1

A Comment on IR 2017 Result:

Well, the reason behind such drastic result of IR in 2017 had largely been lack of writing
practice and lack of development of an analytical mindset. There are Four types of CSS
Candidates who appear in competitive examinations;

Level 1: Knowledge Base

Level 2: Conceptual Clarity

Level 3: Application

Level 4: Analysis

Most of the Candidates remain at Level 1, where the hardly know the knowledge base. The
candidates need to have a conceptual clarity i.e. they need to be able to differentiate between
National interest and National Power for instance. Secondly, under conceptual clarity they need
to be able to explain every concept in simple words and need to have its characteristics on their
fingertips.

Then is the Application LEVEL 3, in this level, the candidate is able to apply the knowledge along
with clearly defined concepts to real life situations, current events, and or historical traditions.
They need to explain the concept with the help of examples, statistics and figures. However,
the highest numbers are gained by those who have an analytical approach. Those with
analytical approach need to be able to explain the concepts/theories/etc., apply them to
current events and be able to dig deeper. They need to be able to look for the answer why is
this particular concept relevant to the world today? What does it compare to? Why do we
study it? And How can it help us further? The raising of questions leads you to an analytical
approach where you are able to develop strong arguments along with its justification.

You need to understand this and practice past papers with a LEVEL 4 Approach. And get your
work evaluated. Only reading or attending lectures are not going to prepare you for CSS as you
final destination is a written exam (first) so make sure you are prepared accordingly.

Syllabus Division
Well, I personally divide syllabus into FIVE Areas. That covers all of the topics of Paper 1 as well
as Paper 2 i.e. Concepts, Theories, History, Foreign Policies and Current Affairs. This is exactly
the pattern in which you will find the Notes.
 2

1. Concepts
a. The Definition and Scope of International Relations
b. The Nation-State System
c. Evolution of International Society
d. Conceptualization of security in the Twenty-First century
e. Power. Elements of National Power
f. Balance of Power
g. Foreign Policy: Determinants, Decision Making and Analysis
h. Sovereignty and National Interest
i. Diplomacy
j. International Law
k. Nationalism
l. Internationalism*
m. Globalization
n. War: Causation of War, Total War, Limited War, Asymmetric Warfare, Civil War,
Guerilla
Warfare
o. Terrorism
p. Strategic Culture: Determinants of Pakistani Strategic Culture.
q. Global Strategic Environment
i. Nuclear Programme of Pakistan
ii. Nuclear Weapon States- Programs and Postures
iii. Indian-Pakistan Nuclear Doctrines
iv. Deterrence
v. Arms Control /Disarmament
vi. Weapons of Mass Destruction
vii. Proliferation and Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (International
Atomic Energy Agency, Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty; Nuclear
Supplier Group; Partial Test Ban Treaty; Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty;
Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty; Challenges of Non-Proliferation,
Cooperation for Nuclear Energy)
viii. The Missile Defense Systems
viii. Weaponisation of Space
 3

Global Political Economy

Theories in IPE: Mercantilism, Economic Liberalism, and Neo- Marxism,Theories of
Imperialism, Dependence and Interdependence discourse
Theories and Approaches
r. Realism and Neo-realism
s. Idealism/Liberalism and Neo-liberalism
t. The Scientific Revolution-Behavioral Approach, System Approach*
u. Post-modernism, Critical Theory, Feminism, Constructivism*
2. History
a. International Relation between two Wars: Russian Revolution, Fascism, League
of Nations, Second World War
b. Cold War: Decolonization in Asia and Africa, Rise of United States and Soviet
Union, Era of Tight Bipolarity, Détente and Loose Bipolarity, Revival of Cold War
c. Post Cold War: End of History, Clash of Civilizations, Terrorism, Globalization,
Unipolarity (New World Order) and Revival of Multi-Polarity
3. Foreign Policy of Selected Countries
a. USA, UK, EU
b. Russia, China,
c. India, Pakistan
4. Current Affairs
a. Domestic
i. Energy Crisis
ii. Water Conflict
b. Regional Relations
i. India and Pakistan: Overview of agreements and accords, Indus Water
Treaty; Composite Dialogue; Sir Creek & Siachen border, Visa and People
to people contact; Trade; and Role of civil society Peace-making and
Peace-Building in South Asia: Analytical overview of peace processes
between/among the states of South Asia especially between India and
Pakistan.
ii. Pakistan and Afghanistan: Cold war theatre; Soviet Invasion and
Mujahedeen;
Geneva Accord; Post Cold War situation---Rise of Taliban, AL-Qeada & 9/11;
Operation Enduring Freedom; The Bonn Process- Withdrawal
 4

