sign in sign up
<<
Home , Classical liberalism, Liberalism (book)

FEATURE CLASSICAL AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Classical liberal ideas apply between states as well as within states, explains Edwin van de Haar

uestions of war and , or foreign Classical often disagree on its precise policy in general, are among the definition, but most regard as most dramatic issues in . It is the political theory characterised by a firm no wonder that classical liberal think in , negative , non-religious tanks publish papers and articles on , , a limited state, international affairs. Often these are reactions to and the .3 In this article these ideas current issues. They hardly ever clarify how their be briefly introduced and then applied to points of view relate to classical liberalism as a international relations, thus sketching the contours political . This begs the question: Does of a classical liberal approach to world politics. In a classical liberal approach to international the process it will become clear that liberalism relations exist? in the American sense differs substantially from This article will argue in the affirmative, classical liberalism. that it is possible to judge current foreign policy Individualism and freedom standpoints from a classical liberal perspective and to develop a classical liberal foreign policy agenda. For liberals the is of ultimate value, Based on a study of four important classical liberal which entails that politics must serve the greater thinkers, , , Ludwig benefit of individual people. The basis for the von Mises, and , it will show that classical liberal idea is its view on human nature: classical liberalism is applicable in international as what are capable of, physically and well as domestic politics.1 Academic international relations theory is Dr Edwin van de Haar is a Lecturer in dominated by American-style liberalism, which International Relations at the Ateneo has much in common with European and Australian social . One effect of this de Manila University in The Philippines. is the equation of liberalism with Immanuel His book Classical Liberalism and Kant and inspired calls for International Relations Theory: Hume, a world federation of the brotherhood of man, Smith, Mises, and Hayek is forthcoming cosmopolitanism, a belief in the goodness of people with Palgrave Macmillan. and the possibility of abolishing war, optimism about the peace-enhancing outcomes of increased intergovernmental international organisation, Endnotes for this essay can be found international , and so forth.2 at www.policymagazine.com.

Vol. 25 No. 1 • Autumn 2009 • POLICY 35 CLASSICAL LIBERALISM AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

rationally; what are their fundamental urges and international affairs, just as the best possible law natural instincts; and how do they relate to other system (however defined) cannot abolish crime in humans? One feature is that classical liberals a domestic political setting. Classical liberals argue take man as he is, not as he should become. that efforts to achieve perpetual peace are destined They start theorising from a realistic assessment to end in failure and they distance themselves of man’s abilities. Man is seen to be governed from the endless stream of utopias the history of by an interplay of passion and . Human ideas has produced. intellectual capacities can be impressive, but The ultimate goal of classical liberalism in are always limited: reason is not omnipotent, international relations is the same as in domestic particularly not when processing information or politics: to maximise individual freedom for all attempting to predict or plan complex societal people. Individuals fare best when they can freely phenomena. Human reason is an important tool deal with the challenges and opportunities in for individuals to adapt to change, but reason is life. Classical liberals define freedom as an area incapable of permanently overcoming certain of non-interference by others individuals and innate natural traits. Human nature is frail and . In the classical liberal view, winning ultimately, as Hume famously argued in A Treatise back and expanding this freedom is one of the of Human Nature, ‘man is and ought to be the most important tasks, especially in the modern slave to the passions.’ Human are not (Western) world. Historically, this call for destined to wrongdoing in a moral sense, but they freedom found an expression in the rejection of do tend towards it. Only a few are always prone to and . For example, Hume unlawful behaviour, but a much larger group can and Smith were strong supporters of American be ‘seduced from the more important but more independence, and Hayek and Mises supported distant interest, by the allurement of the present decolonialisation in the twentieth century. though often very frivolous temptations. This Wars have a negative effect on human freedom great weakness is incurable in man.’4 in several ways, but they are an inevitable feature of human nature.6 Therefore, the relevant question for classical liberals is not how they can Classical liberals take man as be abolished, but how they can be dealt with. he is, not as he should become. Natural law One part of the answer is provided by the natural law foundation of classical liberalism. Its aim of The classical liberal view on human nature achieving the greatest individual freedom is based is not just some unfounded normative choice, on the concept of natural . Every individual easily replaceable by any other view. These old has the right to life, and —and but crucial insights are increasingly supported respect for these rights is crucial for a just order. by research in the fields of evolutionary biology It enables humans, who are after all social and neuroscience, which point out that struggle, beings by nature, to live together and cooperate. competition, the protection of honour, and tribal The laws of nature are a set of rules aimed to and ethnic conflict remain crucial elements in preserve and protect natural rights and to achieve explaining both individual and group behaviour.5 social .7 Humans are not angels, Madison famously There is much discussion over natural law, argued in the Federalist Papers. One important which goes beyond the purposes of this article. consequence of this observation is the impossibility In international relations, the most obvious of rooting out the causes of friction and conflict link between natural law and classical liberalism between people. Since state action is , is found in the latter’s support for the ‘just war this means it is also impossible to get rid of war. tradition,’ which is associated with natural Depending on the circumstances military conflict law thinkers such as the Dutch scholar Hugo can sometimes be prevented or minimised, but as Grotius. Put briefly, the just war tradition limits such it can never be completely abolished from the grounds for warfare to a number of justified

