MSc International Relations 2011-12: IR411

Foreign Policy Analysis

Week 9: Non-state Actors and foreign policy:

Globalisation and the influence of Multinational, non-governmental, transnational and intergovernmental organisations on foreign policy

End-of-Year Drinks Reception for Current and Prospective Members under 35

on

Monday 5 December at Arundel House Drinks and canaps at 18:00 followed by presentations at 18:30

Learn more about the IISS and to network with the IISS research staff. Remarks will be given by

Professor Sir Michael Howard President Emeritus, IISS Dr John Chipman

Director-General and Chief Executive

Adam Ward
Director of Studies

Virginia Comolli
Research Analyst and Administrative Assistant to the Director for Transnational Threat and Political Risk

Jasper Pandza
Research Analyst, Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Programme

Jens Wardenaer
Editorial Assistant, Armed Conflict Database

__________________________

RSVP:

Charlotte Laycock on events@iiss.org

The foreign policy decision maker under Globalisation?

There is no clear division today between what is foreign and what is domestic Bill Clinton, Presidential Inauguration Speech, 20 January 1993. 1. "... the locus of effective political power can no longer be assumed to be in national governments - effective power is shared and bartered by diverse forces and agencies at national, regional and international levels. 2. "the idea of a political community ... of a self-determining collectivity - can no longer meaningfully be located within the boundaries of a single nation-state alone. 3. "criss-crossing loyalties, conflicting interpretations of rights and duties, interconnected legal and authority structures. David Held, Anthony McGrew, David Goldblatt and Jonathan Perraton, Global Transformations, Politics, Economics and Culture , (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999).

Lecture Plan:
1: Introduction. 2: Globalisation and the complexity of foreign policy decision making. 3: How to understand the effects of Globalisation on foreign policy decision making: A: The Transformationalists B: Globalisation as state driven 5: Economic effects. 6: Transnational actors and foreign policy decision makers. 7: Conclusions: its still the state.

David Held, Anthony McGrew, David Goldblatt and Jonathan Perraton, Global Transformations, Politics, Economics and Culture: Three broad understandings of globalisation s effects on foreign policy decision making and the state: The hyperglobalisers: market forces rule, The sceptics: the world economy is dominated by three large trading blocs with powerful national governments The transformationalists: present situation is historically unprecedented and states and societies are going to have to adapt

Robert Keohane: Sovereignty is best understood less as a territorially defined barrier than a bargaining resource for an international politics characterised by complex transnational networks

Globalisation as state driven

Justin Rosenberg, Globalisation Theory: a Post-Mortem , International Politics, Vol. 42, Issue 1, March 2005, 2-74. Leo Panitch and Sam Gindin, Global Capitalism and American Empire , in Leo Panitch and Colin Leys (eds), The new imperial challenge, Socialist Register, 2004, (London, Merlin Press, 2003),

A taxonomy of international actors:

Territorial: They either use or seek to obtain some territorial base Ideological/cultural: They seek to promote ideas or ways of thinking across national frontiers Economic: Their primary focus is wealthcreation.

State relations with transnational actors:

Normal Bargaining Competitive

Two different approaches to understanding the role of INGOs in Foreign Policy Analysis:
1: Paul Wapner, Politics Beyond the State; Environmental Activism and World Civic Politics, World Politics, 47, 3, April 1995, pp. 311-40 / Richard Price, Reversing the Gun Sights: Transnational Civil Society Targets Land Mines, International Organisation, 52, 3, Summer 1998, pp. 613-644. 2: Kim D. Reimann, A View from the Top: International Politics, Norms and the Worldwide Growth of NGOs , International Studies Quarterly (2006) 50, pp. 45 67.

Conclusions: Its still all about states; they just have different capacities.
A: State institutions because they too (like economic, ideological and military institutions) provide necessary conditions for social existence: the regulation of aspects of social life which are distinctively territorially centred . Thus they cannot be the mere consequence of other sources of social power. B: Since states vary greatly, if (A) is true, these [state] variations will cause variations in other spheres of social life. Even within Europe states differ Across the globe, variations dramatically increase: in degree of democracy, level of development, infrastructural power, geopolitical power, national indebtedness, etc. .variations cause variation among these forces, and so limit globalisation. Michael Mann, Has globalisation ended the rise and rise of the nation-state? Review of International Political Economy, 4:3, autumn 1997, pp. 472-496.