Bachelors In Public Administration

International Relations and Current Affairs

Course Pack By
Ms. Mahnoor Farooq

Lahore College for Women University

Chapter 1

Introduction
Significance and evolution of International Relation as separate discipline

International Relations can be interpreted by some to be ‘actual relations between states’ but in

the academic field of International Relations, we give it a somewhat different definition. Whilst

there has never been a precise definition regarding the discipline of International Relations it can

be broadly defined as –

“ A branch of social sciences dealing with policies, developments and interactions, the effects of

which cross national boundaries and affect the lives of people in different countries and in several
parts of the world. ”

Though IR as an academic discipline is of recent origin, relations among nations is a phenomena

that is as old as history itself. Scholars often trace the origin of International Relations back to
1648. This is due to the fact that although actual relations between states had taken place since the
ancient civilizations such as Egypt, Greece, Rome -they were incidental, sporadic and limited in
nature. But by the Westphalia Treaty of 1648 International relations assumed a new character. It
was from this treaty that the concepts of “territorial sovereignty” and “independent nation sate”
were born. But it isn’t until the period after World War I in the 1920’s that International Relations
developed as a “distinct discipline”. The industrial revolution in the 19th century, brought with it
new thought, technology, communication, transportation. Trade, transit and transactions had
become the order of the day. All these developments had made international relations more
systematic, regular and comprehensive. The trauma of the First World War made people demand
a better understanding of foreign relations; War and peace came to the forefront; all these
developments drew peoples’ attention to the growing importance of international relations as an
academic discipline. In order to explore if International Relations is indeed a ‘distinct discipline’,
we need to first understand what is meant by a distinct discipline or academic discipline. Some
scholars consider a distinct discipline to be a separate field or study wholly distinct from any other
field or study. If this is the case, then International relations cannot be considered a ‘distinct
discipline’ because it is a well known fact that International Relations is not a subject that can be
learnt, taught or studied by itself. It is closely linked to many other fields and subjects such as
Political Science, History, Sociology, Law, Economics, etc. At least some basic knowledge of
these fields is essential if you hope to grasp the multi-dimensional nature of international-
relationships, and therefore International Relations can be classified as an “inter-disciplinary”
subject. But on the other hand, if by the words ‘distinct discipline’ is meant a disciplined study of
a particular field, with a recognizable focus of interest and body of theory, then International
Relations is, and always has been a ‘distinct discipline’, a discipline that has tended to evolve with
the times. According to the Webster Online Dictionary an academic discipline is,”A branch of
knowledge that is formally taught, either at the university, or via some other such method.
Therefore International Relations would fall into the category of a distinct academic discipline as
it has evolved into being a field of study which is formally taught in many Universities and
professional institutions.” “International Relations is a subject which began to be studied formally
after World War I (1919) but since then, it has grown much both in terms of the number of scholars
involved and in the literature that has been produced regarding it.” –Trevor Taylor. This discipline
is so new that it can be called the youngest of all social sciences.” (V.K.Malhotra, 2002) After the
1st World war, the systematic study of international relations was initiated by the North Americans
and the West Europeans. The first chair of International Politics was founded in 1919 in the
University College of Wales (U.K.). Several prominent historians like Alfred Zimmern, E.H.Carr,
C.K.Webster were early occupants of this chair. This is considered to be the seed of International
Relations as a distinct discipline. “ There has never been a precise agreement amongst scholars
regarding the definition of the discipline of International Relations. Scholars have emphasized
different aspects of the discipline in each of their definitions of IR as a discipline. Here are some
scholarly definitions regarding IR as a distinct discipline:

• Holsti believed that IR is “A study of the International system –a collection of independent

political entities interacting with considerable frequency according to some more or less
regularized processes.”

• Thompson stated that IR was “The study of rivalry among nations and the conditions and

institutions which ameliorate or exacerbate these relationships.”

• Quincy Wright once said that “It is not only the nations which International Relations seek to

regulate. Varied types of groups –nations, states, governments, people, regions, alliances,

confederations, international organizations, even industrial organizations, cultural organizations,

and religious organizations must be dealt with in the study of IR, if the treatment is to be

realistic.”

• Rosenau mentioned that “The outstanding feature of IR is the decentralized milieu (location) in

which they take place.”

Even though there is no one precise definition of the discipline of IR, it can be concluded that IR
deals with policies and actions of states, their representatives as well as non-state actors too. These
policies and actions extend beyond national boundaries and are largely political but are also
concerned with social relations as well. International Relations as a field of study, has a long
history of growth and development. This is yet another important factor in proving that it has
indeed developed into becoming a distinct academic discipline. Between 1900-1939, the study of
International Relations was gradually progressing and as an academic discipline it received a wider
recognition during the inter-war period (1919-1939). Its development was further aided by the
many universities, research bodies, and organizations that showed a great interest in IR at the time.
The League of Nations also had a considerable role to play in the development of IR as a distinct
discipline, as it encouraged the study by its work as a forum for international discussions and by
sponsoring many International Conferences. After the 2nd World War, the concept of war had
once again rocked the entire world with the multitude of death and destruction it brought with it
and this underlined the compelling need to improve the techniques of inter-state relations for the
survival of the human race. After its birth in first half of the 20th century, IR, attained adulthood
in the post-second world war era passing through several stages. This development can be divided
into a few phases such as the Prenatal, Organizational, Cold War and Scientific Phases. Kenneth
Thompson has summed up the development of IR as a discipline in the following stages.

1. The first stage –up to the end of the World war I (1919) IR was taught by diplomatic historians
who were more interested in history than in politics, their main concern was the description of past
events rather than the analysis of present ones.

2. The second stage starting after the end of World War I stressed only on the study of current
affairs. This was a reaction to the excessive concentration on the past done during the first stage.

3. The third stage –was during the inter-war years (1919-1939) also known as the 20 year crisis
period. Scholars during this time tended to take a more moralistic and legalistic approach towards
studying IR. More emphasis was laid on the importance of international Law and International
Organizations. Especially the League of Nations which was formed during this time, with the hope
of narrowing nationalism by internationalism. The Idealist approach became popular during this
time.

4. The fourth stage –was the period following the World War II (1945) During this era people had
lost faith in the power and authority of international organizations and international law as a tool
of maintaining peace; because of the failure of the League of Nations (its failure to prevent yet
another world war). Therefore the emphasis of this period shifted towards a scientific analysis of
the developments of international politics. Scientific studies were conducted on what causes war,
how to avoid war, what influences the behavior of states, etc. Kenneth.W.Thompson had
formulated these four stages in the 1952 whereas so many new things have happened in the world
since then and the study of IR has accordingly taken several new forms and contents. Therefore
the following stages maybe added to understand the development of IR as a distinct discipline up-
to-date.

5. The fifth stage could be described as cold war phase (1945-1989) There was no complete war
or peace during this time; hence it was described as the Cold war period. One of the main
characteristics of this era was the intense rivalry between USA and USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics (USSR), by way of bloc politics (political aliance). What was most essential during this
time was a Balance of Power. In the 1950’s and 1960’s the Realist approach became the popular
approach in IR, they believed that Politics is nothing but a struggle for power. Marxism also raised
its head during this time. From the mid 1960’s to the 1970’s The Behavioural Approach became
popular. During the era of “Detente” in the 1970’s another approach known as Post-
Behaviouralism (A way to study politics that not only focuses on political behavior by using the scientific
method, but also allows researchers to use their values when presenting policy implications) was adopted.
By the mid-1980’s Realism had once again emerged in the form of Neo-Realism (power is the most
important factor in international relations.).

6. The sixth stage is the post-cold war era which scholars used to try and establish what the cold

war was all about, why it took place and what it was aimed at and what it ultimately achieved.
International Relations consist of many characteristics of a distinct discipline, which are common
to all social sciences. It has a distinct field of study, area of focus, separate subject matter,
analytical methods, key elements, unique approaches, theories and concepts, and its own
vocabulary which sets it apart from being a simple study and proves its distinctive disciplinary
nature. On the road to becoming a distinct discipline, any social science tends to create and adopt
its own theories, approaches, and concepts in order to explain certain phenomena found within the
field and outside as well. This is often referred to as a social science’s particular “way of seeing”
the world. Similarly IR too was recognized as a distinct discipline once it adopted its own way of
seeing the world. Thus IR has its own theories, approaches and concepts.

CONCLUSION

The origin, growth and development of the subject of IR can be traced back to the beginning of
the 20th century. It is therefore a comparatively new discipline. During this short time the subject
has passed through different phases and stages. Every phase is marked by its own perspective and
approach. IR has evolved into a distinct discipline with time. IR is interdisciplinary and thus is
closely related to many other fields of study. It developed from idealism to realism, from realism
to Behaviourism, scienticism, neo-liberalism radicalism, neo-realism and so on. IR also has many
characteristics common to social sciences which are essential in order to be considered a distinct
discipline. Such as a distinct field of study and area of focus, specific subject matter, and analytical
methods. IR has also developed its own theories, approaches, concepts which further prove that it
has indeed grown to become a distinct discipline. Furthermore IR has its own vocabulary
consisting of specific words and terms that hold specific meaning within the field of IR, which is
also another characteristic of a distinct discipline. Today IR has grown into being a highly skilled
specialized field which is taught in a number of prestigious Universities and academic institutions
globally. Many scholars and theorists have worked tirelessly in order to create comprehensive
definitions regarding the discipline and to write books such as Morganthau’s ‘Politics among
nations : struggle for power and peace” which is only an example of the many great works this
distinct discipline of IR has produced. In conclusion after careful consideration of facts, I would
like to state that, IR has undoubtedly developed itself from being a branch of subjects such as
political science, history and law to being an autonomous distinct discipline today.

Idealism is when you envision or see things in an ideal or perfect manner. Realism, on the other hand,
tends toward a more pragmatic and actual view of a situation

What is International Relations and what is its relevance?

Definitions of IR

Jeromy Bentham was the first person to use the word ‘international’, in the later 18th century, with
regardsto defining the relations between nation-states. A restricted definition of IR confines its
focus to official relations and excludes relations other than the official from the purview of
international relations.

From a broader view, IR may refer to all forms of interactions between members of separate
societies, whether government sponsored or not. The study of IR includes analysis of foreign
policies or political processes between nations, and also focuses on international trade and civil
society interaction.

Ingredients of IR

The study of IR involves looking at the nature and principal forces of international organization as
well as the political, social, economic organization of political life. IR is also concerned with an
examination of elements of national power, including the limitation of national power and
examining how it can be controlled.

IR also focuses on the instruments available for promotion of national interest, with foreign
policies of major powers and of smaller (strategic) powers and considers other historical
ingredients as a background for events affecting the current sphere of International Relations.

International Politics vs. International Relations

IR is wider in scope than international politics. International politics focuses on various styles of
politics: the politics of violence, the politics of persuasion, hierarchical policies and pluralistic
politics.
Yet IR embraces the totality of relations among people and groups of people in global society,
which go beyond looking at political forces to an examination of socio-cultural and economic
processes as well.

League of Nations

WWI had caused 20 million deaths in 4 years. For the first time ever, there was a global consensus
on the need for collective security and a focus on the need for prevention of war.

Nations attempted to put to practice the ideas of public voting by diplomats in international
organizations; the rule of law; the promise of disarmament and foreign policies based on
disarmament via the formulation of the League of Nations.

The League was ineffective in stopping the military aggression that led to World War II. It ceased
its work during the war and dissolved in 1946. The United Nations assumed its assets and carries
on much of its work.

Foreign Policy & Diplomacy

Foreign policies are based on circumstantial variables as well as contending theories concerning
how to best achieve the interests of a state in its interaction with other states. Diplomacy focuses
on the structures and instruments available for diplomacy and the changing scope of interaction
with international actors.

International Institutions

Contemporary international institutions in which groups of states or other actors can participate
include International Non Governmental Organizations (INGOs) or the UN system. The European
Union, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Association for South East Asian Nations or South
Asian Association for Regional Cooperation are also other regional groupings with multiple
functions.

Approaches to International Relations: Theories in IR

Political Realism

Realism emphasizes assumes that all nation-states are motivated by national interests, or, at best,
national interests disguised as moral concerns. Realism seeks to preserve political autonomy and
territorial integrity of nation-states. Once basic interests are secured, national interests may take
different forms. Some states may have an interest in securing more resources or land; other states
may wish to expand their own political or economic systems into other areas. Generally speaking,
national interest must be defined in terms of power.

National power has an absolute meaning since it can be defined in terms of military, economic,
political, diplomatic, or even cultural resources. For a realist, power is primarily a relative term:
does a state have the ability to defend itself against the power of another state? Does a state have
the ability to coerce another state to change that state's policies?

The realist conception of the international system is an anarchical environment. All states have to
rely upon their own resources to secure their interests, enforce whatever agreements they may have
entered into with other states, or to maintain a desirable domestic and international order.

For a realist, there should be no authority over the nation-state. Realism tries to describe politics
rationally, not on the basis of morality, but there is no universally acceptable definition of power.
Realists also think there is a constant struggle of power as power is the ultimate aim for all states,
which is not necessarily the case. Hans Morgenthau and Henry Kissinger are famous realists.