c. Organizations
i. United Nations
ii. International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, WTO (Done)
iii. International Court of Justice
iv. iv.Regional: SAARC, SCO, ASEAN, EU, NAFTA, OIC, ECO.
v. Reforms in the United Nations, World Bank and the IMF
d. Global Issues
i. Euro-Atlantic Vs. Asia Pacific: Great Power Policies
ii. Kashmir Issue

iii. Palestine Issue

______________________________________________________________________________

Topic 1: The Definition and Scope of International Relations.

1) Introduction
i. The study of international relations is not a science with which we solve the
problems of international life. At its best it is an objective and systematic
approach to those problems” Palmer and Perkins
ii. The term international was used by Jeromy Bentham in the later 18th century
with regards to laws of nations
iii. A restricted scope of IR: the official relations conducted by the authorized
leaders of the state”
iv. From a broader perspective, IR may refer to all forms of interactions between
members of separate societies, whether govt sponsored or not. Hoffman “IR is
concerned with the factors and activities which affect the external policies and
the powers of the basic units into which the world is divided”
v. The study of IR includes analysis of foreign policies or political processes
between nations, and also focuses on international trade and civil society
interaction
2) Ingredients of IR
i. The nature and principal forces of international organizations
ii. The political, social, economic organization of political life, psychological, social,
pol science, economics aspects are considered in order to understand what is
happening
 5

iii. elements of national power-political dynamics, every nation is interested in

other country's political conditions
iv. Instruments available for promotion of national interest-how national power is
attained and what is its effect on the international level
v. Limitations and control of national power (china vs US in Taiwan case due to
capitalist vs communism theories (phermosa island)
vi. Foreign policies of major powers and of smaller (strategic) powers-HDI
vii.Historical ingredients as a background for other factors
 6

3) International Politics and International Relations

i. IR is wider in scope than IP
ii. IP focuses on various styles of politics(capitalism vs. communism); politics of
violence, persuasion (japan followed the plan of economic power and left
military power), hierarchical policies and pluralistic politics
iii. IR embraces the totality of relations among people and groups of people in
global society
Relevance of International Institutions in IR

 Contemporary international institutions in which groups of states or other

actors can participate include INGOs or the UN system (UNDP UNICEF)
 EU, NATO, SAARC or ASEAN are examples of regional grouping with multiple
functions
4) Scope of International Relations
i. Historically, only concerned with the study of diplomatic history. ii.Later on it
was studied under the purview of International Law.
iii. Field of study widened after the creation of League of Nation as study of
international organizations also included.
iv. Post World War II Scenario further widened the scope due to emergence of two
super powers, new states coming into society of nations, danger of thermo-
nuclear war, rising expectations of underdeveloped states.
v. Emphasis on scientific study; study of military policies.
vi. Efforts to utilize the social science techniques (psychological aspects)
vii. Modern scholars not willing to treat IR as an independent discipline as it lacks
unity of subject matter, unanimity regarding scope and degree of objectivity.
viii. IR has a descriptive-historical approach which leads to immense data but a
theoretical framework is required for ordering and interpreting the facts, which
new theories are beginning to provide. Organski “…within next few decades the
basic foundations of a new discipline will be laid”

5) Significance of Study
i. It enables us to understand the basic motives underlying the policies of various
states. ii.Having an insight to the problems facing the world
iii. Helping to understand that narrow nationalism is bane to humanity, poses
serious threats
iv. Various states view problems subjectively and give preference to national
interest
 7

v. Traditional concept of national sovereignty has become out-dated and requires

modification
vi. Avoid policy of confrontation and instead focus on peaceful co-existence, policy
of cooperation, and universal brotherhood.
6) Solution through the Core Principles of IR
i. The problem of shared interests versus conflicting interests among members of
a group, we will refer to the general case as the collective goods problem.
ii. Dominance: The principle of dominance solves the collective goods problem by
establishing a power hierarchy in which those at the top control those below.
iii. Reciprocity The principle of reciprocity solves the collective goods problem by
rewarding behavior that contributes to the group and punishing behavior that
pursues self-interest at the expense of the group.
iv. Identity: members of an identity community care about the interests of others in
that community enough to sacrifice their own interests to benefit others.
 8

