Analyzing international relations:
Lecture 1: introduction
➔ Goals of the course:
- To get behind the headlines
- To deepen to our understanding of IR
- To think critically about big important issues
➔ IR is a subfield
- We can’t cover it all
➔ Focus of course:
→ Conflict and cooperation between states
→ Focus on explanation (why and under what conditions)
- A little bit about description (inevitable) what/ when / how
- Prescription what is right or desirable (normative side)
( eg: what factors at national and international levels shape the likelihood and the form of
conflict and cooperation between states)
→ Helps us to understand:
- Why conflict is hard to seem to avoid?
- Which solution are chosen and why
- Why are some problems addressed and others not
➔ Key questions:
- Do international rules and organizations make a difference?
- Why is war so common ( but so horrible)
- Why is it so hard to protect the global environment?
- Can international law prevent human right abuse?
- Do economic independence promote growth or vulnerability or both
➔ Corona
- Part of the problem or new problem (transforming world politics?)
,➔ For readings:
- Find the core idea (value and limitations as a way of understanding of world politics)
compare to other resources (there are not truths simply arguments on how to
understand world politics)
➔ Thucydides and the Peloponnesian war (431-404 BC)
➔ 5th century BC among Greek city states
• Went of for 27 years in ancient Greece
• Sparta & allies vs Athens & allies
→ Sparta: Autocracy & major land power
→ Athens: democracy & growing power with overseas empire
→ Result: Sparta won reasserted its dominance over the Greek world
➔ Thucydides writing ( 460 – 400 BC)
• Athenian general in Peloponnesian war
• Blamed for Athenian defeat → exiled from Athens ( did not bring forces fast
enough)
• Wrote a historical interpretation of the war ( travelled through islands)
• Gave an explanation to why and what happened
→ Why people attribute him as the first modern ‘historian’
→ did not attribute events to god
➔ Thucydides explanation of the war
→ He said that war was inevitable because of the growth of Athenian power and the fear
caused in Sparta
- The Athenians made their empire more and more strong → Sparta felt the position to
be no longer tolerable and decided to provoke and employ all energies to destroy
power of Athens
- According to Sparta ( dominant power) Athenians ( rising power)
➔ Formed inspiration for contemporary idea
, → Thucydides trap: The claim that war is likely between rising power and declining
power
Eg: Destined for war china and USA (Graham Alison)
- Found 16 cases when a rising power rivaled a dominant power ( 12 resulted in war)
- He argued yes war can be avoided but it requires great political and psychological
flexibility
- There can be similar dynamics in other parts of the world in different times
➔ What do Thucydides study of war in ancient Greece and Allison book on US – China
relations have In common ?
1. They both talk about states as the key actors in international politics ( not to say that
there are no other actors → but that we understand a lot more by just focusing on
them
2. Differences in the growth of states ( have different economic growth rates → over
time that leads to some states rising and others failing relative to each other) → over
time leases to redistribution of power among states ( rising and falling) → that
produces conflict
• But Thucydides in not best known for this
➔ The siege of Melos (416 BC)
• Melos was helping Sparta (unofficial)but claimed neutrality
• Melos was originally a colony of Sparta
• Athens insisted that Melos should support them → they refused → Athens destroyed
Melos and killed man enslaved women
• What Thucydides was famous for was recreating a dialogue between representatives
of Athens and Melos before fighting ( Melian dialogue) ➔ diplomacy
➔ Melian and Athenian views on
➔ These are 3 big themes in international relations:
→ Neutrality: How do superpowers treat small states that seek neutrality
- That don’t want to join (choose sides)
- Melians argue that they have been independent for 700 years and that they have no
interest in picking sides in the dispute → Athenians (superpower) we cant afford to
let you stay neutral ( the message (signal) that will be sent to other small states) we
cant tolerate your independence
→ Alliances: will a super power help a small state
- Can these commitments be trusted ( eg NATO) ( to be natural ) → was not trusted by
Sparta → On the other hand Melos said they trusted Spartans to come to their aid →
, Athenians said we trust them to do what is best in their self-interest ( they are
skeptical about it) → they are expecting a Sparta first foreign policy
- Will a superpower help a small state?
→ Justice what is it place in international relations?
- Melanin’s are left with one card to play
- The favors of gods (now it be would about international law) → Melians argue that
they are right that’s why god will favor them in the confrontation → Athenians in our
experience god helps those that help them self (they find this reference meaningless
what matter is your abilities)
➔ Which modern cases appear similar?
(Great power a small power and their ability of the small state to follow its own course and
practice self-determination)
Examples:
1. US policy toward Mexico
→ two examples are enormous transformation of territory from Mexico
- Annexation of Texas ( 1845)
- Mexican cession (1848) → at the end of war even larger land to Mexico
2. US embargo on Cuba
- Socialist revolution → hesitated by US → the government argues that it’s a denial of
Cuba’s self determination ]
3. Russia actions in Chechenia
- Wanted independence → Russia really brutal reaction
4. Russian invasion of Ukraine
- Claimed Russian speaking wanted to join EU and NATO → threat to Russia (
annexed Crimea ( other than international law)
5. Israeli policy towards Palestinians
- Only grant as much autonomy as they want to give
( Echo across centuries)
➔ Is internal politics really about all about power
( do we just need to know who has power)
→ Athenians say
‘ Justice is enforced only among those who can be equally constrained by it and those who
have power use it while the weak make compromises’ ➔
Lecture 1: introduction
➔ Goals of the course:
- To get behind the headlines
- To deepen to our understanding of IR
- To think critically about big important issues
➔ IR is a subfield
- We can’t cover it all
➔ Focus of course:
→ Conflict and cooperation between states
→ Focus on explanation (why and under what conditions)
- A little bit about description (inevitable) what/ when / how
- Prescription what is right or desirable (normative side)
( eg: what factors at national and international levels shape the likelihood and the form of
conflict and cooperation between states)
→ Helps us to understand:
- Why conflict is hard to seem to avoid?
