INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Professor Doutor Armando Marques Guedes Nova Law, school year 2018-2019, 1st semester POST-BIPOLAR MODALITIES OF POWER, RECAST IDENTITY- FORMATION, AND CONFLICT IN AN EMERGENT ‘NEW WORLD ORDER’. IS THE SHAPE OF THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM MORPHING? INTRODUCTION While not wanting by any means to skirt a rather thorny issue, the present Program was not designed for future International Relations specialists, but rather for future jurists. Its ambitions are modest, as it aims to provide little more than an introduction to an academic discipline – even if it does so in fairly rich and somewhat demanding manner. Mostly, it offers to provide students with a detailed series of analyses of contemporary international relations from the social-scientific perspective of International Relations (IR). This is by no means a cop-out, as the Program nevertheless does convey much of the gist of what IR has become: a lively and very technical subject-matter, one deeply concerned with the most pressing international political issues of today’s world. These ambitions and aims will be carried out selectively during the semester. We live in a time of change and multi-centered conflicts and accordingly these form the hard core of what follows. The sessions, accordingly, focus a great deal of attention on issues pertaining to identity and its recognition in today’s world, and also on the many tensions and conflicts that beset us all as we try to cope with the very rapid national, sub-national, regional and global transformations which give us no respite. That is not all: the sessions and their ordering also give body to didactic constraints. ‘Narrative’ in style, the semestral introduction that follows is presented in both a wide-angle lens and an in-depth one – as we shall attempt to cover as many examples as it is possible in a semester of as detailed an analytical fashion as we can. Moreover, particular care 1 is taken with concepts and the methodological specificities of International Relations as a discipline. A quick map may prove useful at this juncture. The Program is organized into three major sections (I cast them as one Introduction, and two Parts). As noted, these follow a sequence, which is both a narrative one and one of increasing conceptual complexity. The first step, as this is an introductory program designed for future jurists, maps out concepts and crucial notions relevant in International Relations theory; it consists of two subsets, linked to the chosen topic of the semester. The two following Parts, by far the biggest parcel of this program, includes a series of analyses of some of the most important ‘live fronts’ of contemporary international political dynamics. The middle section (Part 1), larger than the Inteoduction but smaller than the second and last Part 2, focuses on some of the general traits of the relevant international post-bipolar transitions – from the mergence of secessionist infra-state entities to supra-state ones, to different forms of state reactions to their sovereignty and territorial integrity, to the reemergence of religion as a political dimension, to new types of asymmetrical warfare, and the implications of all these factors. Part 2 is an attempt at pulling together the string woven , and does so by trying out a wider take on the highly complex, thickly intertwined, and often very harsh and violent processes we are living through. For each session there is a must-read bibliography. At the end, I added a few more references which are optional. All texts listed are either available at the Faculty, in the Library, or freely available for download at the sites indicated. While the first four sessions of the Program are “magisterial lectures”, the latter ones include a small presentation of the theme by selected groups of students, followed by discussions around them. In terms of Faculty rules there is an obligatory final exam. Both for the exam and the short papers that will serve as the bases for discussions in the second part of the Program, evaluation will depend on clarity in the use of International Relations concepts used and discussed (40%), on knowledge of the examples treated (20%), and on the creativity displayed (40%). 