36 Vol. 25 No. 1 • Autumn 2009 • POLICY CLASSICAL LIBERALISM AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

causes and sets rules for the ways to fight wars. As states are the most important actors in international such the aim is to minimise international conflict. relations. Hume’s writings contain many examples of his To maximise individual freedom the state embrace of the just war tradition; Smith ended should only have a limited number of tasks. The the Theory of Moral Sentiments explicitly praising state is an important protector of natural rights, Grotius; while Hayek applied just war principles but history has shown that it is also the biggest in his numerous commentaries on world events, abuser of these rights. The principle of the rule such as his condemnation of American inaction of law intends to protect the of in the Iran-hostage case of the late seventies and individuals. Classical liberals think the state can his support for the British in the Falklands War best be bound by a combination of constitutions; of 1981.8 separation of the legislative, executive and judicial powers; and the limitation of . and the limited state In international affairs this means that states Liberalism is the political expression of should be cautious about concluding and ratifying individualism, yet cooperation of individuals in treaties and other forms of positive law. These are groups is valued positively. For classical liberals often binding commitments that are very hard the nation, or the country, is the largest group to change or to get rid of, with a large possible in society which is the object of human passion, negative impact on individual freedom. both positive in the sense of national pride and negative in the sense of shame and humiliation. Hume noted that few men are entirely indifferent Attempts to build a better to their country, and both he and Adam Smith underlined that humans sympathise more with world by establishing people to whom they are close than with strangers international organisations or foreigners. Feelings for the nation are strong, and regimes are rejected. natural motivational forces for individuals.9 This also applies in the age of modern states and nationalism. Despite the atrocities committed Some international agreements may be useful in the name of national glory throughout the to smooth the working of the international society twentieth century, Mises and Hayek never of states, or to settle practical matters. But the predicted nor called for the end of the nation dangers of overregulation are just as real in world state. Mises thought that language was the essence politics as they are in national politics. Besides of nationality, and with the fragmentation of some specific cross-border issues, the classical the polyglot Austro-Hungarian Empire in mind liberal rule of thumb is that there is no need for he argued that multi-language countries were international state action if there is no domestic doomed to failure. His solution was an increase state task. in possibilities for individual self-determination Consequently, attempts to build a better world and group secession, but not in the expectation by establishing international organisations and that this would lead to a world without sovereign regimes are rejected. Mises and Hayek were strong states.10 Hayek saw the nation as a prime source critics of the League of Nations and its successor of human bonding and individual loyalty, but the United Nations, and Hayek was a fierce recognised the negative aspects of nationalism. critic of the International Labour Organization. He valued the nation, but nationalism was a Their main concern was that these and other poison, not least because he saw a strong relation organisations were taking up tasks they should between nationalism and imperialism.11 After all, not perform, just like overactive states in national it is a small step from thinking good about one’s circumstances. Social constructivism is bad, no country to trying to rule and civilise allegedly matter at what level it is performed.12 inferior others. Often, although certainly not in all This is not to say that classical liberals see the cases, the nation as a group is politically organised nation-state as the only possible form of political as a sovereign state. In the classical liberal view, organisation internationally. In some cases a