“Realism”, as Robert Gilpin once observed, "is founded on a pessimism regarding moral progress
and human possibilities." From the realist perspective, incompatible goals and conflict are the
defining features of world politics. Without enforceable international rules, decision makers have
little choice but to compete with other states for security, status, and wealth. The competition is
expected to be difficult, since the others are also likely to view their power resources and security
positions in relative terms.

Tenets of Liberalism

Liberal and or neo-liberal theorists try to identify a common basis for international cooperation
and interaction. Liberal theorists think that multiple actors are important to understanding
outcomes in international system: states, MNCs, NGOs, etc. (these actors are not necessarily
unitary or rational).

Economic, social and military goals motivate these actors to act and multiple means are used to
achieve their goals. For liberals, the anarchic character of the interstate system does not imply that
policymakers face an unchanging situation of international conflict. The prospect of economic,
technological, and cultural benefits may give policy makers reasons to cooperate with other states.
These include asymmetries in interdependence, military or issue specific power (where different
states have power on different issues, e.g.OPEC countries have power with respect to oil prices
not political issues)

According to liberal theorists, the anarchic international system is mitigated by norms and rules of
international law and trade. Governance without government is the ideal system for global
organization according to liberals. Liberals are particularly against the interference of the
government in economic processes.
Idealism

Idealists regard realism as a passing phase of history. They envision a world free of power politics
and violence. Idealists have great faith in international organizations and universal education in
achieving this end. But crushing totalitarianism with democratic principles is not easy. Idealism
can be frustrating given the lingering turmoil evident in the world. Rousseau, Kant and Woodrow
Wilson were famous idealists

Approaches to International Relations (Continued)

Approaches to IR

There are several distinct approaches to the study of IR, these include: the traditional approach,
the scientific approach, the behavioural and post-behaviourist approaches, and the systems
approach.

Traditional Approach

In view of the complex variables influencing behaviour of states, the traditionalists focus on the
observed behaviour of governments. They explain observable government behaviour on the basis
of concepts like balance of power, national interest, diplomacy etc. Traditional realists try to
understand and resolve the clashing of interests that inevitably leads to war.

This is an approach to international relations that emphasizes the studying of such disciplines as
diplomatic history, international law, and philosophy in an attempt to develop better insights.
Traditionalists tend to be skeptical of behaviourist approaches that are confined to strict scientific
standards that include formal hypothesis testing and, usually, the use of statistical analysis.

Traditional theorists regard international relations as a sub-discipline of history and political

science. There are historical, philosophical and legal variants to the traditional approach.

Scientific Approach

Scientific scholars challenged the traditionalist, arguing that IR is too broad and complex a field
to be a sub-discipline of political science. They began constructing conceptual frameworks and
partial models of international systems, and tried to collect and analyze data to refute of validate a
formulated hypothesis.

Such theorists focus on statistical correlations between variables like incidence of war and alliance
policies for e.g. While this approach has brought a methodological rigor to IR, it relies more
heavily on process analysis than on experimentation. Even obtaining data is difficult in IR and the
units of analysis vary (terrorism for e.g. is a relative term).

Behavioural Approach

In the 1960s and 70s, scholars began arguing that politics cannot be studied factually without
reference to values. Behavioural approach is informed by socio-anthropological and psychological
perspectives. It focuses on understanding the reasons behind the action behaviour of states and
other international actors.

This approach has contributed to understanding how people and organizations of different cultures
interact, the effects of propaganda and stereotypical views on conflict situations and international
relations.

It is difficult to determine the behaviour of states, which is the aggregate behaviour of a large
number of individuals and of superimposing authorities.

An approach to the study of politics or other social phenomena that focuses on the actions and
interactions among units by using scientific methods of observation to include quantification of
variables whenever possible. A practitioner of behaviourism is often referred to as a behaviourist.

Behaviorism refers to the ideas held by those behavioral scientists who consider only observed
behavior as relevant to the scientific enterprise and who reject what they consider to be
metaphysical notions of "mind" or "consciousness".

Post-Behaviourist Approach

In the 1980s, an attempt was made to combine normative and empirical approaches to study IR.
This approach can be used to test the validity of the idealists’ hypothesis to see if democratic or
authoritarian states are more likely to be engaged in internal conflicts.

Systems Approach

This approach places more emphasis on the complex interaction between and within states, while
retaining a post-behavioural scientific orientation. It does so by focusing on international systems
which are interdependent and interrelated. These systems range from small systems to intermediate
and large systems. The UN system, individual nations, ethnic groups, individual voters, political
parties, MNCs etc. can all be categorized into corresponding systems to understand the complex
nature of IR.

Relevant Vocabulary
 Anarchy: lack or absence of political organization

Mitigated: lessened, alleviated or eased

Interstate: between states

Assume: to take for granted

Lingering: ongoing or continuing. Global poverty for example is a lingering problem.

Contemporary: Current or from the same time period

Aggression: Violent behavior

Ceased: Ended

Disarmament: reduction of weaponry

Formulation: to devise or to design

Circumstantial: based on circumstances or ground realities

Suggested Readings

Students are advised to read the following chapters to develop a better understanding of the various
principals highlighted in this hand-out:

Chapter 1 in ‘“A Study of International Relations” by Dr. Sultan Khan.

Chapter 2
Nation State
THE NATION-STATE SYSTEM

Background and Approaches

A nation denotes a common ethnic and cultural identity shared by a single people, while a state is
a political unit with a governance system controlling a territory and its inhabitants.

The nation promotes emotional relationship amongst its members, while states provide political
and legal foundation for the identity of its citizens. The term nation-state has been used by social
scientists to denote the gradual fusion of cultural and political boundaries after a long control of
political authority by a central government. The nation-state plays a dominant role in international
relations.

Nation and Government

While governments come and go, a state has more permanence. Students and scholars of
international relations can depend upon the continued existence of a state as a viable political
entity.

Historical Background

The Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 created the modern nation-state. The treaty established the
principle of internal sovereignty (preeminence of rulers from other claimants to power) and
external sovereignty(independence from outside powers).

England, Spain and France obtained independence from dominance by the Holy Roman Empire.
It is often said that the Peace of Westphalia initiated the modern fashion of diplomacy as it marked
the beginning of the modern system of nation states. Subsequent wars were not about issues of
religion, but rather revolved around issues of state. This allowed Catholic and Protestant Powers
to ally, leading to a number of major realignments.

Another important result of the treaty was it laid rest to the idea of the Holy Roman Empire having
secular dominion over the entire Christian world. The nation-state would be the highest level of
government, subservient to no others.
Scholars like Machiavelli, Bodin and Grotius defended the authority of the state and provided
justification for the secular state independent from the authority of the Pope.

Approaches to IR

There are three approaches to studying the social-cultural, political and economic forces at work
within different nation-states.

i. Objective (Attributive) Approach: identifies nationalism and the nation-state in terms of

observable and quantifiable attributes, including linguistic, racial and religious factors.
ii. Subjective (Emotional) Approach: views nationalism and the nation-state as a set of
emotional, ideological and patriotic feelings binding people regardless of their ethnic
backgrounds.
iii. Eclectic (Synthetic) Approach: A more subjective than objective approach, seeking to
supplement notions of nationalism and patriotism with interethnic interaction and
education processes to explain creation of a common identity.

Further Evolution of Nation-State

State systems underwent further evolution on account of rise of representative government, the
industrial revolution, population explosion, independence of developing countries, economic
growth and multilateral organizations etc.

THE NATION STATE SYSTEM: BASIC FEATURES OF A NATION-STATE

Sovereignty

The concept of sovereignty is permanently associated with a nation-state. It evolved in the 16thc
in France, during the conflict between the state and the church.

Many theorists have defined sovereignty. Hobbes focused on its absolutist aspect, while Austin
focused on legalistic or juristic notions of sovereignty. The modern doctrine of popular sovereignty
has transferred the source of absolute power from the monarch to the people. The notion of
sovereignty is important but it can become rigid unless applied to the evolving pattern of inter-
state relations.

Nationalism

Nationalism implies elevation of the nation above all other values. States usually control the mass
media to propagate their foreign policy objectives and centralize their education systems to
popularize nationalistic values.
Nationalism may take precedence over moral and religious beliefs (Soviet Union) or it may
become fused with such beliefs (Israel). Hans Morgenthau differentiated between nationalism of
the 19th century and more recent nationalistic universalism under which one state can claim the
right to impose its own standards upon the actions of all other nations.

Nationalism is an ideology that creates and sustains a nation as a concept of a common identity for
groups of humans. According to the theory of nationalism, the good being, the preservation of
identity features, the independence in all subjects, and the glory, of one's own nation, are
fundamental values. Nationalists base nations on various notions of political legitimacy. These can
derive from the liberal argument that political legitimacy is derived from the consent of a region's
population, or combinations of the two.

The modern vernacular use of nationalism refers to the political (and military) exercise of ethnic
and religious nationalism, as defined below. Political scientists usually tend to research and focus
on the more extreme forms of nationalism usually related with national-socialism, separatism etc.

National Power

Power is a gauged by both tangible and non-tangible aspects. The economic output, size,
population and military strength of a state are tangible and quantifiable aspects. Power also rests
on intangible factors like quality of leadership, ideology, morale and manipulative or diplomatic
strength. Power purchases security and enables survival of a state, thus it is an end unto itself. This
long run objective to achieve power also requires exertion of power, so it is also a means to an
end.

Ingredients of National Power

Force: the explicit threat or use of military, economic, nuclear and other instruments of coercion
by one state against another. Influence: using instruments of persuasion by one state to alter or
maintain the behavior of another state.

Authority: voluntary compliance with directives of a state by other states out of respect,
solidarity, or in recognition of expertise.
 Relevant Vocabulary

Derived: obtained or extracted from

Legitimacy: legality or justification

Compliance: following and/or accepting instructions

Directives: orders

Solidarity: united stance

Explicit: obvious or visible

Intangible: not visible or very evident

Gauged: ascertained or measured

Population explosion: uncontrolled growth of population

Sovereignty: dominion, rule or independence

Multilateral initiatives: joint efforts often involving different nations and with many objectives

Linguistic: concerning language

Quantifiable: scientific or verifiable

Suggested Readings

Students are advised to read the following chapters to develop a better understanding of the
various

principals highlighted in this hand-out:

Chapter 2 in “A Study of International Relations” by Dr. Sultan Khan.

Internet Resources

In addition to reading from the textbook, please visit the following web-pages for this lecture,
which

provide useful and interesting information:

International Relations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_relations

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_state

https://owlcation.com/humanities/nation-state

https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-of-the-characteristics-of-a-nation-state-system

http://www.cssforum.com.pk/css-optional-subjects/group-i/international-relations/45780-m
odern-state-system.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_of_Westphalia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Caliphate

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/britain-and-france-conclude-sykes-picot-
agreement
Chapter 3
National Interest

NATIONAL INTEREST

Origins of National Interest

The word interest is derived from Latin and means “it concerns, or it makes a difference to”. In
the 1930s, Charles Bear wrote the first book concerning national interest. In following years the
notion of national interest in IR has been used to describe the underlying rationale for the behavior
of states in a threatening global environment, which preserves and protects one’s values against
another.
Statesmen who are responsible for and to their separate publics, and who operate in an uncertain
milieu, often have little choice but to put the interest of their own entity above those of others.
National interest is understood to mean a state of affairs valued solely for its benefit to the nation.
National interest often becomes synonymous with national egoism, with its disposition of
transferring self love onto the national group.
One cannot speak about national interest without reference to values, even if they are a culmination
of those held by some or all members of a given society

What does Nation Interest include?

Scholars define national interest variously. Some put self-preservation (territorial integrity,
political independence and fundamental government institutions) at the head of the list.
Other categories of national interest focus on self-sufficiency, prestige, aggrandizement. Charles
Bear focused on the notion of territory and commerce as being the defining features of national
interest.
Morgenthau says that a country’s national interests should be proportionate to its capacities Britain
and France after WWII had superpower ambitions, not commensurate to their capacities).

Criteria for Defining National Interest

Ideological criteria: if one country's ideology is liberal-democratic, it will make policies supporting
democratic governments and movements and oppose totalitarian ones.

Moral and legal criteria: the imperative to act honestly and make decisions in accordance with
international laws.

Pragmatic criteria: unemotional, calculated decisions to deal with on ground realities.

Bureaucratic criteria: each organization tends to exaggerate its specific funding request and to
argue in the name of the national interest rather than its own interest.

Partisan criteria: to equate the success of one’s own political party with an entire nation’s
success.

Racial criteria: national interest defined in terms of interest of an ethnic or racial minority or
majority

Class-status criteria: a particular class will defend its interests while defining national interest.
Foreign-dependency criteria: protector states define policy obligations of their dependencies.

National Interest
‘National Interest’ is a key concept in International Relations. All the nations are always engaged
in the process of fulfilling or securing the goals of their national interests. The foreign policy of
each nation is formulated on the basis of its national interest and it is always at work for securing
its goals. It is a universally accepted right of each state to secure its national interests. A state
always tries to justify its actions on the basis of its national interest. The behaviour of a state is
always conditioned and governed by its national interests. Hence it is essential for us to know the
meaning and content of National Interest.

“The meaning of national interest is survival—the protection of physical, political and cultural

identity against encroachments by other nation-states”—Morgenthau.

National Interest is a vague and ambiguous term that carries a meaning according to the context

in which it is used. Statesmen and policy-makers have always used it in ways suitable to them

and to their objective of justifying the actions of their states. Hitler justified expansionist policies

in the name of “German national interests.”