The Nation-State System

1) Introduction
a) A nation denotes a common ethnic and cultural identity shared by a single people,
while a state is a political unit with a governance system controlling a territory and
its inhabitants.
b) The nation promotes emotional relationship amongst its members, while states
provide political and legal foundation for the identity of its citizens.
c) The term nation-state has been used by social scientists to denote the gradual fusion
of cultural and political boundaries after a long control of political authority by a
central government.
d) Palmer “the nation-state system is the pattern of political life in which people are
separately organized into sovereign states that interact with one another in varying
degrees and in varying ways”
2) Historical Background
a) The treaty of Westphalia in 1648 created the modern nation-state. (European states,
different cultures, languages started fusing e.g. Switzerland consists of half German
and half French but their identity is Swiss, plus after partition Indian Muslims are
separate than Pakistani Muslims) It has to organize the different national identities
into one, many grievances with state at times. Minority issue in Pakistan.
b) The treaty established the principle of internal sovereignty (preeminence of rulers
from other claimants to power[state needs to have one ruler only and is supreme])
and external sovereignty (independence from outside powers)
c) England, Spain and France obtained independence from dominance by the Holy
Roman Empire.
d) Scholars like Machiavelli (the Prince), Bodin and Grotius defended the authority of
the state and provided justification for the secular state independent from the
authority of the pope.

3) Approaches To International Relations Specifying Nation-State Concept

There are three approaches to studying the socio-cultural, political and economic
forces at work within different nation-states.
i. Objective (attributive Approach): identifies nationalism and the nation-state
in terms of observable and quantifiable attributes, including linguistic, racial
and religious factors.
ii. Subjective (Emotional) Approach: views nationalism and the nation-state as
a set of emotional, ideological and patriotic feelings binding people
regardless of their ethnic backgrounds. (US) afro-Americans though have
serious problems.
 9

iii. Eclectic (synthetic) Approach: A more subjective than objective approach,

seeking to supplement notions of nationalism and patriotism with
interethnic interaction and education processes to explain creation of a
common identity.
Further Evolution of the Nation-State
State systems underwent further evolution on account of rise of
representative governments, the industrial revolution, the population
explosion, independence of developing countries, economic growth and
growth of multi-lateral organizations.
4) Basic Features of Nation-State
a) Concept of Sovereignty
i. The concept of sovereignty is permanently associated with a nation-state.
ii. It evolved in the 16th century in France during the conflict between the state
and the church.
iii. Many theorists have defined sovereignty. Hobbes focused on its absolutist
aspect, while Austin focused on legalistic or juristic notions of sovereignty.
iv. The modern doctrine of popular sovereignty has transferred the source of
absolute power from the monarch to the people.
v. The notion of sovereignty is important but it can become rigid unless applied
to the evolving pattern of inter-state relations.
b) Nationalism in IR
i. Nationalism implies elevation of nation above all other values.
ii. States usually control the mass media to propagate their foreign policy
objectives and centralize their education systems to popularize nationalistic
values.
iii. Power is gauged by both tangible and non-tangible aspects.
iv. The economic output, size, population and military strength of a state are
tangible and quantifiable aspects.
v. Power also rests on intangible factors like quality of leadership, ideology,
morale and manipulative or diplomatic strength.
vi. Power purchases security and enables survival of the state. Thus it is an end
onto itself. This long run objective to achieve power also requires exertion of
power. It is also a means to an end. (to get power u need power.
c) Ingredients of National power
i. Force-the explicit threat or use of military, economic, nuclear and other
instruments of coercion by one state against another. Woodrow Wilson
’talk softly but carry a stick’
 10

ii. Influence-using instruments of persuasion by one state to alter or maintain

the behavior of another state.
iii. Authority-voluntary compliance with directives and orders of a state by
other states out of respect, solidarity, or in recognition of expertise.
5) Elements of Modern Nation-State
a) Sovereignty; right of self-government and promotion of national interests through
independent foreign policy
b) Territorial Integrity
c) Legal Equality of the States; UN Charter; in reality this principle has become a farce;
a state which had general interest and could protect those interests in all spheres
was considered a great power.
6) Setback to Nation-State System
a) Growing interdependence of the states due to globalization. (national Sovereignty)
b) Reconciliation of each other’s national interests
iii.Creation of regional blocs lead to dilution of nation-state
concept iv.Rise of nuclear weapons; blow to concept of
equality of states v.Growing role of public opinion alters
foreign policy objectives vi.Growing dependence of developing
nations on developed states.
vii.Role played by Multi National Corporations.

