THE GLOBAL INTERSTATE

SYSTEM
- The transformations of the
interstate system.
- Elements of the contemporary
interstate system as well as
Different views on its character
and the nature of its actors.
- Changes in the construct of
sovereignty and territory.
• The role of states in
international affairs and the
transformations that have
occurred.
• Growing role of non-state
actors.
• Impact of globalization on the
interstate system.
THE GLOBAL INTERSTATE
SYSTEM

FOR A LONG TIME, STATES

HAVE BEEN THE DOMINANT
ACTORS IN THE
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS.
 The Interstate System
The idea of a 'system' requires the
existence of units, among which
interactions take place (Buzan 1993).

In the interstate system, the units are

the states, and their interactions
include war, diplomacy, and
cooperation.
 The Interstate System
The contemporary interstate system
is founded on the principles of
sovereignty, territoriality and non -
interdependence. The use of the
term “interstate” is preferred over
“international” to emphasize that
what is being dealt with are states
instead of nations.
 The Interstate System
The contemporary interstate
system can be traced back to
the Peace of Westphalia
which ended the Thirty Years
War in Europe. The continent
before 1648 consisted of
political units smaller than the
states.
 The Interstate System
• These political units include
territories ruled by powerful feudal
lords who did not necessarily owe
allegiance to the monarchs.
• At the macro level, authority
resided in the Holy Roman empire.
This made the state being not the
focus of power.
 The Interstate System

At the time, in fact, there was an

obscure idea of what a state was,
what it was composed and who it
represented.
 The Interstate System
The current interstate system is a
result of convergence of economic
and political factors, wealth and
coercion. These factors enabled
monarchs to wield powers enough
to challenge the dominance of the
Holy Roman Empire as well as the
feudal lords.
 The Interstate System

With the money and army,

monarchs gained exclusive
control over the means to
wage wars.
 STATE
• A COMMUNITY OF PERSONS, MORE
OR LESS UNITED, OCCUPYING A
DEFINITE PORTION OF TERRITORY,
HAVING A GOVERNMENT OF ITS OWN
IN WHICH A GREAT NUMBER OF
INHABITANTS RENDER OBEDIENCE
AND INDEPENDENT OF EXTERNAL
CONTROL.
 ELEMENTS OF STATE

1.TERRITORY- DEFINITE PORTION

OF THE EARTH WHERE THE
PEOPLE LIVE.

2.PEOPLE- MASS OF INHABITANTS

WHO LIVE WITHIN THE
TERRITORY OF STATE
3. GOVERNMENT- AGENCIES/OFFICES
WHICH CARRIES OUT THE WILL OF STATE
STATE, THAT IS TO MAINTAIN ORDER AND
SECURITY IN THE STATE.

4. SOVEREIGNTY- SUPREME POWER OF

THE STATE TO COMMAND OBEDIENCE
FROM ITS PEOPLE AND TO BE FREE
FROM OUTSIDE INTERFERENCE
(INDEPENDENCE).
 Four Types of Sovereignty
1. Internal Sovereignty
2. External Sovereignty
3. Political Sovereignty
4. Legal Sovereignty
AS A RULE, EVERY STATE MUST
RESPECT EACH OTHER’S
SOVEREIGNTY AND NOT INTERVENE
IN EACH DOMESTIC AFFAIRS.
- THE TREATY OF WESTPHALIA (1648)
RECOGNIZES THE PRINCIPLE OF
SOVEREIGN STATEHOOD.
 CONCERT OF EUROPE
From 1815 - 1914 the concert of
Europe established a set of
principles, rules and practices that
helped to maintain balance between
the major powers after the
Napoleonic wars (1803-1815), and to
spare Europe from another broad
conflict.
 CONCERT OF EUROPE
The concert of Europe, also known as
the Congress System or the Vienna
System after the congress of Vienna
was a system of dispute resolution
adopted by the major powers of Europe
to avoid future conflicts escalating into
war, and to solidify and maintain their
powers in their respective controlled
regions.
 CONCERT OF EUROPE

Their goal was primarily to

prevent any figure like
Napoleon who would incite
popular uprisings and
cause Europe instability.
 THEORETICAL
PERSPECTIVES
There are theories that other
competing explanations and
interpretations on the character
of the interstate system and the
nature of interstate relations.
These theories include
REALISM, LIBERALISM,
CONSTRUCTIVISM and
 THEORETICAL
PERSPECTIVES
• 1.REALISM- ASSUME THAT JUST LIKE
HUMAN INDIVIDUALS, STATES ARE
RATIONAL ACTORS AND THEIR
PRIMARY CONCERN IS THE
PROMOTION OF THEIR SELF-
INTERESTS.
REALISM
IN AN ANARCHAIC INTERNATIONAL
SYSTEM, WHEREIN THERE’S AN
ABSENCE OF CENTRAL AUTHORITY,
STATES MUST FEND FOR THEMSELVES
AND MUST AMASS POWER TO
PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM THE
DEPRADATIONS OF OTHER STATES
REALISM

To the realists, the rationality of

states and the anarchic structures
of the international system have
important implications. Because
states think in terms of self-help,
they must fend for themselves.
During the Cold War period, the
United States and
REALISM

the former Soviet Union were

engaged in a nuclear arms race.
They each amassed thousands of
nuclear warheads. Although
biopolarity helped maintain
stability vertical proliferation was
seen mutually by both parties as a
threat to their security.
REALISM