The US presidents have always justified their decisions to go in for the development of more and

more destructive weapons in the interest of “US national interest.” To build up a strong nuclear

base at Diego Garcia was justified by the USA in the name of meeting the challenge posed by

erstwhile USSR as well as for protecting the US interests in the Indian Ocean. During 1979-89,

(erstwhile) USSR justified its intervention in Afghanistan in the name of “Soviet national
interests”.

China justified its border disputes with India and the Soviet Union in the name of attempts to

secure the national interests of China. Now the P-5 countries talk of Non- proliferation and arms

control in terms of the national interests of all the nations.

All these and many more examples can be quoted to stress the ambiguity that surrounds the

concept of National Interest. This ambiguity hinders the process of formulating a universally

accepted definition of National Interest. However, several scholars have tried to define National

Interest.

Definition of National Interest:

(1) National Interest means: “The general, long term and continuing purpose which the state, the
nation, and the government all see themselves as serving.” —Charles Lerche and Abdul

(2) National Interest is: “What a nation feels to be necessary to its security and well being
…National interest reflects the general and continuing ends for which a nation acts.” —
Brookings Institution
(3) “National Interest is, that which states seek to protect or achieve in relation to each other. It
means desires on the part of sovereign states.” —Vernon Von Dyke

1. Necessary or Vital Components of National Interest and

2. Variable or Non-vital Components of National Interests.

(A) Necessary or Vital Components:

According to Morgenthau, the vital components of the national interests that a foreign policy
seeks to secure are survival or identity. He sub-divides identity into three parts: Physical identity.
Political identity and Cultural identity.
Physical identity includes territorial identity. Political identity means politico- economic system
and Cultural identity stands for historical values that are upheld by a nation as part of its cultural
heritage. These are called vital components because these are essential for the survival of the
nation and can be easily identified and examined. A nation even decides to go to war for securing
or protecting her vital interests.
A nation always formulates its foreign policy decisions with a view to secure and strengthens its
security. The attempts to secure international peace and security, that nations are currently
making, are being made because today the security of each state stands inseparably linked up
with international peace and security. Security is, thus, a vital component of national interest.
Each nation always tries to secure its vital interests even by means of war.

(B) Non-vital or Variable Components of National Interest:

The non-vital components are those parts of national interest which are determined either by
circumstances or by the necessity of securing the vital components. These are determined by a
host of factors—the decision-makers, public opinion, party politics, sectional or group interests
and political and moral folkways.
“These variable interests are those desires of individual states which they would, no doubt, like
to see fulfilled but for which they will not go to war. Whereas the vital interests may be taken as
goals, the secondary interests may be termed as objectives of foreign policy.”
These objectives have been listed by V.V. Dyke and his list includes: Prosperity, Peace,
Ideology, Justice, Prestige, Aggrandisement and Power. Though each state defines these
objectives in a manner which suits its interests in changing circumstances, yet these objectives
can be described as common to almost all states. Thus, national interest which a nation seeks to
secure can be generally categorized into these two parts.

Classification of National Interests:

In order to be more precise in examining the interest which a nation seeks to secure, Thomas W.
Robinson presents a six fold classification of interests which nations try to secure.

1. The Primary Interests:

These are those interests in respect of which no nation can compromise. It includes the
preservation of physical, political and cultural identity against possible encroachments by other
states. A state has to defend these at all costs.

2. Secondary Interests:
These are less important than the primary interests. Secondary Interests are quite vital for the
existence of the state. This includes the protection of the citizens abroad and ensuring of
diplomatic immunities for the diplomatic staff.
3. Permanent Interests:
These refer to the relatively constant long-term interests of the state. These are subject to very
slow changes. The US interest to preserve its spheres of influence and to maintain freedom of
navigation in all the oceans is the examples of such interests.

4. Variable Interests:
Such interests are those interests of a nation which are considered vital for national good in a
given set of circumstances. In this sense these can diverge from both primary and permanent
interests. The variable interests are largely determined by “the cross currents of personalities,
public opinion, sectional interests, partisan politics and political and moral folkways.”

5. The General Interests:

General interests of a nation refer to those positive conditions which apply to a large number of
nations or in several specified fields such as economic, trade, diplomatic relations etc. To
maintain international peace is a general interest of all the nations. Similar is the case of
disarmament and arms control.

6. Specific Interests:
These are the logical outgrowths of the general interests and these are defined in terms of time
and space. To secure the economic rights of the Third World countries through the securing of a
New International Economic Order is a specific interest of India and other developing countries.
Methods for the Securing of National Interest:
To secure the goals and objectives of her national interest is the paramount right and duty of
every nation. Nations are always at work to secure their national interests and in doing so they
adopt a number of methods.
The following are the five popular methods or instruments which are usually employed by
a nation for securing her national interests in international relations:

1. Diplomacy as a Means of National Interests:

Diplomacy is a universally accepted means for securing national interests. It is through
diplomacy that the foreign policy of a nation travels to other nations. It seeks to secure the goals
of national interests. Diplomats establish contacts with the decision-makers and diplomats of
other nations and conduct negotiations for achieving the desired goals and objectives of national
interests of their nation.
The art of diplomacy involves the presentation of the goals and objectives of national interest in
such a way as can persuade others to accept these as just and rightful demands of the nation.
Diplomats use persuasion and threats, rewards and threats of denial of rewards as the means for
exercising power and securing goals of national interest as defined by foreign policy of their
nation.
Diplomatic negotiations constitute the most effective means of conflict-resolution and for
reconciling the divergent interests of the state. Through mutual give and take, accommodation
and reconciliation, diplomacy tries to secure the desired goals and objectives of national interest.
As an instrument of securing national interest, diplomacy is a universally recognized and most
frequently used means. Morgenthau regards diplomacy as the most primary means. However, all
the objectives and goals of national interest cannot be secured through diplomacy.

2. Propaganda:
The second important method for securing national interest is propaganda. Propaganda is the art
of salesmanship. It is the art of convincing others about the justness of the goals and objectives
or ends which are desired to be secured. It consists of the attempt to impress upon nations the
necessity of securing the goals which a nation wishes to achieve.
“Propaganda is a systematic attempt to affect the minds, emotions and actions of a given group
for a specific public purpose.” —Frankel
It is directly addressed to the people of other states and its aim is always to secure the self-
interests—interests which are governed exclusively by the national interests of the propagandist.
The revolutionary development of the means of communications (Internet) in the recent times
has increased the scope of propaganda as a means for securing support for goals of national
interest.

3. Economic Means:
The rich and developed nations use economic aid and loans as the means for securing their
interests in international relations. The existence of a very wide gap between the rich and poor
countries provides a big opportunity to the rich nations for promoting their interests vis-a-vis the
poor nations.

The dependence of the poor and lowly- developed nations upon the rich and developed nations
for the import of industrial goods, technological know-how, foreign aid, armaments and for
selling raw materials, has been responsible for strengthening the role of economic instruments of
foreign policy. In this era of Globalisation conduct of international economic relation has
emerged as a key means of national interests.

4. Alliances and Treaties:

Alliances and Treaties are concluded by two or more states for securing their common interests.
This device is mostly used for securing identical and complementary interests. However, even
conflictual interests may lead to alliances and treaties with like-minded states against the
common rivals or opponents.
Alliances and treaties make it a legal obligation for the members of the alliances or signatories of
the treaties to work for the promotion of agreed common interests. The alliances may be
concluded for serving a particular specific interest or for securing a number of common interests.
The nature of an alliance depends upon the nature of interest which is sought to be secured.
Accordingly, the alliances are either military or economic in nature. The need for securing the
security of capitalist democratic states against the expanding ‘communist menace’ led to the
creation of military alliances like NATO, SEATO, CENTO, ANZUS etc. Likewise, the need to
meet the threat to socialism led to the conclusion of Warsaw Pact among the communist
countries.
The need for the economic reconstruction of Europe after the Second World War led to the
establishment of European Common Market (Now European Union) and several other economic
agencies. The needs of Indian national interests in 1971 led to the conclusion of the Treaty of
Peace, Friendship and Cooperation with the (erstwhile) Soviet Union. Alliances and Treaties are
thus popular means for securing national interests.
5. Coercive Means:
The role of power in international relations is a recognized fact. It is an unwritten law of
international intercourse that nations can use force for securing their national interests.
International Law also recognizes coercive means short of war as the methods that can be used

by states for fulfilling their desired goals and objectives. Intervention, Non-intercourse,
embargoes, boycotts, reprisals, retortion, retaliation, severance of relations and pacific biocides
are the popular coercive means which can be used by a nation to force others to accept a
particular course of behaviour or to refrain from a course which is considered harmful by the
nation using coercive means.
War and Aggression have been declared illegal means, yet these continue to be used by the states
in actual course of international relations. Today, nations fully realize the importance of peaceful
means of conflict-resolution like negotiations, and diplomacy as the ideal methods for promoting
their national interests. Yet at the same time these continue to use coercive means, whenever
they find it expedient and necessary. Military power is still regarded as a major part of national
power and is often used by a nation for securing its desired goals and objectives.
The use of military power against international terrorism now stands universally accepted as a
natural and just means for fighting the menace. Today world public opinion accepts the use of
war and other forcible means for the elimination of international terrorism.
All these means are used by all the nations for securing their national interests. Nations have the
right and duty to secure their national interests and they have the freedom to choose the requisite
means for this purpose. They can use peaceful or coercive means as and when they may desire or
deem essential.
However, in the interest of international peace, security and prosperity, nations are expected to
refrain from using coercive means particular war and aggression. These are expected to depend
upon peaceful means for the settlement of disputes and for securing their interests.
While formulating the goals and objectives of national interest, all the nations must make honest
attempts to make these compatible with the international interests of Peace, Security
environmental protection, protection of human rights and Sustainable Development.
Peaceful coexistence, peaceful conflict-resolution and purposeful mutual cooperation for
development are the common and shared interests of all the nations. As such, along with the

promotion of their national interests, the nations must try to protect and promote common
interests in the larger interest of the whole international community.
All this makes it essential for every nation to formulate its foreign policy and to conduct its
relations with other nations on the basis of its national interests, as interpreted and defined in
harmony with the common interests of the humankind. The aim of foreign policy is to secure the
defined goals of national interest by the use of the national power.

Variations in National Interest

There are different types of national interest. Some of the salient ones are described below:

Primary Interests: preservation of physical, political and cultural identity of the nation-state.

Secondary Interests: protection of citizens abroad and ensuring diplomatic immunity of foreign
missions.
Permanent Interests: long-term interests of strategic, ideological or economic nature which do
not change easily, with changes in domestic politics, for example

Variable Interests: these are short-term interests varying with cross-currents of personalities,
public opinion,partisan politics, sectional interests etc.

General Interests: involve a large number of nations, such as economic interests or diplomatic
norms.
Specific Interests: location and issue specific interests emerging from more general interests
(bilateral terms of trade for example).

Identical Interests: interests held in common by different states (climate protection concerns)
Complementary Interests: though not identical, these interests can serve as basis for agreement
on specific issues (US-Pakistan security cooperation).

Conflicting Interests: bring countries at odds with each other. Yet these interests can also
undergo change due to varying internal circumstances and a changing external scenario.

Means to Promote National Interests

Coercive Means: these can be internal so that they don’t infringe directly on other sovereign
nations(embargos, boycotts, severing diplomatic relations) or they can be external and are a
prima facie act of war(seizure of property of offending state, suspension of treaties), if the other
state responds with escalating moves, it leads to an outbreak of war.

Alliances: based on complementary or identical interests and strengthened by ideology, alliances

can promote national interest.
Diplomatic Negotiations: common interests are most effectively perpetuated by means of
diplomacy.
Diplomacy is also useful in negotiating conflicting national interests without resorting to
coercive means.

National vs. Global Interests

Given the complexities of international politics, Morgenthau for e.g. opposes state action based
on universal principles, instead he advocates a pragmatic approach of acting based on national
interests.
Yet, issues of global concern like growing inequalities and environmental problems require
world leaders to think beyond the narrow ambit of national interests. The world is also becoming
increasingly interconnected due to which national interests often exert an influence on global
interests and global interests to some degree also compel national interests.

Suggested Readings:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_interest

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-Methods-for-the-Securing-of-National-Interest

http://mrlowegpcsd.weebly.com/nationalism-and-national-interest.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism

https://www.britannica.com/topic/nationalism

German nationalism https://g.co/kgs/ibmQuK

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-national-interest-of-Pakistan

https://nation.com.pk/10-Sep-2017/in-the-national-interest

https://tribune.com.pk/story/463803/what-is-national-interest-2

https://www.dawn.com/news/762962
Chapter 4
Diplomacy

Definitions of Diplomacy
Diplomacy is the management of IR through negotiations or the method by which these relations
are adjusted or managed. Diplomacy tries to achieve the maximum objectives (national interests)
with a minimum of costs in a system of politics where war remains a possibility.
There are two major forms of diplomacy. The simplest and the oldest is bilateral diplomacy
between two states. Bilateral diplomacy is still common with many treaties between two states,
and it is a main concern of embassies. The other form of diplomacy is multilateral diplomacy
involving many states.
Formal multilateral diplomacy is normally dated to the Congress of Vienna in the nineteenth
century. Since then, multilateralism has grown in importance. Today most trade treaties, such as
the World Trade
Organization (WTO), arms control agreements, such as the Partial Test Ban Treaty and the
Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty, and environmental agreements, such as the Koyoto Accord, are multilateral. The
United
Nations (UN) is the most important institution of multilateral diplomacy.

