Table Of ContentINTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Featuring over 20 new entries, International Relations: The Key Concepts,
now in its second edition, is the essential guide for anyone interested in
internationalaffairs.Comprehensiveanduptodate,itintroducesthemost
importantthemesininternationalrelationsinthepost-9/11era.Keyareas
coverinternationalcriminallaw,humanrights,thedevelopingworld(the
Arab League, African Union), globalization and strategic studies. New
entries include:
• English School
• Digital Divide
• War on Terror
• Bush Doctrine
• International Criminal Court
• Legitimacy
• Global Warming
• Unilateralism
Featuring suggestions for further reading as well as a unique guide to
websitesoninternationalrelations,thisaccessibleguideisaninvaluableaid
to an understanding of this expanding field; ideal for the student and
non-specialist alike.
MartinGriffithsisAssociateProfessorattheDepartmentofInternational
Business and Asian Studies at Griffith University, Australia. He is the
author of Fifty Key Thinkers in International Relations, also available from
Routledge.
Terry O’Callaghan is Senior Lecturer in the School of International
Studies at the University of South Australia.
Steven C. Roach is Assistant Professor of International Affairs in the
DepartmentofGovernmentandInternationalAffairsattheUniversityof
South Florida. He is the author of Politicizing the International Criminal
Court:TheConvergenceofPolitics,Ethics,andLaw(2006),CulturalAutonomy,
MinorityRights,andGlobalization(2005),andeditorofCriticalTheoryand
InternationalRelations:AReader(2007).
ALSOAVAILABLEFROMROUTLEDGE
Economics:TheBasics
TonyCleaver
0-415-31412-7
978-0-415-31412-1
Politics:TheBasics
SecondEdition
StephenTansey
0-415-30329-X
978-0-415-30329-3
Sociology:TheKeyConcepts
EditedbyJohnScott
0-415-34406-9
978-0-415-34406-7
FiftyMajorEconomists
SecondEdition
StevenPressman
0-415-36649-6
978-0-415-36649-6
TheRoutledgeCompaniontoGlobalEconomics
EditedbyRobertBenyon
0-415-24306-8
978-0-415-24306-3
INTERNATIONAL
RELATIONS
The Key Concepts
Second Edition
Martin Griffiths,
Terry O'Callaghan
and
Steven C. Roach
First published 2002
by Routledge
Second edition published 2008
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Routledge
270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016
This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2007.
“To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s
collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.”
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2002, 2008 Martin Griffiths, Terry O’Callaghan and Steven C. Roach
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any
form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented,
including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system,
without permission in writing from the publishers.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record for this book has been requested
ISBN 0-203-93408-3 Master e-book ISBN
ISBN10: 0–415–77436–5 (hbk)
ISBN10: 0–415–77437–3 (pbk)
ISBN10: 0–203–93408–3 (ebk)
ISBN13: 978–0–415–77436–9 (hbk)
ISBN13: 978–0–415–77437–6 (pbk)
ISBN13: 978–0–203–93408–1 (ebk)
CONTENTS
Preface vi
Introduction vii
ListofKeyConcepts xiv
KEYCONCEPTS 1
Appendix:InternationalRelationsWebSites 348
Bibliography 369
Index 400
v
PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION
This second edition of International Relations: The Key Concepts provides
students of international relations with short introductory essays to the
concepts and issues that are most likely to be encountered in the study of
international relations. It builds on the central aim of the first edition, by
updatingmanyoftheessaysofthekeyconceptsandaddingseveralconcepts
associatedwithimportantnewdebatesininternationalrelations.Indoingso,it
addresses many of the new concepts associated with the post-9/11 era,
including the Bush Doctrine, Enemy Combatants, Pre-emption, War on
Terror,AxisofEvil,Jihad,etc.Suchanerahasalsoprovidedanovelcontext
forstudyingtheimportanceofexistingconceptsthatwerenotstressedinthe
firstedition(i.e.unilateralismandtorture),yethavecometoshapeanddefine
USforeignpolicyduringthepost-9/11era.