Vol. 25 No. 1 • Autumn 2009 • POLICY 37 CLASSICAL LIBERALISM AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

society of coexisting states will not come about. Classical liberals strongly endorse free trade Mises and Hayek thought that the in in international economics. Their is that of interwar showed that exceptional measures completely free trade without any governmental were needed. They supported the creation of a interference. Contrary to perceived common European Federation, as long as it would be a wisdom, classical liberals do not expect trade strictly limited state. A European superstate with to promote peace. Actually, Hume and Smith many tasks performed at the central level was recognised a strong relation between trade and opposed by both. It is therefore likely that they war. Trade relations are often troubled and richer would disapprove of the current European Union. countries can spend more money on belligerent 16 Mises was an active member of the Pan-European action. Trade is unable to get rid of the numerous other causes of warfare such as conflicts over Movement for some time and Hayek supported religion or geography; for example, the 2008 war federalisation as the ultimum remedium in special between Russia and Georgia. circumstances throughout his life. In the 1970s Another prominent feature of the classical he even tried to get support from leading Israeli liberal embrace of in international politicians, including Moshe Dayan and Teddy relations is the call to stop all forms of development 13 Kolek, for a plan to federalise . aid. Under the influence of the ground breaking Spontaneous order work of development economist Peter Bauer, Mises and Hayek rejected aid from its inception, The belief in spontaneous order is a defining arguing that dependence on foreign donations characteristic of classical liberalism. The idea that is no solution for developing countries. Western you do not need a central authority explicitly laying countries should not feel any guilt about the sorry down rules to create order was best summarised state in many former colonies, given the collectivist by the thinker Adam policies of most of their leaders. Only a real Ferguson: ‘the result of human action but not policy change towards capitalism and liberalism human design.’ The most common example of would bring improvement.17 The in a a spontaneous order is the free , but as number of Asian countries confirms the validity of Hayek was keen to point out, it also includes the these views. development of moral rules, language, customs, and traditions. Conclusion Spontaneous order in international relations This brief overview of how classical liberalism’s takes a few forms. Most importantly, classical foundational principles apply to international liberals realise that in an international world relations makes clear there is far more to liberalism without a supreme arbiter, the balance of power in international relations than commonly is an important ordering mechanism. States thought. Classical liberalism aims at maximising individual freedom, which requires international differ in their military power, and preventing one order. Given human nature, it is pointless to aim state from dominating or ruling over the others for abolishing human conflict by establishing is therefore important. States form alliances to a utopian world federation. In an inevitably prevent domination by others, as was the case imperfect society of states, stability depends on an in the Cold War. These alliances will change interplay of just war, the balance of power, and a depending on the circumstances. To keep a minimum of international law and organisation. balance, sometimes minor wars must be allowed Even the expansion of trade, necessary as it is, and certainly not everybody’s natural rights can will be unable to guarantee peace. The classical be safeguarded at all times. Yet more often the liberal foreign policy agenda is one of change, balance works to stabilise international order and calling for the abolition of all trade barriers, many allows many more states and people to survive international treaties, international organisations, or increase their freedom.14 Hume thought it and development aid. Maximising individual was ‘founded so much on common sense and freedom is the right classical liberal goal at all obvious reasoning.’15 political levels, everywhere in the world.