Diplomacy from a Historical Perspective

The ability to practice diplomacy is one of the defining elements of a state, and diplomacy has
been practiced since the first city states were formed millennia ago (around 5th BC). For the
majority of human history diplomats were sent only for specific negotiations, and would return
immediately after their mission
concluded.
Diplomats were usually relatives of the ruling family or of very high rank in order to give them
legitimacy
when they sought to negotiate with the other state. Envoys eventually became negotiators rather
than being
just messengers. During the Middle Ages (6th to 18th century), the scope of diplomacy did not
grow much
and diplomats were mostly confined to maintaining archives rather than negotiating them.
In the late Middle Ages, in Genoa, the Duke of Milan established the first foreign mission. But
this was still
diplomacy of the court rather than that of the people.
After the American and French revolutions, diplomacy became more democratic and less
aristocratic. The
Congress of Vienna (1815) laid down procedures for diplomatic immunities and defined
diplomatic
hierarchies.

How Diplomacy Functions

Diplomacy functions through a network of foreign officers, embassies, consulates, and special
missions
operating around the globe. Diplomacy is bilateral in character but as a result of growing
international and
regional organizations, it is becoming increasingly multilateral in character.

Diplomacy & Foreign Policy: What’s the Difference?

Diplomacy is the method and process by which foreign policy is pursued but it is not a policy
onto itself.
Outcome of diplomatic negotiations can affect foreign policy options.

Traditional Versus Modern Diplomacy

Traditional diplomacy assumed that major European powers had special responsibility for
maintaining
world peace and the colonies had no more significant diplomatic role than that of satellites.
Traditional diplomacy was professional but secretive and relied on a limited cadre rather than
extended diplomatic
channels.
Modern diplomacy is more open and democratic; it requires reciprocal bargains and
compromises so it is
not possible for diplomats to spell out a given stance in advance.
Multilateralism is increasingly evident in the practice of modern diplomacy. It includes
conference or
summit diplomacy, with behind the scenes preparations by diplomatic officials.

Diplomacy:
Diplomacy stands accepted as the mainstay and the core process of relations among nations. The
process of establishment of relations among nations begins effectively by the establishment of
diplomatic relations among nations. A new state becomes a full and active member of the family
of nations only after it gets recognition by existing states.
The common way in which this recognition is granted is the announcement of the decision to
establish diplomatic relations. Thereafter diplomats are exchanged and relations among nations
get underway. As such diplomacy is the means through which nations begin to develop their
relations.
“Diplomacy is the management of international relations by means of negotiations; the method
by which these relations are adjusted and managed by ambassadors and envoys the business or
art of the diplomats” —Harold Nicholson.
“Diplomacy is the inevitable outcome of the coexistence of separate political units (states) with
any degree of contact.” —Frankel
Diplomacy is a basic means by which a nation seeks to secure the goals of its national interest.
Foreign policy always travels on the shoulders of diplomacy and gets operationalized in other
states.

What is Diplomacy?
The term Diplomacy is used in a variety of ways. Sometimes it is described as “the art of telling
lies on behalf of the nation”, or “as instrument for employing deceit and duplicity in international
relations.”
Stalin once observed:
“A diplomat’s words must have no relation to action—otherwise what kind of diplomacy is it?
Good words are a mask for concealment of bad deeds. Sincere diplomacy is no more possible
than dry water or wooden iron.” Another statesman has also observed, “When a diplomat says

yes, he means perhaps; when he says perhaps, it means no; and when he says no, he is not a
diplomat.”
Such general characterizations of diplomacy have been quite popular but these do not reflect the
true nature of diplomacy. No doubt, diplomacy at times attempts to cloak the real goals of
national interests with several ideational principles or morality or rules of international
behaviour, yet it cannot be described as the art of deceit and concealment. Diplomacy is, in fact,
the art of negotiations and conduct of foreign relations. It is the key instrument for implementing
the foreign policy of the nation.
Definitions:
(1) “Diplomacy is the process of representation and negotiation by which states customarily deal
with one another in times of peace.” —Padelford and Lincoln
“Diplomacy is the application of intelligence and tact to the conduct of official relations between
governments of independent states.” —Sir Ernest Satow
(3) “Diplomacy is “the art of forwarding one’s interests in relation to other countries.” —K.M.
Panikar
(4) “Diplomacy is the management of international relations by means of negotiations; the
method by which these relations are adjusted and managed by ambassadors and envoys the
business or art of the diplomats.” —Harold Nicholson
(5) “Diplomacy is the promotion of the national interest by peaceful means.”—Hans J.
Morgenthau
Nature of Diplomacy:

(1) Diplomacy is not Immoral:

Diplomacy is neither the art of deceit nor mere lies or propaganda, and nor even something
immoral.

(2) Diplomacy is a means of International Relations:

Diplomacy is a normal means of conducting relations. It consists of techniques and procedures
for conducting relations among nations.

(3) Diplomacy is machinery for action:

In itself diplomacy is recognized as official machinery for the conduct of relations among
nations.

(4) Diplomacy acts through Settled Procedures:

Diplomacy functions through a network of foreign offices, embassies, legations, consulates, and
special missions all over the world. It always works according to definite and settled procedures
and protocol.

(5) Bilateral as well as Multilateral in Form:

Diplomacy is commonly bilateral in character. However as a result of the growing importance of
international conferences, international organisations, regional negotiations, it has now also
developed a plural character. It is concerned with all issues and problems among nations.

(6) Diplomacy handles all types of Matters:

Diplomacy may embrace a multitude of interests—from the simplest issues to vital issues to that
of war and peace.

(7) Breakdown of Diplomacy always leads to Crisis:

When diplomacy breaks down, the danger of war, or at least of a major crisis develops.

(8) Diplomacy operates both in times of Peace as well as War:

Some writers hold that diplomacy operates only in times of peace and when war breaks out
diplomacy comes to an end. However, this is not a correct view. Diplomacy continues to operate
even when war breaks out. Of course, during war its nature undergoes a change; from peace
diplomacy it takes the form of war diplomacy.

(9) Diplomacy works in an environment characterised both by Conflict and Cooperation:

Diplomacy works in a situation involving both cooperation and conflict. A certain degree of
cooperation among nations is essential for the working of diplomacy because in its absence,
diplomatic relations cannot be maintained. Similarly when there is no conflict diplomacy
becomes superfluous because there is no need for negotiations. Thus existence of cooperation as
well as conflict is essential for the working of diplomacy.

(10) Diplomacy always works for securing national interests of the nation it represents:
The purpose of diplomacy is to secure the goals of national interest as defined and specified by
the foreign policy of the nation. Diplomacy always works for the nation it represents.

(11) Diplomacy is backed by National Power. Diplomacy is backed by national power:

A strong diplomacy means a diplomacy backed by a strong national power. Diplomacy uses
persuasion and influence as the means for exercising power in international relations. It cannot
use force and violence. However, it can issue warnings, give ultimatums, promise rewards and
threaten punishment, but beyond this it cannot directly exercise force. “Diplomacy is the
promotion of national interest by peaceful means.”

(12) Test of Success of Diplomacy:

Success in Diplomacy is measured in terms of the amount of success achieved towards the
fulfillment of the goals of national interest in international relations.
All these characteristics highlight the nature of Diplomacy. One can describe Diplomacy as an
instrument of national interest and a tool of foreign policy.

Objectives of Diplomacy:
Broadly speaking, Diplomacy seeks to secure two types of primary objectives for the nation
it represents. These are:

(i) Political Objectives, and

(ii) Non-political Objectives.

(1) Political Objectives of Diplomacy:

Diplomacy always works to secure the goals of national interest as defined by the foreign policy.
It always works for increasing the influence of the state over other states. It uses persuasion,
promises of rewards and other such means for this purpose. Through rational negotiations, it
seeks to justify the objectives of the foreign policy of the nation. It seeks to promote friendship
and cooperation with other nations.

(2) Non-political Objectives of Diplomacy:

The interdependence among nations is the most important and valuable fact of international
living. Each nation depends upon others for economic and industrial links and trade. Diplomacy
always seeks to promote the economic, commercial and cultural links of the nation with other
nations. Diplomacy depends upon peaceful means, persuasive methods for promoting the
interests of the nation and this is indeed an important non-political objective of Diplomacy.

Functions and Role of Diplomacy:

In performing its tasks and securing its national objectives, Diplomacy has to undertake a
number of functions.
Major Functions:

(1) Ceremonial/Symbolic Functions:

The diplomats of a nation are the symbolic representatives of the state and they represent their
state and government in all official ceremonies and functions as well as in non-official, social
and cultural functions held in the place of their postings.

(2) Representation:
A diplomat formally represents his country in a foreign state. He is the normal agent of
communication between his home office and that of the state to which he is accredited. His
representation is legal and political. He can vote in the name of his government. Of course, in
doing so he is totally bound by the directions of his home office and the foreign Policy of the
nation.

(3) Negotiations:
To conduct negotiations with other states is a substantive function of diplomacy. Diplomats,
observe Palmer and Perkins, are by definition negotiators. They are the channels of
communication which handle the transmission of messages between the foreign ministries of the
parent state and the host state. Along with the nature of the message, the manner and style of
delivering the message greatly influences the course of negotiations. It is mainly through
negotiations that a diplomat seeks to secure agreements and compromises over various
conflictual issues and problems among states.
The role of diplomacy in conducting negotiations has, however, declined in our times because of
the emergence of multilateral diplomacy, personal diplomacy political diplomacy, summit
diplomacy and the direct communication links among the world leaders and top statesmen. The
diplomats today do not play as great a role in international negotiations as used to be previously
played by them. Nevertheless, they continue to be the legal and formal channels of negotiations
in international relations.

(4) Reporting:
Reporting involves the observation of the political, economic, military and social conditions of
the host country and the accurate transmission of the findings of the diplomat to his home
country. The political reporting involves a report about the assessment of the roles of various
political parties in the politics of the host country. It seeks to assess the friendliness or hostility of
the various political groupings towards the home state, and the power potential of each party or
organisation.
Economic reporting involves sending of reports to the home office containing general
information about the economic health and trade potential of the host country. Military reporting
involves an assessment of the military might, intentions and capabilities, and the strategic
importance of the host country.
The level of social and cultural conflicts among the people of the host country and the level of
social harmony and cohesion are assessed for determining the level of stability of the host
country. Thus reporting is an important and valuable function of diplomacy.

(5) Protection of Interests:

Diplomacy is always at work for protecting and promoting the interests of the nation and its
people living abroad. Protection of interests is the “bedrock of the practice of diplomacy.” It
works to secure compatibility out of incompatibility through accommodation, reconciliation and
goodwill.

A diplomat always attempts to prevent or change practices which he feels are discriminatory to
the interests of his country. It is his responsibility to protect the persons, property and interests of
such citizens of his country as are living in the territory of the state to which he stands posted.
Through all these functions, diplomacy plays an important role in international relations.

Suggested Readings:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_of_Vienna
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organization
https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/pakistan_e.htm
https://tribune.com.pk/story/1283827/pakistan-pursue-diplomacy-cpec
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-09/18/c_136618958.htm
https://www.facebook.com/TheDiplomatMagazine
https://www.facebook.com/diplomatmagazine
Chapter 5
Foreign policy
Suggested Readings:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_policy

http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/international-politics/foreign-policy-16-elements-of-
foreign-policy/48492

http://www.cssforum.com.pk/css-optional-subjects/group-i/international-relations/15490-
foreign-relations-pakistan.html

http://www.cssforum.com.pk/css-compulsory-subjects/current-affairs/114422-post-9-11-
foreign-policy-pakistan.html

http://www.cssforum.com.pk/css-compulsory-subjects/pakistan-affairs/19828-overview-
pakistans-foreign-policy-1947-2004-a.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Pakistan

http://www.mofa.gov.pk/content.php?pageID=guidingpri
Chapter 6
Power in International Relation

COLONIALISM, NEO-COLONIALISM & IMPERIALISM

Colonialism is an elusive concept. It is a political, a legal, an economic, a cultural and a social

phenomenon, which does not lend itself to a short and clear definition. While colonizing states
refrained from defining colonialism, many scholars of various disciplines have written about the
subject.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the mid-14th century "colonye" was used to
describe the Roman settling, creating outposts, or occupying lands outside the Roman city-state.
Colonialism emerged around the 19th century to reify a European practice that was becoming
prevalent across the world.

Defining Colonialism

The element of 'alien domination' appears to be at the heart of the colonial experience.
Colonialism is foreign rule imposed upon a people. Colonialism is a system in which a state
claims sovereignty over territory and people outside its own boundaries, often to facilitate
economic domination over their resources, labor, and often markets.

Colonialism can be defined as rule over people of different races living in separate lands by a
single colonial power. Colonialism also refers to a set of beliefs used to legitimize or promote
this system, especially the belief that the values and systems of the colonizer are superior to
those of the colonized. Colonialism can thus be seen to imply domination of an alien minority
asserting racial and cultural superiority over a materially inferior majority. Hobson describes
colonialism ‘in its best sense’ as the natural outflow of nationality, its test is the power of the
colonizer to transplant the civilization they represent to a new social and cultural environment.