The revised version also includes additional concepts and institutions
associatedwithfourareasofinternationalrelations:(1)thedevelopingworld
(Mercosur, African Union, Arab League), (2) international criminal law
(InternationalCriminalCourt(ICC)andInternationalCriminalTribunals),
(3) Human Rights (Human Security), and (4) strategic studies (Coercion).
Accordingly, the second edition seeks to be more inclusive without being
comprehensive,morerelevantthansimplybeinguptodate.Inall,thereare21
conceptsthathavebeenaddedtothisnewedition(10thathavebeendropped
from the first edition). Together, they reflect a wider array of relevant and
previously under-emphasised introductory essays and an expanded range of
importantnewdebatesininternationalrelations.
Giventheexpandedscopeofthiseditionandthehistoricalimportanceof
thepost-9/11era,Ihaveincludedabriefintroductionthatdiscussesseveral
emergent challenges and the central debates in the field of international
relations. In addition, I have updated and expanded the list of web sites to
reflect the rapidly growing number of non-governmental organisations,
researchinstitutes,andacademicjournalsininternationalrelations.
Steven C. Roach
University of South Florida
March 2007
vi
INTRODUCTION
International relations: conceptual issues and challenges
International relations (IR) is the study of the political and social
interactionofstate,non-stateactors,andindividuals.Inrecentyears,the
increasing interaction among these actors, coupled with advances in
informational technology and the spread of human rights, have raised
many new questions for IR scholars, practitioners, and students. For
instance,whydostatesnowelecttodelegatemoreoftheirauthoritytothe
international level? How does this process explain the capacity of
international institutions, notably the United Nations (UN), World
TradeOrganisation(WTO),andtheInternationalCriminalCourt
(ICC),toaddressthesocial,economic,legal,andhumanitarianproblems
that cut across nation-state boundaries? Moreover, which theories in IR
allowustobestexplainthechangingdynamicsofinternationalissuessuch
as environmental pollution, humanitarian emergencies, global terrorism,
theAIDS/HIVpandemic,theproliferationofnuclearweaponsandtrade
disputes?AndhowshouldweapplyIRtheorytodeviseeffectivepolicies
that can resolve the serious effects of these global problems?
Toaddressthesequestions,weneedtofirstappreciatetheimportanceof
internationalrelationstheory.Theory,inthissense,offerstheconceptual
tools to accomplish three basic tasks: to analyse the impact of rules and
decisionsonstatebehaviour;tounderstandthechangingdimensionsand
limits of power structures, institutions and order, including the role of
greater transparency (access to information) and accountability; and to
promotetheidealsofjustice,greatersocialinclusion,andequality.Inshort,
theoryisaboutdescribingrealityandgeneratingthehistoricalandpractical
knowledge needed to resolve problems and promote the above ideals.
Whetherthismeansapplyingarigorous,scientificassessmentoftheeffects
of low educationalstandards on civilwars inAfricaduring the 1990s, or
understanding the oppression of women in Taliban-controlled
Afghanistan (1996–2001), it is essential that theory be employed to
understand the increasinglycomplex policy and ethical challenges facing
state and international political leaders.
vii
INTRODUCTION
Today, policymakers confront the ongoing challenge of building
consensus around complex issues related to maintaining and promoting
internationalpeaceandsecurity.Inlightofthe9/11attacksontheWorld
Trade Center and Pentagon, US foreign policy now, more than ever,
requiresnew strategicprioritiesand thinkingtoaddress globalproblems.
Andwhilethereisnoeasysolutionorfixperse,wealsoneedtobewaryof
thelimitsandpoliticalfalloutofrelyingtooheavilyonmilitarysolutionsto
resolveourproblems.Nowhereisthisperhapsmoreevidentthanwiththe
unprecedentedformulationofenemycombatants,whichhasallowedthe
UnitedStatesgovernmenttoengageinreportedactsoftorturethatviolate
the Geneva Conventions and other well established international legal
mechanisms.
Thus, of the many challenges facing international policymakers and
politicalleaders,theglobalwaronterrorismisarguablythemostpressing
(thoughglobalwarmingmayalsobeconsideredequallyimportant).Here,
we must continue to strike some credible balance between international
anddomesticsecurityconcernsandtheneedforjustice,ethics,civilrights,
andfreedom.Howstudentsandscholarseffectivelyengagethistaskwillof
course depend on how they appreciate the historical and theoretical
meaningofconceptsandissues.Or,alternatively,howtheyareabletolink
theissuesandconceptswiththerelevantpolicyandtheoreticaldebatesthat
informandshapetheirmeaningandsignificanceininternationalrelations.