38 Vol. 25 No. 1 • Autumn 2009 • POLICY """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Endnotes i This article is based on Edwin van de Haar’s Edward Elgar, 1997), 37–59; Frank van Dun, Classical Liberalism and International ‘Natural Law: A Logical Analysis,’ Etica & Relations Theory: Hume, Smith, Mises, and Politica V:2 (2003). Hayek (New York and Houndmills: Palgrave viii Van de Haar, Classical Liberalism, chapters Macmillan, 2009, forthcoming). Please refer 3,4,6,7. to the book for additional references, further ix Hume, Treatise,79, 317; Adam Smith, The context and analysis. Methodology is Theory of Moral Sentiments (Indianapolis: discussed in chapters one, two and seven. Liberty Fund, 1982), 299; also Edwin van de ii The literature is huge. Prominent examples Haar, ‘David Hume and International Political are M. W. Zacker and R. A. Matthew, ‘Liberal Theory: A Reappraisal,’ Review of International Theory: Common Threads, International Studies, 34:2 (April 2008), 225– Divergent Strands,’ in Controversies in 242. International Relations Theory: Realism and x , Nation, State, and the Neoliberal Challenge, ed. C.W. Kegley (New Economy: Contributions to the Politics and York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995), 107–150; History of Our Time (New York and London: Michael Doyle, Ways of War and Peace: Institute for Humane Studies & New York Realism, Liberalism and (New York University Press, 1983), 39–40, 82. and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1997); Tim Dunne, ‘Liberalism’ in The xi Friedrich Hayek, Studies in Philosophy, of World Polics: An Introduction to International Politics and Economics (New York: Simon and Relations, eds. J. Baylis and S. Smith Schuster, 1967), 143. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 185– xii Mises, Nation, State and Economy, 90–91; 201. Ludwig von Mises, : iii See for example , Liberalism The Rise of the Total State and Total War (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1995), (Grove City: Libertarian Pres, 1985), 292–294; 45–77; Norman P. Barry, On Classical Friedrich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom Liberalism and (New York: St. (London: Routledge, 1997), 176. Martin's Press, 1987), 1–43; Robert Higgs and xiii Mises, Omnipotent Government, 43–49; Carl P. Close, The Challenge of Liberty: Friedrich Hayek, Socialism and War: Essays, Classical Liberalism Today (Oakland: The Documents, Reviews, ed. Bruce Caldwell, The Independent Institute, 2006), xii-xxii; Hannes Collected Works of F. A. Hayek, vol. X Gissurarson, Hayek’s (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1997), (New York and London: Garland Publishing, 161–164; F. A. Hayek, Letter to the Editor, 1987), 10–41; David Conway, Classical The Times (London, 21 April 1985). Liberalism, The Unvanquished Ideal xiv Herbert Butterfield, ‘The Balance of Power,’ (Houndmills: Macmillan Press, 1995), 1–24. in Diplomatic Investigations: Essays in the iv David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature Theory of International Politics, eds. H. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 266; Butterfield and M. Wight (London: Allen & David Hume, Essays: Moral, Political and Unwin, 1966), 142–144. Literary (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1987), xv David Hume, Essays, 337. 38. xvi R. A. Manzer, ‘The Promise of Peace? Hume v Stephen P. Rosen, War and Human Nature and Smith on the Effects of Commerce on (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University War and Peace,’ Hume Studies XXII (1996), Press, 2005); Bradley A. Thayer, Darwin and 369–382. International Relations: On the Evolutionary xvii Mises, Omnipotent Government, 290–292; Origins of War and Ethnic Conflict (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 2004). Friedrich Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty, (London: Routledge, 1993) 322#"$%%&$%'(" vi As made abundantly clear by Robert Higgs, see for example his Depression,War And Cold War: Studies in Political Economy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006). vii See for example Douglas B. Rasmussen and Douglas J. Den Uyl, Liberalism Defended: The Challenge of Post-Modernity (Cheltenham: !"

"