Judging Colonization

Defenders of colonialism argue that colonization developed the economic and political
infrastructure necessary for modernization and democracy (they point to former colonies like
Singapore as examples of post-colonial success).
Postcolonialist such as Franz Fanon argue that colonialism does political, psychological, and
moral damage to the colonized as well.

Let us consider the case of British colonist for example. The British Empire, in the early decades
of the 20th century, held sway over a population of 400–500 million people - roughly a quarter
of the world's population - and covered roughly two-fifths of the world's land area.

The British Empire came together over 300 years through a succession of phases of expansion,
interspersed with intervals of pacific commercial and diplomatic activity, or imperial contraction.
Its territories were scattered across all parts of the world, and it was described with some truth as
"the empire on which the sun never sets". The Empire facilitated the spread of British
technology, commerce, language, and government around much of the globe. Imperial
hegemony contributed to Britain's extraordinary economic growth, and greatly strengthened its
voice in world affairs. Even as Britain extended its imperial reach overseas, it continued to
develop and broaden democratic institutions at the homeland.

From the perspective of the colonies, the record of the British Empire is mixed. The colonies
received from Britain the English language, an administrative and legal framework on the British
model, and technological and economic development. During decolonization, Britain sought to
pass parliamentary democracy to its colonies, with varying degrees of success.

British colonial policy was always driven to a large extent by Britain's trading interests. While
settler economies developed the infrastructure to support balanced development, tropical African
territories found themselves developed only as raw-material suppliers. A reliance upon the
manipulation of conflict between ethnic and racial identities, in order to keep subject populations
from uniting against the occupying power - the classic "divide and rule" strategy - left a legacy of
partition or inter-communal difficulties in several parts of the world including the Subcontinent.

Decolonization

Decolonization is the antithesis of colonization. While anti-colonialist feeling first manifested in

the 18th c. (in the US), decolonization is a product of the post-WW II period. Nationalism in Latin
America, Asia and Africa, as well as the weakening of the colonial powers helped achieve
decolonization.The UN played an important role in ending colonial rule in Indonesia and certain
African colonies. It particularly helped decolonize Liberia, Somalia and Eritrea from Italy.

Definition of Neo-Colonialism

Neo-colonialism implies political control of an underdeveloped people whose socio-economic

life is directed by a former colonizer. Dependency theorists such as Andre Gunder Frank argued
that neo-colonialism leads to net transfer of wealth from the colonized to the colonizer, inhibiting
successful development.
The essence of neo-colonialism is that the state, which is subject to this phenomenon, is in theory
independent and has all outward trappings of international sovereignty, but in reality its
economic system and its political policy is directed from the outside.

The 3rd All Parties African People’s Conference held in Cairo in 1961 described Neo-
Colonialism as: “the economic infiltration by a foreign power after independence, through
capital investment loans and monetary aids or technical experts, of unequal concessions,
particularly those extending for long periods”.

Why Neo-Colonialism Occurs

Weakness and growing resentment after WWII made direct colonization impractical. Previously
united colonial territories were divided into mostly unviable states, compelling them to depend
on their former colonial powers for economic and defense needs to fund welfare policies within
their own countries, former colonial powers needed resources, which were easy to generate
through former colonies still reliant on them, thus encouraging neo-colonial ties to develop.

Types of Neo-Colonialism

Economic Dependencies: control over financial strings of a nation allows control over its
political and social institutions as well.

Satellites: formal independence but political and economic control still exercised by colonial
power. Control exercised by colonial power over a satellite is more extensive than that exercised
by imperial states.

How Neo-Colonization Occurs

Former colonies are particularly prone to become economically dependent on colonial powers
due to its

capital investments, financial loans, and because of unequal exchange of goods and resulting
trade imbalances. Technological dependency on former colonial powers enables retaining control
over prior colonies. Military presence in the form of bases also helps exert and retain control of
former colonies.

Critics of Neocolonialism allege that both nations and corporations have aimed to control other
nations through indirect means; that in lieu of direct military or political control, neocolonialist
powers employ economic, financial and trade policies to dominate less powerful countries. Those
who subscribe to the concept maintain this amounts to control over targeted nations. They portray
the choice to grant or to refuse granting loans, especially by international financial institutions
such as the IMF and World Bank, as a decisive form of control. They argue that in order to qualify
for these loans (as well as other forms of economic aid), weaker nations are forced to take steps
favorable to the financial interests of the IMF/WB,
but detrimental to their own economies, increasing rather than alleviating their poverty.
Critics of neocolonialism also attempt to demonstrate that investment by multinationals enriches
few in underdeveloped countries, and causes humanitarian (as well as environmental and
ecological) devastation to the populations which inhabit 'neo-colonies.' This, it is argued, results
in perpetual underdevelopment; which cultivates those countries as reservoirs of cheap labor and
raw materials, while restricting their access to advanced production techniques to develop their
own economies. By contrast, critics of the concept of neocolonialism argue that, while the
developed world does profit from cheap labor and raw materials of developing nations, ultimately,
it does serve as a positive force for development in developing countries of the Third World.

What is Imperialism?

Imperialism is the process of extending the rule of government beyond the boundaries of its
original state.

Imperialism establishes a relationship, formal or informal, in which one state uses direct military
or economic means, to control the political sovereignty of another political entity.

Imperialism therefore implies the policy of extending the control or authority over foreign
entities as a means of acquisition and/or maintenance of empires, either through direct control of
territories or through indirect methods of exerting control on the politics or economies of other
countries. The term is used by some to describe the policy of a country in maintaining colonies
and dominance over distant lands, regardless of whether the country calls itself an empire.

Imperialists normally hold the belief that the acquisition and maintenance of empires is a positive
good, combined with an assumption of cultural or other such superiority inherent to imperial
power. However, imperialism has often been considered to be an exploitive evil.

Marxists use the term imperialism as Lenin defined it: "the highest stage of capitalism",
specifically the era in which monopoly finance capital becomes dominant, forcing the empires to
compete amongst themselves increasingly for control over resources and markets all over the
world. This control may take the form of geopolitical machinations, military adventures, or
financial maneuvers.

It is worth noting that Marx himself did not propound a theory of imperialism, and in contrast
with later Marxist thinkers generally saw the colonialism of European powers as having a
progressive aspect, rather than seeing it as the pillage of those countries in favor of the European
centre countries.

Distinguishing Colonialism from Imperialism

Many writers have used the terms colonialism and imperialism interchangeably, as if there is
little difference between these two phenomena. Yet an important difference between the two
phenomena is the presence of a significant number of settlers from the colonizing power in the
colonized state.

Whereas settlement may be the most important feature of colonialism, it is generally

acknowledged that colonialism involves much more than the immigration of people from one
region to another one.

According to Michael Doyle, colonialism is one of the possible outcomes of imperialism,

achieved either by force, by political collaboration, by economic, social or cultural dependence.

Objectives of Imperialism

• Economic Gain: to secure raw materials, or gain access to trade routes or to the sea

• National Prestige: imperialism is often portrayed as ‘manifest destiny’ or intrinsic superiority

• Military or Defense Needs: to gain control over strategic areas

• Surplus Population: over-populated states can find relief through migration to colonies

• ‘While Man’s Burden’: obligation to civilize savages

• Marxist-Leninist View: imperialism compelled by control markets for surplus production and

investment, Communists were imperialist too

Examples of Imperialism

US Imperialism: under the guise of the Monroe Doctrine (1823) the US exerted control over
Latin America under the guise of protecting interference of the European powers in the affairs of
independent states of the New World.

Russian Imperialism: initially the imperialist urge was confined to contiguous territories but with
advent of the Cold War, Russian imperialism spread to the Asian, African and South American
continents, filling in the vacuum left by the decreasing influence of colonial European powers.

Japanese Imperialism: as Japan industrialized and became increasingly militarized prior to

WWII, it annexed parts of Korea and China. Thereafter Japanese imperialistic influence has
primarily been economic.

What is National Power Meaning Definition and

Elements

Meaning of National Power

William Ebenstein says, "National power is more than the sum total of population, raw-material
and quantitative factors. It includes its civil devotion, the flexibility of its institutions, its technical
know-how, its national character or quantitative elements that determine the total strength of a
nation." Like sovereignty and nationalism, national power is a vital and potent feature of the state
system. Power of some kind is the mean by that states implement their domestic as well as foreign
policies. All states possess power, but very different amounts of power. We must therefore
approach an analysis of power in international relations with the realization that we are dealing
with a complex subject whatever the ultimate aim of international politics. Power is always the

immediate aim. The statesman usually describes their goals in terms ofreligious, philosophic,
economic or social ideal and may try to realize them through non-political means. But whenever
they try to achieve these goals by means of international politics, they do so by restoring to power.
Because power plays same role in the international politics as money plays in market economy.

Definitions

Prof. Morgenthau defines national power as, "A psychological relation

between those who exercise it and those over whom it is exercised. It

gives the former control over certain actions of the latter, through the

influence that the former exerts over the latter's mind.

" According to George Shwarzen Berger, "The power is the capacity to,

impose one's will on other by reliance on effective sanctions in the case

of noncompliance.

" According to Organski, "Power is the ability to influence the behaviour

of other in accordance with one's own end.

" According to Charles, "The ability to make a man to do what one's

wanted and not to do what one's do not want.

" Power may be defined as, "A relationship between two political actors
in that actor "A" has the ability to control the mind and actions of actor

"B."

"National power is a concept that denotes anything that establishes and

maintain the control of state over others states."

Basic Elements of National Power

The elements of national power can be divided into two main categories

i.e. tangible and intangible.

Tangible Elements

Tangible elements are those elements that can he felt and touched.

Following are the important elements of national power.

Geography

The importance of geography to a study of international relations has

long been recognized. History has often been characterized as geography

in nation. Napoleon once said that, "The foreign policy of a country is

determined by its geography." The importance of geography in the study

of international relations cannot be ignored, because all other elements

of national power depend upon the geographical location of the state.

The importance of geography has been decreased to some extant due to

technological development but one cannot ignore its importance because

USA is the superpower of the world just because of its geographical

location. Size: Size of the state as well as population greatly influence its

national power i.e. the big countries have great weightage in

international affairs while small states have no impact on national power

but some time small state with rich natural resources have deep impact
on its national power, like oily rich countries of Middle East. The size of

territory increases the power of a nation. A small state cannot become

powerful. England was powerful as long as she had colonies. A large

state can accommodate a large population and can also have large supply

of natural resources on this account. In today;s world USA, China and

India are bound to play effective role in the world politics on account of

their vast size.

Population

Population is tangible element of national power. It is assumed that

populous nation state are always powerful hut it is not true in developed

nation-state a large number of population is a source of strength,

integration, development while in developing state a large number of

population is sign of its weakness i.e. unemployment, disintegration and

corruption etc. population is one of the most important element of

national power. Because if population of a country is engaged in

industrial activities then the country will be stronger then the one, whose

population is primarily engaged in agricultural activities.

Location

Another most important element of national power is location. It

determines the country's security and its spatial relationship with outside

world. England and Japan being Islands have been more secure.

Similarly, USA being separated from Europe and Asia could remain in

isolation for long time, and emerge as a super power because of its

location. Location is more important then size because it determine the

climate and influence the economic system. Location plays very

significant role in national power, for example Bangladesh separated

from Pakistan just because of geographical location and weak- end the

national power of Pakistan.

Territory

It is an important tangible element of national power. Territory is an important element that

determines the power of a state. The territorial characteristics such as boundaries, climate.
strategic location, nature of land and waterways plays very important role in the enhancement of
national power. For example, a mountainous country is difficult to be overcome by enemy while
plain one easy to be captured.

Natural resources

Natural resources may be defined as, "Gifts of nature of established utility." They would include,
for example waterfall, fertility of soil, oil, iron, copper, gas and coal etc. Natural resources plays
very significant role in national power. For example, Kuwait is very small state but due to rich
oil resources it plays very vital role in international politics. Natural resources are the gifts of
God and a raw material are the labour of the individual. However, the natural resources do not by
themselves

create power. They have to be exploited with the help of capital,

technical know-how and skilled labours. For example, though Brazil had

rich iron deposits they did not contribute to her national power till they

were exploited with the technical assistance received from USA.

Technology

Technology is often defined as applied science. Technological change

reflects the actual adoption of new methods and products; it is the

triumph of the new over the old in the test of the market and the budget.

Moreover, it involves a complex, social process including many

elements science, education, research and development under private

and public auspices, management, technology, production facilities,

workers and labour organization." It has already ushered in the age of

computers, automation, and atomic and space technology. Technology is

also one of the most important elements of national power. For example,

USA is the global master due to advancement in technology. In recent

years, technology has come to exercise profound influence on the power

base of a state as well as the course of international relations.

Technology at least in three sphere i.e. industrial, communication and

military, has greatly influenced the power of the state.

Economic development

Economic development means increase in national income or increase in

per capita income or economic development is the process that not only

effect the economic relations of the states but social, political, cultural

and religious relation also. It is also an important and contributing factor

in the increasing of national power. USA emerged as a powerful state of

the world because of industrial development. USA pursues an

independent foreign policy due to economic development.

Political structure

The mere possession of abundance of material and human resources and

formation of a good foreign policy would prove useless if the political

structure or the government cannot play its role effectively. The

government is required to choose the objectives and methods of its

foreign policy in the light of the power available to support them with a
maximum success.