BelowarethreeoftheprincipaltheoreticaldebatesinIRwithwhichallIR
studentsneedtobeacquainted.Together,theyshowhowIRscholarsand
practitioners frame the basic questions and issues of their research and
policy analysis regarding power politics, interests, identities, values, and
new norms and practices (i.e. sovereignty, human rights, and
environmentalprotection)ininternationalrelations.
FRAMING THE ISSUES: THEORETICAL DEBATES
The origins of the first debate can be traced back to the early studies of
internationalpoliticsintheUnitedKingdomandUnitedStatesduringthe
1930sand1940s.Atthistime,E.H.Carr’sTheTwentyYearsCrisisemerged
asoneofthemostimportanttextsofInternationalRelations(Carr,1946).
Carr, for instance, argued that the failure of the League of Nations to
contain aggression symptomised the tension between the League’s
adherence to the ideals of peace and democratic order and the political
realitiesofnationalaggression.Byneglectingthelatter,theLeaguefailedto
takestockofthepoliticalandsocialrealitiesthatconflictedwithandoften
underminedtheenactmentoftheseprinciples.Realists,therefore,believed
thatpoliticalinterestsneededtobedefinedintermsofpowerobjectives;
viii
INTRODUCTION
whilst idealists insisted on the need to formulate and implement
international principles of peace and tolerance.
Naturally, the devastating effects of the Second World War had
convincedmanythatviolenceandwarcouldnotbeignored.Infact,they
argued,itwaspreciselytheabidingadherencetomoralprinciplesthatfor
some had become the very source of national aggression and conflict.
Hitler,forinstance,invokedtheLeagueCovenant’sencodeddemocratic
principle of the right to self-determination to justify the conquest of the
Sudetenland (to uphold the right to self-determination of German
nationals living in this area). In the United States and United Kingdom,
therefore,politicalrealismbecametheestablishedconceptualframework
forstudyinginternationalorderandrelationsamongstates.Itwasbasedon
twotenets:1)thatstatesdefinedtheirpoliticalinterestsintermsofpower;
and 2)that order reflected a delicateyetdiplomaticallyengagedeffort to
work with, and harness the normative and structural constraints of the
balance of power (in the international realm) to prudent foreign policy
making.Asoneofthefirsttextsto offerasystematicstudyofthepower
relationsamongstates,HansMorgenthau’sPoliticsAmongNationsfocused
on the relationship between political power interests and the laws and
mechanicsofthebalanceofpower(Morgenthau,1948).Otherprominent
diplomats,mostnotablyGeorgeKennanandJohnHerzwould goonto
formulatethepolicyofcontainment(ofSovietinfluence)andthesecurity
dilemma (in which one state’s attempts to make itself more secure only
leads to greater insecurity), respectively.
Bythe1950sand1960s,however,asecondgreatdebatewouldarise,
which pitted historians and behavioural (positivist) social scientists. The
latter, in this case, stressed the use of statistical analyses and hypothesis
testing to test and measure the impact of rules and events on state
behaviour.Intakingissuewiththisscientificpriority,historiansarguedthat
the international system was an evolving process, requiring a historically
based analysis of the changing laws and rules of the inter-state system.
Despite this general disagreement, however, realism remained the
dominant paradigm in international relations theory.
Theterm‘paradigm’cametoprominenceinthephilosophyofscience
inthe1960s,primarilythroughtheworkofThomasKuhn(1970).Briefly,
he argued that a paradigm consists of a set of fundamental assumptions
about the subject-matter of science. A paradigm is both enabling and
constraining.Ontheonehand,ithelpstodefinewhatisimportanttostudy
andsoaparadigmisindispensableinsimplifyingrealitybyisolatingcertain
factors and forces from a multitude of innumerable possibilities. On the
other hand,aparadigmisconstrainingsinceitlimitsour perceptual field
(whatwe‘see’asthemostimportantactorsandrelationshipsinaparticular
ix