2 Introduction A FRAMEWORK: PERSPECTIVES AND CONCEPTS section 1 SOME GENERAL OPERATIONAL CONCEPTS THE SEDIMENTATION OF THE DISCIPLNE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. FROM INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM TO INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY. THE STATE, SOVEREIGNTY, FOREIGN POLICY, AND DIPLOMACY (1) The historical rise of the discipline of International Relations (IR). International anarchy and international society. The Peace of Westphalia, and the international state system. Sovereignty and international politics. Diplomacy as a political instrument. Headley Bull, (1977), “The nature of order in world politics”, em The Anarchical Society. A study of order in world politics: 3-53, MacMillan, London. Armando M. Marques Guedes (1984), “O estatuto científico das Relações Internacionais”, Nação e Defesa 28: 3-15, Instituto de Defesa Nacional, Lisboa. Martin Hollis e Steven Smith (1990), “The growth of a discipline”, in Explaining and Understanding International Relations: 16-45, Clarendon Press, Oxford. Henry Kissinger (1994), “The new world order”, in Diplomacy: 17-29, Simon & Schuster, New York. Armando Marques Guedes (2007), “A Teoria Internacional de Adriano Moreira: uma apresentação”, em Adriano Moreira, A Comunidade Internacional em Mudança: 7-34, Almedina, Lisboa, in https://www.academia.edu/9305125/A_Teoria_Internacional_de_Adriano_Morei ra_uma_apresentação ___________________(2008), Raising Diplomats. Political, genealogical and administrative constraints in training for diplomacy, Favorita Series, Diplomatiche Akademie, Vienna, Austria., in 3 https://www.academia.edu/9202047/_2008_Armando_Marques_Guedes_Raising _Diplomats_political_genealogical_and_administrative_constraints_on_patterns_ of_training_for_diplomacy_published_as_a_monograph_in_the_Favorita_Series _of_the_Diplomatische_Akademie_Wien_Austria_with_a_Preface_by_Jiri_Gruj a_ REALISM, LIBERALISM AND STRUCTURALISM. POWER, ITS PLACES AND SCOPE. FROM BALANCE OF POWER TO COLLECTIVE SECURITY. THE RISE AND PROGRESSION OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS (2) The three “classical” theoretical paradigms in the study of IR. The progression of international scenarios. “hegemonic domination” by the US and the liberal proposals for “wars and other immoralities of international anarchy”. From the League of Nations to the United Nations. Power distribution in the world and the emergent forms of its exercise. Chris Pentland (1991, original 1976), “International organizations and their roles ”, in (ed.) R. Little and M. Smith, Perspectives on World Politics: 242-249, Routledge. Joseph S. Nye (1992, original 1990) “O Mundo pós-Guerra Fria: uma nova ordem no Mundo?”, Política Internacional 5(1): 79-97 [from the original US edition, entitled The Sources of American Power]. Henry Kissinger (1994), “”The new face of diplomacy: Wilson and the Treaty of Versailles”, in Diplomacy, op. cit.: 218-246, “The dilemmas of the victors”, op. cit.: 246-266, e “America re-enters the arena: Franklin Delano Roosevelt”, op. cit.: 369-394. Joseph S. Nye (1997), “Balance of power and World War I”, “The failure of collective security and World War II” and “The Cold War”, and Understanding International Conflict. An introduction to theory and history: 50-71, 74-95 e 98- 129., Longman. ____________(2002), “Redefining the national interest”, in The Paradox of American Power. Why the world’s only superpower can’t go it alone: 137-173, Oxford University Press. Edward Keene (2002), Beyond the Anarchical Society. Grotius, colonialism and order in world politics, Cambridge University Press. Armando Marques Guedes (2007), “As Organizações Internacionais de hoje: de onde e para onde?”, Portugal e as Relações Internacionais, em Negócios Estrangeiros 11.2: 27-45, Ministério dos Negócios Estrangeiros, Lisboa. 4 section 2 A FEW SPECIFIC CONTROVERSIES AND NOTIONS NATIONALISM, ETHNICITY, AND IDENTITY: CONTEXTS AND TYPOLOGIES (3) The old and new formats of nationalism, ethnic affiliations and other modalities of constitution and affirmation of sociopolitical identities. Their explanations and their configurations and roles in modern political communities. Nationalisms and the end of the bipolar world: tradition or change? The advantages of dynamic comparisons. Ernest Renan (1994, original 1883), Qu’est-ce qu’une nation?, in (ed.) J. Hutchinson and A. Smith, Nationalism: 17-18, Oxford University Press [from here onward (1)]. Hans Kohn (1945), “Western and Eastern nationalisms”, in The Idea of Nationalism: 18-20, 329-331, MacMillan, New York. Frederik Barth (1996, original 1969), “Ethnic groups and boundaries” in (ed.) J. Hutchinson and A. Smith, Ethnicity: 69-74, Oxford University Press [doravante (2)]. Walker Connor (1978), “A nation is a nation, is a state, is an ethnic group, is a …”, Ethnic and Racial Studies 1-4: 379-388. Anthony Smith (1991), “National and other identities”, in National Identity: 1- 18, Penguin. Benedict Anderson (1991), “The origins of national consciousness”, in Imagined Communities. Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism: 36- 46, Verso London. Michael Ignatieff (1993), “Civic and ethnic nationalism”, in Blood and Belonging: journeys into the new nationalism: 5-14, The Noonday Press, New York. Eric Hobsbawm (1997), “An anti-nationalist account of nationalism since 1989”, in (eds.) M. Guibernov and J. Rex, The Ethnicity Reader: nationalism,