- Which solution are chosen and why
- Why are some problems addressed and others not
➔ Key questions:
- Do international rules and organizations make a difference?
- Why is war so common ( but so horrible)
- Why is it so hard to protect the global environment?
- Can international law prevent human right abuse?
- Do economic independence promote growth or vulnerability or both
➔ Corona
- Part of the problem or new problem (transforming world politics?)
,➔ For readings:
- Find the core idea (value and limitations as a way of understanding of world politics)
compare to other resources (there are not truths simply arguments on how to
understand world politics)
➔ Thucydides and the Peloponnesian war (431-404 BC)
➔ 5th century BC among Greek city states
• Went of for 27 years in ancient Greece
• Sparta & allies vs Athens & allies
→ Sparta: Autocracy & major land power
→ Athens: democracy & growing power with overseas empire
→ Result: Sparta won reasserted its dominance over the Greek world
➔ Thucydides writing ( 460 – 400 BC)
• Athenian general in Peloponnesian war
• Blamed for Athenian defeat → exiled from Athens ( did not bring forces fast
enough)
• Wrote a historical interpretation of the war ( travelled through islands)
• Gave an explanation to why and what happened
→ Why people attribute him as the first modern ‘historian’
→ did not attribute events to god
➔ Thucydides explanation of the war
→ He said that war was inevitable because of the growth of Athenian power and the fear
caused in Sparta
- The Athenians made their empire more and more strong → Sparta felt the position to
be no longer tolerable and decided to provoke and employ all energies to destroy
power of Athens
- According to Sparta ( dominant power) Athenians ( rising power)
➔ Formed inspiration for contemporary idea
, → Thucydides trap: The claim that war is likely between rising power and declining
power
Eg: Destined for war china and USA (Graham Alison)
- Found 16 cases when a rising power rivaled a dominant power ( 12 resulted in war)
- He argued yes war can be avoided but it requires great political and psychological
flexibility
- There can be similar dynamics in other parts of the world in different times
➔ What do Thucydides study of war in ancient Greece and Allison book on US – China
relations have In common ?
1. They both talk about states as the key actors in international politics ( not to say that
there are no other actors → but that we understand a lot more by just focusing on
them
2. Differences in the growth of states ( have different economic growth rates → over
time that leads to some states rising and others failing relative to each other) → over
time leases to redistribution of power among states ( rising and falling) → that
produces conflict
• But Thucydides in not best known for this
➔ The siege of Melos (416 BC)
• Melos was helping Sparta (unofficial)but claimed neutrality
• Melos was originally a colony of Sparta
• Athens insisted that Melos should support them → they refused → Athens destroyed
Melos and killed man enslaved women
• What Thucydides was famous for was recreating a dialogue between representatives
of Athens and Melos before fighting ( Melian dialogue) ➔ diplomacy
➔ Melian and Athenian views on
➔ These are 3 big themes in international relations:
→ Neutrality: How do superpowers treat small states that seek neutrality
- That don’t want to join (choose sides)
- Melians argue that they have been independent for 700 years and that they have no
interest in picking sides in the dispute → Athenians (superpower) we cant afford to
let you stay neutral ( the message (signal) that will be sent to other small states) we
cant tolerate your independence
→ Alliances: will a super power help a small state
- Can these commitments be trusted ( eg NATO) ( to be natural ) → was not trusted by
Sparta → On the other hand Melos said they trusted Spartans to come to their aid →
, Athenians said we trust them to do what is best in their self-interest ( they are
skeptical about it) → they are expecting a Sparta first foreign policy
- Will a superpower help a small state?
→ Justice what is it place in international relations?
- Melanin’s are left with one card to play
- The favors of gods (now it be would about international law) → Melians argue that
they are right that’s why god will favor them in the confrontation → Athenians in our
experience god helps those that help them self (they find this reference meaningless
what matter is your abilities)
➔ Which modern cases appear similar?
(Great power a small power and their ability of the small state to follow its own course and
practice self-determination)
Examples:
1. US policy toward Mexico
→ two examples are enormous transformation of territory from Mexico
- Annexation of Texas ( 1845)
- Mexican cession (1848) → at the end of war even larger land to Mexico
2. US embargo on Cuba
- Socialist revolution → hesitated by US → the government argues that it’s a denial of
Cuba’s self determination ]
3. Russia actions in Chechenia
- Wanted independence → Russia really brutal reaction
4. Russian invasion of Ukraine
- Claimed Russian speaking wanted to join EU and NATO → threat to Russia (
annexed Crimea ( other than international law)
5. Israeli policy towards Palestinians
- Only grant as much autonomy as they want to give
( Echo across centuries)
➔ Is internal politics really about all about power
( do we just need to know who has power)
→ Athenians say
‘ Justice is enforced only among those who can be equally constrained by it and those who
have power use it while the weak make compromises’ ➔
