes’ will be
explored further later on, so these are important concepts to study.
What?
Unravelling complexity - Complex EU in a complex world of international relations
Why?
The complexity is often seen as a burden seen as a negative thing, it creates a lot of anxiety
often
UN General Assembly - Worlds parliament → in negative connotation because they only
present their views on how the world is turning, however the binding power is very minimal →
referred to as a talking show.
On their 80th anniversary it will be very difficult meeting - world cup of diplomacy
- war and recognition of gaza
- soudan
- war ukraine - russia
- the (de)funding of the UN
→ a move to Africa, seems nice but its a vail for cost benefit motivations
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION:
Organization that include at least three states as members, have activities in several states and
are created through a formal intergovernmental agreement (such as a treaty, charter or statute)
→ States are (often) main actors for international organizations
l-> challenging times for IOs
, - Reason 1: one of many
- international policy is no longer made in a single organizations but in regime
complexes
- Regime complex; IO; global governance; globalisation
- Reason 2: contestation
- contestation of IOs as cornerstones of Liberal International Order
Not only from the outside, but also from the within
- liberal international order; liberalism; realism; realpolitik; geopolitics
REGIME COMPLEX (new concept):
What? international policy is no longer made in single bodies/organization
1. More actors: proliferation of forums
(overlapping functions and memberships)
2. Less ‘classic’ actors: proliferation of informal clubs, public-private arrangements…
Why? Diverging interests push actors toward each other and away from integrated regimes.
GLOBAL GOVERNANCE:
Context of the 1990s - systematic changes (end of the Cold War, globalisation, new technology)
inspire reflection on how the world works.
→ not a global government, but global governance - not simple but complex, not one body, but a
lot of actors
“The multi-level collection of governance-related activities, rules, mechanisms, formal and
informal, public and private, existing in the world today.”
→ globalisation as a reason global governance
GLOBALISATION
The process of increasing interconnectedness between societies (more and deeper
connections/contacts)
Waves: Thick globalisation, but questions (deglobalisation, slowbalisation,...)
,Contestation —-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIBERAL ORDER - LIBERAL INTERNATIONAL ORDEL; ILO
Rules-based world order (decision very black/white in the media), created after WW1 under US
leadership based on liberal ideas, aimed at peace and prosperity - institutions (cooperation) as
key feature/tool. → three versions of liberal internationalism
“For many years, the EU has been strongly invested in the liberal international order and many
of its core approaches to security have been heavily dependent upon it.
The EU underpinned liberal order as part of its own core, founding identity. The EU was
prominent in its support for many of the key advances of the multilateral architecture, including
Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, the Human Rights Council and the International Criminal
Court, and provided about half of the UN’s budget.
From an early stage, European governments saw support for multilateral organisations as a
natural extension of the same principles that informed the EU integration project itself.”
LIBERALISM:
emphasizes cooperation, interdependence, and the role of international institutions,
norms, and law in promoting peace and stability. It assumes that states, while pursuing their
interests, can overcome anarchy through dialogue, trade, and shared values such as
democracy and human rights.
Theoretical tradition (theories as lenses to understand overall politics)
- linear reading of history (progress)
- beyond political interaction
- state and society
- positive impact of institutionalisation, but cooperation not guaranteed/successful
→ idealism & institutionalism
REALISM - theories of international politics and zombies
views states as the main actors in an anarchic international system, where no
overarching authority exists above them. States are seen as rational, power-seeking actors
primarily concerned with their own survival and security. Cooperation is possible but limited, as
power and national interest ultimately drive state behavior.
- Cyclical reading of history (no progress) - understanding the world as it is
- political interaction (states)
- international level
- cooperation limited/difficult
- explanatory in nature (monopoly)
REALPOLITIK (first a theory and then a practice)
“Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable - the are of the next best” - Otto von Bismarck
pragmatic way of practicing (international) politics
That takes ‘reality’’ (the actual cost-benefit situation) as starting-point (rather than ideology)
→ Hans Morgenthau was inspired by Bismark
, GEOPOLITICS (theoretical tradition)
the study of how geography—such as location, natural resources, borders, and strategic
spaces—shapes the power relations, strategies, and foreign policies of states and other
international actors. It examines the link between physical space and political influence in global
affairs.
That emphasizes geographical variables when explaining politics
Relic of the past (19th century) or back for good (spheres of influence)?
Revenge? geography does matter, borders matter → “the world is not one (happy) global
village”
