Hannah O. 2023-2024
INHOUDSTAFEL
HOOFDSTUK 1: ORDER
- LAWSON: WHEN DID IO EMERGE?
- BULL: ORDER DEPENDS ON IT PURPOSE
- RICARDO’S COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE THEORY = BASE OF EU TRADE POLICY OF
FREE TRADE PRINCIPLES
- MEARSHEIMER & IKENBERRY
HOOFDSTUK 2: EUROPEAN FOREIGN POLICY (INTEGRATION): IN BETWEEN EXPECTATIONS
AND CAPABILITIES
- HILL, SMITH AND VANHOONACKER
- VANHOONACKER AND POMORSKA: MULTIFACETED NATURE EU
HOOFDSTUK 3: EU-US TRANSATLANTIC COOPERATION AND COMPETITION
- MEIJER AND BROOKS : STRATEGIC AUTONOMY TO BE REACHED, STRATEGIC
CACOPHONY
- SMITH AND STEFFENSON: PENETRATED DECISION MAKING
HOOFDSTUK 4: EU-CHINA RELATIONS
- GEERAERTS: 2 DIVERGING (POWER BASED LOGIC) AND CONVERGING
(TRANSFORMATIONAL LOGIC) TRENDS
- KEUKELEIRE EN DE BRUYN: BRICS POLICY
HOOFDSTUK 5: EU FOREIGN POLICY, ENLARGEMENT AND THE WAR IN UKRAINE
- BROWNING: EU = GEOPOLITICAL ACTOR, SEE ENP
HOOFDSTUK 6: DECENTERING EUROPE IN THE EU’S DEVELOPMENT AND MIGRATION
POLICY
- CARBONE: EU DEV POL IS DIVIDED BETWEEN CLUSTERS OF MEMBER STATES
- ONAR AND NICOLAÏDIS: POSTCOLONIALISM - DECENTERING AGENDA
HOOFDSTUK 7: GLOBAL TECH RACE
- CYTERA: (CRITIQUES THE EU) CHIPS (ACT)
- CSERNATONI: 4 KEY AREAS OF TECHNOLOGICAL SOVEREIGNTY
HOOFDSTUK 8: CSDP
- KEUKELEIRE AND DELREUX: CIVILIAN COMPONENT OF CSDP FOR LONGER-TERM
STABILIZATION
- TARDY: DIVERGING EUROPEAN STRATEGIC CULTURES
1
, Hannah O. 2023-2024
STRUCTURE: CLAIM + LOGIC + EVIDENCE + CRITIQUE
Hoofdstuk 1: Order in international relations
1. Define ‘order’ in international relations
- Lawson and definition of order + consequences of global transformation (shrinking
of the planet, IGO’s, structural power relations and inequality, institutions and
technology & infrastructure)
- Bull and definition of order, depends on its purpose, 3 elementary goals of a
purposive order (life, truth, property) + components of order
IO may exist without sovereign or hegemonic leader
2. What are the historical origins of the ‘modern international order’? Can we take one
moment as a key step in the development of international order?
- Peace of Westphalia, 1648 because it established a certain form of local sovereignty
however loyalty remained and this was only the case in Europe. Considering starting
point for modern IO is highly criticized because sovereignty was not mentioned as
such. Of course one could argue that the Westphalian treaties were an important
step in the history of how sovereignty and international order developed, but is was
hardly the main step.
- Mid-19th century: global transformation, the rise of democratic and liberal political
systems, comparative advantage David Ricardo
- Post WW2 order: IGO’s
3. If Europe had an important role in the emergence of modern international orders, does it
mean that a newly emerging order cannot exist without European leadership?
CLAIM: Europe indeed played an important role in the modern IO. LOGIC + EVIDENCE: Europe was
central in the development of the Westphalian system of state sovereignty in the 17th century, the
Industrial Revolution (mid-19th century), and the colonial empires that shaped global politics and
economics. European ideas and institutions have historically influenced the structure of international
relations.
Currently: The global power dynamics have shifted significantly, with the rise of other influential
regions and countries such as the United States and BRIC’S countries. These countries increasingly
play crucial roles in shaping the international order.
Influence of Europe today: Brussels Effect - normative power.
Europe remains an important player but is not the sole architect or leader of the international
system.
CRITIQUE: What will be the new global order? Multipolarity, bipolarity, unipolarity: Is Europe’s role in
decline?