Military advancement

Military advancement is the most apparent and tangible factor capable of

supporting the foreign policy and promoting national interest. Military

advancement plays very important role in international politics. For

example, during first phase of the World War I Germany gained

superiority over British because of the use of submarines.

Diplomacy

The national power of national state is greatly determined by the quality

of diplomacy pursued by its diplomats. According to Morgenthau "The

quality of diplomacy of a state gives direction and weight to other

elements of power." Diplomacy is an entire method of resolving

international conflicts. Diplomacy can serve the interest of a state by

protecting its people abroad, by searching out new opportunities for

trade, by decumulating information about geography resources,

techniques, cultural and military establishment.

Intangible Elements of National Power

So, for we have been considering tangible and material factors of

national power. Now we must turn to factors that are no less important,

although they are more difficult to isolate and define. These are the

elements of ideology, moral and leadership.

Ideology
In the modern period the ideologies of socialism, communism,

democracy, liberalism and nationalism have an international appeal.

Ideology is the most important element of national power because

ideology creates unity among nations and builds a sense of common

interest to people. For example, the Soviet and Chinese national power is

associated with the ideology of communism. An ideology is a bunch of

ideas about life, society or government. USSR got the status of super

power through the ideology of communism and Pakistan came into

being due to Islamic ideology.

Leadership

Leadership is interrelated with the other elements of national power

because it is one of the measures of the extant to that those elements are

utilized. According to Palmer and Perline: "Without leadership people

cannot even constitute a state." A nation state cannot emerge without

able leadership. Without it there can be no well-developed or integrated

technology and without it morale is totally useless, if indeed it can exist

at all. Leadership plays very important role in stimulating or

discouraging governmental activities. People like Lenin, Stalin and

Churchill changed the fate of their people and countries. So, we can say

that leadership plays very important role in the enhancement of national

power.

National Character and Morale

Some writers list national character as one of the elements of national

power as does Professor Hans J. Morgenthau in his politics among

nations. It may be regarded as one of the major determinants of national

morale although of course, it is broader then morale. But where it is

more then the basis of morale, it may help to explain some other

elements. National character may be thought of as climate, morale as

weather. Morgenthau also says that, "National character is the degree of

determination with that a nation support the home and foreign policy of

its government in time of peace and war."

BALANCE OF POWER (BOP)

Definitions of BoP The equilibrium of power among members of the family of

nations as will prevent any one of them from becoming sufficiently strong to

enforce its will upon the others. The power equation between states is based on an

assessment of each state’s relative power capabilities and this assessment provides

the basis for the conduct of relations between them.

BoP from a historical perspective From 1648 (Peace of Westphalia) to 1789

(French Revolution) was a golden age of classical balance of power, when the

princes of Europe began accepting BoP as the supreme principle of foreign policy.

Evident use of BoP is also noted in the mid-17th cent., when it was directed

against the France of Louis XIV. Balance of power was the stated British objective

for much of the 18th and 19th cent., and it characterized the European international

system, for example, from 1815–1914. The Concert of Europe (from 1815 to1870)

provides another good example of major European states striving to achieve

balance power. The increasing the power of Germany began seeing bipolar set of

alliances form, leading to the World Wars. After World War I, the balance of

power system was attacked by proponents of cooperation and a community of

power. International relations were changed radically after World War II by the
predominance of two superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, with

major ideological differences between them. After the 1960s, with the emergence

of China and the third world, a revived Europe and Japan, it reemerged as a

component of international relations. With the collapse of the USSR in 1991, the

United States, as the sole remaining superpower, has been dominant militarily and,

to a lesser degree, economically. Some BoP Techniques • Alliances (NATO) and

Counter-Alliances (WARSAW Pact)

• Armament (arms race in the Subcontinent spurred by need to maintain BoP) and

• Disarmament (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)

• Intervention (Soviets and US incursion into Afghanistan) and Non-Intervention

(France and Britain did not interfere in Spanish civil war of 1936)

Balance of power:

How is Power Balanced? Often it is a matter of balancing threat rather than power,

so distance, interdependence, and ideology matter. External balancing can take

place through alliances but risks dependency on others and requires placing trust

on them. This kind of trust and dependency was evident in NATO and Warsaw

Pact during the Cold War. Internal balancing takes place by building up the

capacity of the state, as occurred with the US-Soviet arms race, in which both

super powers tried to balance power by becoming more powerful themselves.

Suggested Readings:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(international_relations

http://internationalrelations.org/history-of-international-relations/power-international-
relations/
Chapter 7
Globalization and IR
GLOBALIZATION AND ITS IMPLICATIONS

Globalization implies increased flow of information and interaction around the world. To say
more things

are flowing does not mean that they are flowing more equitably or that all the flows are
beneficial. While

flows among developed states may be increasing dramatically, increases are far less dramatic for
developing

states.

Advocates of Globalization

Globalization is promoted by governments of rich countries and major international

organizations

dominated by rich countries:

- Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), intergovernmental

think tank from world’s 29 richest countries. OECD states produce 2/3 of world’s goods

and services

- International Monetary Fund, which makes loans to countries facing bankruptcy

- World Bank, which makes loans for development projects

- World Trade Organization, which oversees world trade and aims to promote it further

Why is the World Globalizing?

Technological changes, particularly in communications (phone and Internet connections) and

transportation
(cars, ships, planes) move not only ideas but also money and services now. Technology makes
access to new

markets possible and also enables flexible productions processes. Transnational linkages are not
driven by

economics but by bonds forged across countries both directly by immigration and indirectly by

transnational loyalties and allegiances. Deliberate policy choices (Liberalization of trade, foreign
direct

investment, and capital) are pursuing a more global economy and culture.

Reconsidering Globalization

Globalization involves a major change in where power is located in the world. Globalization
involves a

change in how much states can control these flows of people, information, etc.

International institutions and regimes like WTO, EU, NAFTA, ILO, and other international
organizations

can, within limits, restrict the freedom of states. Globalization is a complex phenomenon, which
is likely to

lead to greater concentrations of power in some cases and, at the same time, empowering of
some who are

not yet empowered.

As more nations, people, and cultures adapt to the ever changing international

community, diplomats, politicians, and representatives must meet and deal with

accordingly to the needs and wants of nations. Diplomacy can be exerted in

many forms; through peace talks, written constitutions, field experiences, etc.

Culture is a familiar term and remains unchanged by definition. However,

globalization and international relations have constantly altered culture both

positively and negatively.

Globalization increases worldwide technology, and the readability of fast,

effective communication and consumption of popular products. Globalization

links cultures and international relations on a variety of levels; economics,

politically, socially, etc.

International relations have used globalization to reach its goal: of

understanding cultures. International relations focus on how countries, people

and organizations interact and globalization is making a profound effect on

International relations.

Understanding culture, globalization, and international relations is critical for

the future of not only governments, people, and businesses, but for the survival

of the human race.

In today’s increasingly interdependent and turbulent world, many of the leading

issues in the news concern international affairs. Whether it is the continuing

impact of globalization,

Globalization – the process of continuing integration of the countries in the

world – is strongly underway in all parts of the globe. It is a complex

interconnection between capitalism and democracy, which involves positive and

negative features, that both empowers and disempowers individuals and groups.

From the other hand Globalization is a popular term used by governments,

business, academic and a range of diverse non-governmental organizations. It

also, however, signifies a new paradigm within world politics and economic

relations. While national governments for many years dictated the international

political and economic scene, international organizations such as the World

Bank, International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization have
now become significant role players. In this “Global Village” national

governments have lost some of their importance and perhaps their powers in

favour of these major international organizations.

As a process of interaction and integration among people, companies and

governments of different nations Globalization is a process driven by the

International Trade and Investment and aided by Information technology. This

process on the environment on culture, on political system, on economic

development and prosperity, and on human physical well-being in societies

around the world.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Globalization

Globalization has a range of advantages while it has also disadvantages.

The Advantages include GDP Increase; statistics shows that GDP in developing

countries has increased twice as much as before. Unemployment is reduced.

Education has increased. Competition on Even Platform: The Companies all

around the world are competing on a single global platform which allows better

options o consumers. It increased free trade between nations;

The Corporations have greater flexibility to operate across borders. Global mass

media ties the world together.

Increased flow of communications allows vital information to be shared

between individuals and corporations around the world. It increases in

environmental protection in developed nations. Spread of democratic ideas to

developed nations. Reduced cultural barriers increases in the global village

effect.
 ● The Disadvantages are considered to be Uneven Distribution of Wealth,
Income Gap Between Developed and Developing Countries, where the wealth

of developed countries continues to grow twice as much as the developing

world.

Next disadvantage is Different Wage Standards for Developing Countries,

which is explained by the following fat that the technology worker may get

more value for his work in a developed country than a worker in a developing

country thus there are in the later many dynamic, industrious and enterprising

people who are well educated and ready to work with rigor.

Te reveal of Globalization is also considered as a disadvantage which is

explaining by future factors such as war that can be demand the reveal of the

globalization and current process of globalization may just be impossible to

reverse.

There is also another aspect of disadvantage of globalization in media sphere.

The threat that control of world media by a handful of corporations will limit

cultural expression.

And the final in my estimation is the chance of reactions for globalization being

violent in an attempt to preserve cultural heritage.

Effects of Globalization

With the roster of the mentioned disadvantages and advantages Globalization

culminates also effective facts. The following are considered the Effects of
Globalization; enhancement in the information flow between geographically remote

locations

the global common market has a freedom of exchange of goods and

capital there is a broad access to a range of goods for consumers and companies

worldwide production markets emerge free circulation of people of different nations leads to
social benefits global environmental problems like cross-boundary pollution, over

fishing on oceans, climate changes are solved by discussions more trans border data flow using
communication satellites, the Internet, wireless telephones, etc. international criminal courts and
international justice movements are launched the standards applied globally like patents,
copyright laws and world trade agreements increase corporate, national and sub-national
borrowers have a better access to external finance worldwide financial markets emerge
multiculturalism spreads as there is individual access to cultural diversity.

This diversity decreases due to hybridization or assimilation international travel and tourism
increases worldwide sporting events like the Olympic Games and the FIFA World

Cup are held enhancement in worldwide fads and pop culture

local consumer products are exported to other countries

immigration between countries increases

cross-cultural contacts grow and cultural diffusion takes place

there is an increase in the desire to use foreign ideas and products, adopt

new practices and technologies and be a part of world culture

free trade zones are formed having less or no tariffs

due to development of containerization for ocean shipping, the

transportation costs are reduced

subsidies for local businesses decrease

capital controls reduce or vanquish

there is supranational recognition of intellectual property restrictions, i.e.,

patents authorized by one country are recognized in another

CONCLUSION

In conclusion I would like to state m estimation that despite all the formidable

obstacles and stumbling blocks the effectiveness of the Globalization and

cohesive efforts of people and the government will help to stand a positive stead

prevail over the disadvantages. It will fortify to prevent migration which is

inherent in third-world and back water countries and reduce social inequality

which in its turn will benefit the advantages of the Globalization. All these

mentioned facts are time-consuming and labour-intensive process but it will

distinctly fortify and develop the Globalization.

Chapter 8
States and Non-states Actor
Suggested Readings:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-state_actor

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-state-and-non-state-actors-in-international-relations
http://www.academia.edu/5124220/The_Role_of_Non-
state_Actors_in_International_Relations

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehrik-i-Taliban_Pakistan

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant_%E2%80%93_K
horasan_Province

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant
Chapter 9
Conflict and Conflict Resolution
Conflicts in IR

Conflict in the sense of visible incompatibility of policies and interests of different states is a
permanent and continuous feature of IR.

A traditional and persistent issue causing conflict between states is territorial disputes. A crisis is
the first stage of conflict and a crisis may erupt due to actions of citizens of one nation against
another (hijacking) or due to hostile actions at the state level (border incursion).

Components of a Conflict

There are four distinct ways of categorizing conflicts:

1 Number of parties involved: Depending on the nature and/or gravity of a conflict it can involve
two or

more parties (WWI or Cold War for e.g.)

2 Issues Field: A range of issues can trigger conflicts including territorial, ideological or
economic

interests. Conflicts can also have multiple reasons

3 Attitudes: Different attitudes are important in conflict situations including the perception of
threat,

amount of suspicion concerning opponents intensions, symbolic interests involved in conflict,

perception about available alternatives

4 Actions: denials, rejections, protests, and international pressure are actions which can defuse

conflicts. On the other hand, actions like escalating steps like withdrawal of diplomatic staff,

economic blockades, ban on travel and limited use of force instigate all out conflict.

Causes of Conflicts
Given the perpetual problem of conflict, what causes conflicts merits careful attention.
Sometimes conflicts become the origin of conflicts, other times conflicts occur due to security
concerns or religious or ideological reasons.

Some scholars categorize international conflicts in the following manner:

• Conflicts can be traced to individual reactions of decision makers

• Conflicts can also be caused by the prevailing world order, like the polarization witnessed
during the Cold War

• Conflicts caused at the state level can include focus on national character, ideological beliefs,

imperialist or hegemonic tendencies

Potential Outcomes of Conflict

Conflict outcomes can vary significantly:

• Avoidance of hostile action and adopting a compromising position is a common outcome of

conflict

• Conquest: often implies overwhelming use of force and even then requires concessions by the

victor to secure an end of resistance

• Surrender: the losing party withdraws from previously held position, value or interest

• Compromise: where both parties agree to a partial withdrawal from the initial stance that
brought about the conflict

• Award: instead of mutual bargaining, acceptance of a binding decision by third part arbitration
to end the conflict

• Passive Settlement: lingering conflicts which are not ended compel parties to accept the status
quo instead

What is the importance of Conflict Resolution in IR?

