NANTAI NVERSTES DISCUSSIONS ON GLOBALIZATION INTERNATIONAL AND GLOBAL

NİŞANTAŞI ÜNİVERSİTESİ DISCUSSIONS ON GLOBALIZATION INTERNATIONAL AND GLOBAL SECURITY IN THE POST-COLD WAR ERA İktisadi, İdari ve Sosyal Bilimler Fakültesi iisbf. nisantasi. edu. tr NİŞANTAŞI ÜNİVERS İTESİ ©

THE CONCEPT OF SECURITY • There is a general consensus that security implies freedom from threats to core values; but there is a major disagreement about whether the main focus of enquiry should be on individual, national or international security. • Notion of security – «A nation is secure to the extent to which it is not in danger of having to sacrifice core values if it wishes to avoid war, and is able, if challenged, to maintain them by victory in such a war» (Walter Lippmann) – «Security in any objective sense measures the absence of threats to acquired values and in a subjective sense, the absense of fear that such values will be attached» (Arnold Wolfen) – «In case of security, the discussion is about the pursuit of freedom from threat. When this discussion is in the context of the international system, security is about the ability of states and societies to maintain their independent identity and their functional integrity» (Barry Buzan) NİŞANTAŞI ÜNİVERSİTESİ ©

THE TRADITIONAL APPROACH TO NATIONAL SECURITY • Key neo-realist assumptions – The international system is anarchic. They do not mean by this that it is necessarily chaotic. Rather, anarchy implies that there is no central authority capable of controlling state behaviour. – States claiming sovereignty will inevitably develop offensive military capabilities to defend themselves and extend their power. As such they are potentially dangerous to each other. – Uncertainty, leading to lack of trust, is inherent in the international system. States can never be sure of the intentions of their neighbours and therefore, they must always be on their guard. – States will want to maintain their independence and sovereignty, and as a result, survival will be the most basic driving force influencing their behaviour. – Although the states are rational, there will always be room for miscalculation. In a world of imperfect information, potential antagonists will always have an incentive to misrepresent their capabilities to keep their opponents guessing. This may lead to mistakes about «real» NİŞANTAŞI ÜNİVERSİTESİ © state interests.

THE DIFFICULTIES OF CO-OPERATION BETWEEN STATES • Cooperation between states occurs, but it is difficult to achieve and even more difficult to sustain. – There is prospect of cheating – There is the concern which states have about what are called relative-gains • Contingent realists regard themselves as structural realists or neo-realists. – They believe standard neo-realism is flawed for the 3 main reasons: they reject the competition bias in theory; they do not accept that states are only motivated by relative gains; they believe the emphasis on cheating is exaggerated. – They tend to be more optimistic about cooperation between states than traditional neorealists. • Supporters of the concept of mature anarchy also accept that structure is a key element in determining state behaviour. NİŞANTAŞI ÜNİVERSİTESİ ©

ALTERNATIVE VIEWS ON INTERNATIONAL AND GLOBAL SECURITY • Social constructivists argue that material things acquire meaning only through the structure of shared knowledge in which they are embedded. • Critical security theorists argue that too much emphasis is given to the state. Instead, the referent should be the individual; . • Feminists argue that gender tends to be left out of the literature on international security. • Post-modernists emphasize the importance of ideas and discourse in thinking about international security. • Supporters of global society school argue that the end of 20 th century witnessed an accelerated process of globalization. NİŞANTAŞI ÜNİVERSİTESİ ©

SOURCES • John Baylis & Steve Smith (2001) The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. NİŞANTAŞI ÜNİVERSİTESİ ©