2
INHOUDSTAFEL
HOOFDSTUK 1: ORDER
- LAWSON: WHEN DID IO EMERGE?
- BULL: ORDER DEPENDS ON IT PURPOSE
- RICARDO’S COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE THEORY = BASE OF EU TRADE POLICY OF
FREE TRADE PRINCIPLES
- MEARSHEIMER & IKENBERRY
HOOFDSTUK 2: EUROPEAN FOREIGN POLICY (INTEGRATION): IN BETWEEN EXPECTATIONS
AND CAPABILITIES
- HILL, SMITH AND VANHOONACKER
- VANHOONACKER AND POMORSKA: MULTIFACETED NATURE EU
HOOFDSTUK 3: EU-US TRANSATLANTIC COOPERATION AND COMPETITION
- MEIJER AND BROOKS : STRATEGIC AUTONOMY TO BE REACHED, STRATEGIC
CACOPHONY
- SMITH AND STEFFENSON: PENETRATED DECISION MAKING
HOOFDSTUK 4: EU-CHINA RELATIONS
- GEERAERTS: 2 DIVERGING (POWER BASED LOGIC) AND CONVERGING
(TRANSFORMATIONAL LOGIC) TRENDS
- KEUKELEIRE EN DE BRUYN: BRICS POLICY
HOOFDSTUK 5: EU FOREIGN POLICY, ENLARGEMENT AND THE WAR IN UKRAINE
- BROWNING: EU = GEOPOLITICAL ACTOR, SEE ENP
HOOFDSTUK 6: DECENTERING EUROPE IN THE EU’S DEVELOPMENT AND MIGRATION
POLICY
- CARBONE: EU DEV POL IS DIVIDED BETWEEN CLUSTERS OF MEMBER STATES
- ONAR AND NICOLAÏDIS: POSTCOLONIALISM - DECENTERING AGENDA
HOOFDSTUK 7: GLOBAL TECH RACE
- CYTERA: (CRITIQUES THE EU) CHIPS (ACT)
- CSERNATONI: 4 KEY AREAS OF TECHNOLOGICAL SOVEREIGNTY
HOOFDSTUK 8: CSDP
- KEUKELEIRE AND DELREUX: CIVILIAN COMPONENT OF CSDP FOR LONGER-TERM
STABILIZATION
- TARDY: DIVERGING EUROPEAN STRATEGIC CULTURES
1
, Hannah O. 2023-2024
STRUCTURE: CLAIM + LOGIC + EVIDENCE + CRITIQUE
Hoofdstuk 1: Order in international relations
1. Define ‘order’ in international relations
- Lawson and definition of order + consequences of global transformation (shrinking
of the planet, IGO’s, structural power relations and inequality, institutions and
technology & infrastructure)
- Bull and definition of order, depends on its purpose, 3 elementary goals of a
purposive order (life, truth, property) + components of order
IO may exist without sovereign or hegemonic leader
2. What are the historical origins of the ‘modern international order’? Can we take one
moment as a key step in the development of international order?
- Peace of Westphalia, 1648 because it established a certain form of local sovereignty
however loyalty remained and this was only the case in Europe. Considering starting
point for modern IO is highly criticized because sovereignty was not mentioned as
such. Of course one could argue that the Westphalian treaties were an important
step in the history of how sovereignty and international order developed, but is was
hardly the main step.
- Mid-19th century: global transformation, the rise of democratic and liberal political
systems, comparative advantage David Ricardo
- Post WW2 order: IGO’s
3. If Europe had an important role in the emergence of modern international orders, does it
mean that a newly emerging order cannot exist without European leadership?
CLAIM: Europe indeed played an important role in the modern IO. LOGIC + EVIDENCE: Europe was
central in the development of the Westphalian system of state sovereignty in the 17th century, the
Industrial Revolution (mid-19th century), and the colonial empires that shaped global politics and
economics. European ideas and institutions have historically influenced the structure of international
relations.
Currently: The global power dynamics have shifted significantly, with the rise of other influential
regions and countries such as the United States and BRIC’S countries. These countries increasingly
play crucial roles in shaping the international order.
Influence of Europe today: Brussels Effect - normative power.
Europe remains an important player but is not the sole architect or leader of the international
system.
CRITIQUE: What will be the new global order? Multipolarity, bipolarity, unipolarity: Is Europe’s role in
decline?
2