International conflict resolution is an interdisciplinary field of study that allows students and
practitioners to

examine and formulate effective approaches to deadly conflict.

Conflict Resolution is linked to development, human rights, security policy and social
psychology. Conflict resolution requires understanding of root causes, conflict dynamics, and
seizing opportunities for conflict transformation.

Issues concerning modern conflicts

Modern conflicts often involve intrastate rather than the more traditional interstate struggles,
presenting new challenges to policymakers and peacemakers alike. The intended result of
conflict resolution is a reduction of despair, an enrichment of alternatives, and the empowerment
of all dimensions conducive to fair, sustainable, lasting and satisfactory agreements.

Some basic steps for resolving conflicts

1. The win/win approach

Identify attitude shifts to respect all parties' needs

2. Creative response

Transform problems into creative opportunities

3. Empathy

Develop communication tools to build rapport. Use listening to clarify understanding

4. Appropriate assertiveness

Apply strategies to attack the problem not the person

5. Co-operative power

Eliminate "power over" to build "power with" others

6. Managing emotions

Express fear, anger, hurt and frustration wisely to effect change

7. Willingness to Resolve

Name personal issues that cloud the picture

8. Mapping the conflict

Define the issues needed to chart common needs and concerns.

9. Development of options

Design creative solutions together

10. Introduction to negotiation

Plan and apply effective strategies to reach agreement

11. Introduction to mediation

Help conflicting parties to move towards solutions

12. Broadening perspectives

Evaluate the problem in its broader context

Middle East Crisis summary Readings:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26116868

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/05/syria-civil-war-explained-160505084119966.html

https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/opinion/the-frank-realities-of-pakistan-syria-relations/

http://www.arabnews.pk/node/1267111

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2077252309211581&id=1559901027613381
Chapter 10
International Law
International Law

The body of law that governs the legal relations between or among states or nations.

To qualify as a subject under the traditional definition of international law, a state had to be
sovereign: It needed a territory, a population, a government, and the ability to engage in diplomatic
or foreign relations. States within the United States, provinces, and cantons were not considered
subjects of international law, because they lacked the legal authority to engage in foreign relations.
In addition, individuals did not fall within the definition of subjects that enjoyed rights and
obligations under international law.

A more contemporary definition expands the traditional notions of international law to confer
rights and obligations on intergovernmental international organizations and even on individuals.
The United Nations, for example, is an international organization that has the capacity to engage
in treaty relations governed by and binding under international law with states and other
international organizations. Individual responsibility under international law is particularly
significant in the context of prosecuting war criminals and the development of international Human
Rights.

Types of international law:

Procedural law consists of the set of rules that govern the proceedings of the court in criminal

lawsuits as well as civil and administrative proceedings. The court needs to conform to the

standards setup by procedural law, while during the proceedings. These rules ensure fair

practice and consistency in the “due process”

Substantive law is a statutory law that deals with the legal relationship between people or the

people and the state. Therefore, substantive law defines the rights and duties of the people, but

procedural law lays down the rules with the help of which they are enforced. The differences

between the two need to be studied in greater detail, for better understanding.

Maritime law is a body of laws, conventions and treaties that governs international private

business or other matters involving ships, shipping or crimes occurring on open water. Laws

between nations governing such things as national versus international waters are considered
public international law and are known as the Law of the Seas. Maritime law is also known as
“admiralty law”

Introduction to International Law

Robert Beckman and Dagmar Butte

A. PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT

This document is intended to provide students an overview of international law and the structure

of the international legal system. In many cases it oversimplifies the law by summarizing key

principles in less than one page in order to provide the student with an overview that will enhance

further study of the topic.

B. DEFINITION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

International Law consists of the rules and principles of general application dealing with the

conduct of States and of international organizations in their international relations with one

another and with private individuals, minority groups and transnational companies.

C. INTERNATIONAL LEGAL PERSONALITY

International legal personality refers to the entities or legal persons that can have rights and

obligations under international law.

1. States

A State has the following characteristics:

(1) a permanent population;

(2) a defined territory;

(3) a government; and

(4) the capacity to enter into relations with other States. Some writers also
argue that a State must be fully independent and be recognized as a State by other States. The

international legal system is a horizontal system dominated by States which are, in principle,

considered sovereign and equal. International law is predominately made and implemented by

States. Only States can have sovereignty over territory. Only States can become members of the

United Nations and other international organizations. Only States have access to the

International Court of Justice. .

2. International Organizations

International Organizations are established by States through international agreements and their

powers are limited to those conferred on them in their constituent document. International

organizations have a limited degree of international personality, especially vis-à-vis member

States. They can enter into international agreements and their representatives have certain

privileges and immunities. The constituent document may also provide that member States area

legally bound to comply with decisions on particular matters.

The powers of the United Nations are set out in the United Nations Charter of 1945. The main

political organ is the General Assembly and its authority on most matters (such as human rights

and economic and social issues) is limited to discussing issues and making recommendations.

The Security Council has the authority to make decisions that are binding on all member States

when it is performing its primary responsibility of maintaining international peace and security.

The main UN judicial organ is International Court of Justice (ICJ), which has the power to make

binding decisions on questions of international law that have been referred to it by States or give

advisory opinions to the U.N.

3. Nationality of individuals, companies, etc.

Individuals are generally not regarded as legal persons under international law. Their link to State

is through the concept of nationality, which may or may not require citizenship. Nationality is the
status of being treated as a national of a State for particular purposes. Each State has wide

discretion to determine who is a national. The most common methods of acquiring nationality at

birth are through one or both parents and/or by the place of birth. Nationality can also be

acquired by adoption and naturalization.

Companies, ships, aircraft and spacecraft are usually considered as having the nationality of the

State in whose territory they are registered. This is important because in many circumstances

States may have international obligations to regulate the conduct of their nationals, especially if

they are carrying out act activities outside their territory.

Under the principle of nationality of claims, if a national of State A is injured by State B through

internationally unlawful conduct, State A may make a claim against State B on behalf of its injured

national. This is known as the doctrine of diplomatic protection.

D. SOVEREIGNTY OF STATES OVER TERRITORY

Sovereignty is the exclusive right to exercise supreme political authority over a defined territory

(land, airspace and certain maritime areas such as the territorial sea) and the people within that

territory. No other State can have formal political authority within that State. Therefore,

sovereignty is closely associated with the concept of political independence.

Classical international law developed doctrines by which States could make a valid claim of

sovereignty over territory. The doctrines included discovery and occupation and prescription.

During the period of Western colonial expansion new territories and islands were subject to

claims of sovereignty by discovery and occupation. Sovereignty could also be transferred to

another State by conquest (use of force) or by cession where the sovereignty over the territory

would be ceded by treaty from one State to another.

Since a State has sovereignty over its territory, the entry into its territory by the armed forces of

another State without consent is a prima facie breach of international law. Among the attributes

of sovereignty is the right to exclude foreigners from entering the territory, which is traditionally
referred to as the right to exclude aliens.

Since a State has sovereignty within its territorial sea (with some exceptions such as the right of

innocent passage), it has the exclusive authority to exercise police power within its territory sea.

For example, if foreign ships are attacked by “pirates” in the territorial sea of a State, the only

State that can exercise police power and arrest the pirates in the territorial sea is the coastal

State.

E. INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS (SOURCES OF LAW)

It is generally accepted that the sources of international law are listed in the Article 38(1) of the

Statute of the International Court of Justice, which provides that the Court shall apply:

a) international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly

recognized by the contesting states;

b) international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;

c) the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;

d) subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the

most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the

determination of rules of law.

1. Treaties

International conventions are generally referred to as treaties. Treaties are written agreements

between States that are governed by international law. Treaties are referred to by different

names, including agreements, conventions, covenants, protocols and exchanges of notes. If

States want to enter into a written agreement that is not intended to be a treaty, they often refer to

it as a Memorandum of Understanding and provide that it is not governed by international law.

Treaties can be bilateral, multilateral, regional and global.

The law of treaties is now set out in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which
contains the basic principles of treaty law, the procedures for how treaties becoming binding and

enter into force, the consequences of a breach of treaty, and principles for interpreting treaties.

The basic principle underlying the law of treaties is pacta sunt servanda which means every

treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith. The

other important principle is that treaties are binding only on States parties. They are not binding

on third States without their consent. However, it may be possible for some or even most of the

provisions of a multilateral, regional or global treaty to become binding on all States as rules of

customary international law.

There are now global conventions covering most major topics of international law. They are

usually adopted at an international conference and opened for signature. Treaties are sometimes

referred to by the place and year of adoption, e.g. the 1969 Vienna Convention. If a State

becomes a signatory to such a treaty, it is not bound by the treaty, but it undertakes an obligation

to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty.

A State expresses its consent to be bound by the provisions of a treaty when it deposits an

instrument of accession or ratification to the official depository of the treaty. If a State is a

signatory to an international convention it sends an instrument of ratification. If a State is not a

signatory to an international convention but decides to become a party, it sends an instrument of

accession. The legal effect of the two documents is the same. A treaty usually enters into force

after a certain number of States have expressed their consent to be bound through accession or

ratification. Once a State has expressed its consent to be bound and the treaty is in force, it is

referred to as a party to the treaty.

The general rule is that a treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary

meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in light of its object and

purpose. The preparatory work of the treaty and the circumstances of its conclusion, often called

the travaux preparatoires, are a supplementary means of interpretation in the event of ambiguity.
2. Custom

International custom – or customary law – is evidence of a general practice accepted as law

through a constant and virtually uniform usage among States over a period of time. Rules of

customary international law bind all States. The State alleging the existence of a rule of

customary law has the burden of proving its existence by showing a consistent and virtually

uniform practice among States, including those States specially affected by the rule or having the

greatest interest in the matter. For example, to examine the practice of States on military uses of

outer space, one would look in particular at the practice of States that have activities in space.

Most ICJ cases also require that the States who engage in the alleged customary practice do so

out of a sense of legal obligation or opinio juris rather than out of comity or for political reasons.

In theory, opinio juris is a serious obstacle to establishing a rule as custom because it is

extremely difficult to find evidence of the reason why a State followed a particular practice. In

practice, however, if a particular practice or usage is widespread, and there is no contrary State

practice proven by the other side, the Court often finds the existence of a rule of customary law.

It sometimes seems to assume that opinio juris was satisfied, and it sometimes fails to mention it.

Therefore, it would appear that finding consistent State practice, especially among the States with
the most interest in the issue, with minimal or no State practice to the contrary, is most important.

Undisputed examples of rules of customary law are (a) giving foreign diplomats criminal

immunity; (b) treating foreign diplomatic premises as inviolable; (c) recognizing the right of

innocent passage of foreign ships in the territorial sea; (d) recognizing the exclusive jurisdiction
of the flag State on the high seas; (5) ordering military authorities to respect the territorial

boundaries of neighboring States; and (6) protecting non-combatants such as civilians and sick or

wounded soldiers during international armed conflict..

3. General Principles of Law

General principles of law recognized by civilized nations are often cited as a third source of law.

These are general principles that apply in all major legal systems. An example is the principle
that persons who intentionally harm others should have to pay compensation or make reparation.

General principles of law are usually used when no treaty provision or clear rule of customary law

exists.

4. Subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law

Subsidiary means are not sources of law, instead they are subsidiary means or evidence that can

be used to prove the existence of a rule of custom or a general principle of law. Article 38 lists

only two subsidiary means - the teaching (writings) of the most highly qualified publicists

(international law scholars) and judicial decisions of both international and national tribunals if

they are ruling on issues of international law. Writings of highly qualified publicists do not include

law student articles or notes or doctoral theses.

Resolutions of the UN General Assembly or resolutions adopted at major international

conferences are only recommendations and are not legally binding. However, in some cases,

although not specifically listed in article 38, they may be subsidiary means for determining

custom. If the resolution purports to declare a set of legal principles governing a particular area,

if it is worded in norm creating language, and if is adopted without any negative votes, it can be

evidence of rules of custom, especially if States have in practice acted in compliance with its

terms. Examples of UN General Assembly Resolutions which have been treated as strong

evidence of rules of customary international law include the following:

• GAR 217A Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

• GAR 2131 Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of

States and the Protection of their Sovereignty (1965) [Declaration on Non-

Intervention]

• GAR 2625 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly

Relations and Cooperation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the

United Nations (1970) [Declaration on Friendly Relations

• GAR 3314 Resolution on the Definition of Aggression

Some of these resolutions have also been treated as subsequent agreement or practice of States

on how the principles and provisions of the UN Charter should be interpreted.

In addition, Article 38 fails to take into account the norm-creating effect of modern global

conventions. Once the international community has spent several years drafting a major

international convention, States often begin in practice to refer to that convention when a

problem arises which is governed by the convention - in effect treating the rules in the

Convention as customary. Furthermore, if the Convention becomes universally accepted the

provisions in the Convention may become very strong evidence of the rules of custom, especially

if States which are not parties have also acted in conformity with the Convention. Examples of

such conventions would be the 1959 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the 1969

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

5. Hierarchy of norms

In theory there is no hierarchy among the three sources of law listed in Article 38 of the ICJ

Statute. In practice, however, international lawyers usually look first to any applicable treaty

rules, then to custom, and last to general principles.