The United Nations was already

in place but it could not do so
much to keep the two
superpowers from acquiring
more nuclear weapons.
THE STATE’S POWER MAY BE
BASED ON THE FOLLOWING
ELEMENTS:
1. MILITARY STRENGTH
2. STRONG ECONOMY
3. INTERNAL STABILITY
4. FOREIGN ALLIANCES
2. LIBERALISM
- LIBERALS ASSUME STATES
BEHAVE WITH RATIONALITY AND
MUST BEHAVE PROPERLY IN
RELATION WITH EACH OTHER
- THEY ARE OPTIMISTIC FOR
LONG-TERM PEACE
LIBERALISM
- LIBERALS EMPHASIZE THE
PACIFYING ROLES OF
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS,
ECONOMIC INTERDEPENDENCE,
AND DEMOCRACY
LIBERALISM
- LIBERALS MAINTAIN THAT
ECONOMIC INTERDEPENDENCE
MINIMIZES CONFLICTS. AS RATIONAL
ACTORS, IT IS NOT IN STATE’S BEST
INTERESTS TO SACRIFICE THE
GAINS OF ECONOMIC TIES BY
ENGAGING IN COSTLY CONFLICTS
LIBERALISM
- CONFLICTS AND WARS CAN ONLY
RESULT IN MUTUALLY ASSURED
ECONOMIC DESTRUCTION
- LIBERALS BELIEVE THAT
DEMOCRATIC STATES DO NOT
FIGHT OTHER DEMOCRACIES. THEY
RESPECT EACH OTHER
3. CONSTRUCTIVISM
- IS CONCERNED WITH THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AGENTS AND
STRUCTURES
CONSTRUCTIVISTS IDENTIFY THE
PRINCIPAL ACTORS, THEIR INTERESTS
AND INDENTITIES, AND THE NATURE
AND STRUCTURE OF THE
INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM
 CONSTRUCTIVISM
Substantive theory - provides specific claims
and speculations about issues and patterns
of world affairs.
- how we can explain the absence of wars
between the major powers.

CONSTRUCTIVISM is best compared to

Rational Choice - a social theory that explains
how agents pursue their interests under specific
conditions or constraints.
 CONSTRUCTIVISM
- breaks with the assumptions of two rational
choice theories, realism and liberalism.

- constructivits do not share the view that

states are rational actors that have fixed set
of interests, identities and preferences.

- They do not also accept that anarchy is an

inherent condition that cannot be changed.
 CONTRUCTIVISM
- Constructivists argue that both state interests
and anarchy are socially constructed, that is they
are created by the states themselves.

- Self - help and power politics are shaped through

shared understanding and interaction. if states
change the way they interact , their identity as sel-
interested agents and their anarchic environment
are likely to change too.
A constructivist view can tell us why things happened
the way they did
 CONSTRUCTIVISM
- Emphasizes the role of ideas.

- the world is shaped not just by material

factors but also by ideational forces.
While capabalities like military power are
important. It is ideas that determine whether
states should always pursue them at all
costs
 CONSTRUCTIVISM
- Constructivists highlight the importance of
norms.

Norms - are ideas that have an effect on the

behavior of agents. Norms may be
regulative, prescriptive, or constitutive.
4. MARXISM
- ARGUE THAT THE WORLD IS DIVIDED
ALONG ECONOMIC LINES, BETWEEN
DEVELOPED AND UNDEVELOPING
STATES. RICH/DEVELOPED STATES
EXPLOIT POOR/DEVELOPING STATES
RESULTING TO MASS POVERTY AND
GIVING RISE TO ANTI-IMPERALIST
MOVEMENTS.
MARXISM
-IMPERIALISM MAKES THE CONFLICT
BETWEEN RICH AND POOR STATES
UNAVOIDABLE AND CONTINUOUS.

- IT IS THE AIM OF POOR STATES FROM

FREE THEMSELVES FROM IMPERIALISM
AND PURSUE DEVELOPMENT ON THEIR
OWN PATH.
 THE ROLE OF NON-STATE
ACTORS
1.INTERNATIONALORGANIZATIONS
- PROMOTE PEACE, SECURITY AND
COOPERATION (UN, EU, ASEAN, NATO)
2. NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS
- ENGAGE IN VARIOUS ADVOCACIES
LIKE ENVIRONMENT
PROTECTION ,HUMAN RIGHTS
(AMNESTY INT’L, GREENPEACE)
3. MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS
- MONOPOLY FIRMS THAT
OPERATE IN
MANY COUNTRIES
- PROMOTE INTERDEPENDENCE BY
EXPANDING TRADE AND FOREIGN
INVESTMENT
MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS
(MNC’S)
- OWING TO THEIR ENORMOUS
CAPITAL, THEY HAVE THE
TENDENCY TO INTERFERE AND
INFLUENCE THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS
OF HOST COUNTRIES
 GLOBALIZATION AND THE
INTERSTATE SYSTEM
• Outside-in view - regards globalization as
an exogenous process that is making a
profound impact on state affairs.

• Inside-out view - globalization recognizes

that states are the ones influencing the
level of global interconnectedness today.