There are two types of norms or rules – not previously discussed - which do have a higher status.

First, peremptory norms or principles of jus cogens are norms that have been accepted and

recognized by the international community of States as so fundamental and so important that no

derogation is permitted from them. Examples of jus cogens principles are the prohibitions against

wars of aggression and genocide. A war of aggression is the use of armed force to take over

another State or part of its territory. Genocide is the killing or other acts intended to destroy, in

whole or in part, of a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.

Second, members of the United Nations are bound by the Article 103 of the United Nations

Charter, which provides that in the event of a conflict between the obligations of members under

the Charter – including obligations created by binding decisions of the Security Council - the

Charter obligations prevail over conflicting obligations in all other international agreements.

6. Role of the International Law Commission (ILC)

The ILC was established by the UN in 1948. The 34 members of the ILC are elected by the

General Assembly after being nominated by member States. They possess recognized

competence and qualifications in both doctrinal and practical aspects of international law and the

ILC reflects a broad spectrum of expertise and practical experience

The mandate of the ILC is the progressive development and codification of international law.

The ILC usually spends many years studying areas of international law before presenting draft

articles to the General Assembly for adoption as a draft convention. The primary written

products of the ILC aside from the draft articles themselves are the detailed periodic reports

prepared by the Special Rapporteurs on each subject and the official commentary for each draft

article.

Sometimes the official commentary to an ILC draft article or the Rapporteur’s report will indicate

whether that draft article is intended to codify a rule of customary law or is intended to

progressively develop the law on that point. When the ILC Draft Articles are approved, they are

approved together with the official commentaries.

The official commentaries to ILC draft articles and the reports of the ILC and its rapporteurs can

be considered for two purposes. First, they are part of the travaux préparatoires when

interpreting a treaty related to the subject of the draft article. Second, they are the writings of 34

highly qualified publicists speaking in unanimity and therefore serve as a subsidiary means for

determining rules of customary law.

JURISDICTION OF STATES

1. Principles of Jurisdiction

The concept of jurisdiction refers to the power of a State to prescribe and enforce criminal and

regulatory laws and is ordinarily based on the territorial principle, under which a State has

jurisdiction over activities within its territory. Some states also claim jurisdiction over activities

outside their territory which affect their territory.

States can also claim jurisdiction based upon the nationality principle by extending jurisdiction

over their nationals even when they are outside the territory. For example, civil law countries

extend their criminal law to cover their nationals while abroad while common law countries

usually only do so in exceptional cases.

There is also a very narrow category of crimes – including genocide and war crimes - over which

States may assert jurisdiction based upon the universality principle, which gives all States have

jurisdiction irrespective of nationality or location of the offence.

Almost all States claim jurisdiction under the protective principle, under which a State asserts

jurisdiction over acts committed outside their territory that are prejudicial to its security, such as

treason, espionage, and certain economic and immigration offences. The most controversial

basis for jurisdiction – followed by very few States - is the passive personality principle, which

establishes jurisdiction based on the nationality of the victim. In recent years States have

asserted jurisdiction over terrorist acts outside their territory directed against their nationals,

thereby basing jurisdiction on a combination of the protective and passive personality principles.

Modern counter-terrorism treaties establish jurisdiction among State Parties based on the

presence of the offender within their territory. If a persons who are alleged to have committed the

offence established in the treaty (e.g, hijacking of an aircraft) is present in their territory, a State

Party to the treaty is under an obligation to take the persons into custody, and to either prosecute

them or extradite them to another State Party that has jurisdiction over the offence.
If two or more States have jurisdiction over a particular offence, they are said to have concurrent

jurisdiction. In such cases the State which is most likely to prosecute the offender is the State

which has custody over him. No State may exercise jurisdiction within the territorial sovereignty

of another State. The police of State A cannot enter the territory of State B to arrest a person who

has committed a crime in State A. Also, if a crime takes place in the territorial sea of a coastal

State, no State other than the coastal State my intercept and arrest the ship carrying the

offenders.

States enter into bilateral treaties to provide for the extradition of alleged offenders. Sending an

alleged criminal to another State for investigation or prosecution in the absence of an extradition

treaty is referred to as rendition.

The high seas and outer space are outside the territorial jurisdiction of any State. The general

principle of jurisdiction in these common areas is that ships, aircraft and spacecraft are subject to

the jurisdiction of the “flag State”, or State of registration. The general principle is that ships on

the high seas are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the flag State, and cannot be boarded

without its express consent. The most notable exception is piracy. All States have a right to board

pirate ships on the high seas without the consent of the flag State.

2. Immunities from Jurisdiction

The principle of sovereign equality of States requires that the official representatives of one State

should not be subject to the jurisdiction of another State. For example, the law of the sea

provides that warships are subject only to the jurisdiction of the flag State. Even if warships

commit acts contrary to the right of innocent passage or the laws and regulations of the coastal

State, the coastal State’s only remedy is to escort the offending warship out of the territorial sea.

The principle of State immunity or sovereign immunity provides that foreign sovereigns enjoy

immunity from the jurisdiction of other States. The principle of diplomatic immunity provides

that the diplomatic agents of the sending State have complete immunity from the criminal
jurisdiction of the receiving State. Since this immunity belongs to the sending State and not to

the diplomat, it can be waived by the sending State. Also, the receiving State has the right to

expel any diplomatic agent from its country by declaring them persona non grata. The premises

of an embassy or diplomatic mission as well as its records and archives are also inviolable. The

authorities of the receiving State cannot enter a foreign embassy without the express permission

of the head of mission, even in the case of an emergency.

G. STATUS OF THE SEAS, OUTER SPACE AND ANTARCTICA

1. High Seas

The high seas are governed by several fundamental principles. First, no State may purport to

assert sovereignty over any part of the high seas. Second, all States have the right to exercise

the freedoms of the seas, including freedoms of navigation, freedom of overflight, freedom to lay

submarine cables and pipelines, and freedom to conduct marine scientific research. Freedom of

fishing was a traditional high seas freedom but fishing on the high seas is subject to restrictions

as set out in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. It is generally agreed

that freedom of the seas also includes the right of all States to use the high seas for military

purposes, including weapons testing and naval exercises.

2. Exclusive economic zone

Coastal States are permitted to claim an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of up to 200

nautical miles from the baselines from which the territorial sea is measured wherein they have the

sovereign right to explore and exploit the natural resources of the sea and of the seabed and

subsoil. The EEZ is neither under the sovereignty of the coastal State nor part of the high seas. It

is a specific legal regime in which coastal States have the rights and jurisdiction set out in

UNCLOS, and other States have the rights and freedoms set out in UNCLOS. Other States have

the right to exercise high seas freedoms in the EEZ of any State. With respect to jurisdiction over
matters outside of economic activities, the principles of jurisdiction governing the high seas apply

in the EEZ.

3. Deep Seabed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction

The natural resources of the deep sea bed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction are vested in

mankind as a whole under the principle of the common heritage of mankind. No State may claim

or exercise sovereignty or sovereign rights over any part of this area or its resources and it is

governed by the International Sea Bed Authority (ISBA) No State or natural or juridical person

may appropriate any part of the area or its resources except under the authority of the ISBA.

4. Outer Space

The principles governing the use of outer space are similar to those that the high seas. First, no

State may purport to assert sovereignty over any part of outer space. Second, all States have the

freedom to use outer space for peaceful purposes. Third, States on whose registry a space

object is launched shall retain jurisdiction and control over the space object and over any persons

on board the space object.

5. Antarctica

Official claims to sectors of the ice-covered continent of Antarctica were made by seven

States – Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom. A

sector was also claimed by Admiral Byrd on behalf of the United States, but the United States

never officially adopted Byrd’s claim, and refused to recognize the claims of the six claimant

States. In 1959 the seven claimant States, together with 5 other States whose scientists had

been conducting research in Antarctica (Belgium, Japan, South Africa, the United States and the

USSR) entered into the Antarctic Treaty. The Antarctic Treaty “froze” the claims of the seven

claimant States, and stated that no new claims to sovereignty would be made. It also stated that

Antarctica should be used only for peaceful purposes. The Antarctic Treaty permits States
parties to conduct scientific research in Antarctica and its provisions are generally respected by

non-party States as customary law.

H. PRINCIPLES GOVERNING RELATIONS BETWEEN STATES

The general principles governing friendly relations between States are set out in UN General

Assembly Resolution 2625. It states that the progressive development and codification of the

seven principles below would secure their more effective application within the international

community and would promote the realization of the purposes of the United Nations. Therefore,

the resolution sets out the consensus in the international community on the content of the

following seven principles:

1) States shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force

against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other

manner inconsistent with the purpose of the United Nations

2) Pacific settlement of disputes

3) Non-intervention in matters within the domestic jurisdiction of any State, in

accordance with the Charter

4) Co-operation with one another in accordance with the Charter

5) Equal rights and self-determination of peoples

6) Sovereign equality of States

7) States shall fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with

the Charter

I. RESPONSIBILITY OF STATES FOR WRONGFUL ACTS

The 2001 ILC Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts set out
the

principles in this important field of international law. The ILC Articles are a combination of
codification and progressive development. Even though the ILC Articles have not been adopted

as an international convention, some of the provisions have been referred to by international

courts and tribunals as reflective of customary international law.

States are responsible to other States for their internationally wrongful acts. A State commits

internationally wrongful act when conduct consisting of an act or omission (a) is attributable to
the

State under international law; and (b) constitutes a breach of an international obligation owed by

that State to the injured State or the international community. Therefore, if a dispute arises

between two States, the first question is whether the offending State owed an international

obligation to the injured State under either a treaty or under customary law. The second question

is whether that obligation was breached by conduct consisting of either an act or an omission that

is attributable to the offending State.

The rules on attribution are based on common sense. The conduct of an organ of the State is

attributable to the State because a State acts through its official representatives, such as its Head

of State, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ambassadors and government ministries and departments.

The official acts of these persons and organs are attributable to the State.The conduct of private

persons or private entities is generally not attributable to the State unless the State knew of the

conduct and failed to act in relation to that conduct when it had an international obligation to act.

However, the conduct of a person or entity empowered by the law of the State to exercise

elements of government authority is attributable to the State and a State may also ratify and

adopt the conduct of private persons or control their conduct in such a manner that it can be

attributed to the State.

A State is in breach of an international obligation when conduct attributable to it is not in

conformity with what is required by the obligation. A State may not rely on provisions of its

internal or domestic law as justification for failure to comply with an international obligation. The

responsible State is under an obligation to cease the wrongful act if it is continuing. It is also

under an obligation to offer appropriate assurance and guarantees of non-repetition, if

circumstances so require. In addition, the responsible State is under an obligation to make full

reparation for the injury – both material and moral - caused to the other State by the

internationally wrongful act.

The forms of reparation under international law are restitution, compensation and satisfaction.

The preferred form of reparation is restitution, which requires the State to re-establish the

situation which existed before the wrongful was committed. Insofar as the damage is not made

good by restitution, the State much pay compensation to cover the financially accessible

damage, including loss of profits insofar as it is established. If the injury cannot be made good by

either restitution or compensation, the State must provide satisfaction, which may consist of

acknowledgement of the breach, an expression of regret, a formal apology or another appropriate

remedy.

There are defenses available to the responsible State which preclude the wrongfulness of an act,

including valid consent by the injured State, self-defence, force majeure, distress, necessity and

valid countermeasures. The ILC Articles set out the requirements which must be met before

these defenses can be invoked. Some of the provisions of the ILC Articles on these “defences”

can be classified as “progressive development” rather than a codification of customary

international law.

J. THE ROLE OF THE ICJ

The ICJ is the chief judicial organ of the United Nations. All members of the UN are automatically

parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice. The jurisdiction of the ICJ in

“contentious disputes” between States is subject to the principle of consent. It can obtain

jurisdiction in three ways. First, the States parties to a dispute may enter into an ad hoc

agreement to refer a particular legal dispute to the court. Second, States can submit an “optional

clause declaration” to the UN Secretary-General declaring that they accept the jurisdiction of the

ICJ over certain categories of disputes with other States which have also filed an optional clause
declaration. This category of disputes is quite rare, as many States are not willing to accept the

jurisdiction of the ICJ in advance for wide categories of disputes. Third, many international

conventions contain dispute settlement clauses called “compromissory clauses” allowing disputes

between States parties to the convention to refer disputes concerning the interpretation or

application of provisions of that convention to the ICJ by one of the parties to the dispute. Some

conventions allow States to “opt out’ of such compromissory clauses.

If a dispute between two States is decided by the ICJ, the decision is final and binding as

between the parties to the case. It is not binding on other States. However, to the extent that the

ICJ pronounces on issues of customary law or treaty law, its judgment will be treated as an

authoritative interpretation of international law by many States.

The ICJ also has advisory jurisdiction. The UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly

may request advisory opinions on any legal question. The UN General may also authorize other

UN organs or specialized agencies to request advisory opinions on legal questions arising within

the scope of their activities.

Chapter 11
International Organization
Suggested Readings:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bank

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union