Topic 3: Evolution of International Society

1. Introduction
i. The basic structures and principles of international relations are deeply rooted in
historical developments.
ii. 'International society' is any association of distinct political communities which
accept some common values, rules, and institutions.
iii. It is the central concept of the 'English School' of International Relations.
iv. Although originally coined to refer to relations among European states, the term
may be applied to many different sets of political arrangements among distinct
political communities.
2. Historical Background
i. Elements of international society may be found from the time of the first
organized human communities.
ii. Early forms of diplomacy and treaties existed in the ancient Middle East.
iii. Relations among the city-states of ancient Greece were characterized by more
developed societal characteristics, such as arbitration.
 11

iv. Ancient China, India, and Rome all had their own distinctive international
societies.
v. Medieval Europe's international society was a complex mixture of supranational,
transnational, national, and subnational structures
vi. The Catholic Church played a key role in elaborating the normative basis of
medieval international society.
vii. Islam developed its own distinctive understanding of international society.
3. Evolution of International Society
i. The main ingredients of contemporary international society are the principles of
sovereignty and non-intervention and the institutions of diplomacy, the balance
of power, and international law.
ii. These took centuries to develop, although the Peace of Westphalia (1648) was a
key event in their establishment throughout Europe.
iii. The Napoleonic Wars were followed by a shift to a more managed, hierarchical,
international society within Europe and an imperial structure in Europe's
relations with much of the rest of the world.
iv. World Wars I and II dominated the 20th century, yet they seem to offer
contradictory lessons about the utility of hardline or conciliatory foreign policies.
v. The League of Nations was an attempt to place international society on a more
secure organizational foundation.
vi. For nearly 50 years after World War II, world politics revolved around the East-
West rivalry of the Cold War. This bipolar standoff created stability and avoided
great power wars, including nuclear war, but turned states in the global South
into proxy battlegrounds.
vii. The United Nations was intended to be a much improved League of Nations but
the cold war prevented it from functioning as such.
viii. The post–Cold War era holds hope of growing peace and great-power
cooperation despite the appearance of new ethnic and regional conflicts
ix. Decolonization led to the worldwide spread of the European model of
international society.
x. The collapse of the Soviet Union completed this process.
xi. Globalization poses serious problems for a sovereignty-based international
society.
xii. These include the challenges emanating from new forms of community, failing
states in Africa, American hyperpower, growing resistance to Western ideas, and
global poverty and environmental issues.
 12

Area 2: Theories

The Classical Approaches-Realism

1) Introduction
i. Realism emphasizes and assumes that all nation-states are motivated by national
interests, or, at best, national interests disguised as moral concerns
ii. national interest must be defined in terms of power iii.National power has an
absolute meaning since it can be defines in terms of military, economic, political,
diplomatic, or even cultural resources.
iv. The unifying theme around which all realist thinking converges is that states find
themselves in the shadow of anarchy such that their security cannot be taken for
granted.
v. At the end of the millennium, Realism continues to attract academicians and
inform policy-makers, although in the period since the end of the cold we have
seen heightened criticism of realist assumptions.
2) Assumptions
i. Analytic unit: state is the principal actor.
ii. View of actor: state is unitary actor.
iii. Behavioral dynamic: in its foreign policy, the state is a rational actor seeking to
maximize its own interest or objectives.
iv. Issues: national security issues are most important.
3) Precursors
i. Thucydides, Machiavelli, Hobbes
ii. Grotius: maintenance of order between states through norms of international
law
iii. Clausewitz: a state’s military objectives are important, but subordinate to larger
political objectives.
iv. E.H. Carr: The Twenty Years’ Crisis: 1919-1939 v.Hans j Morgenthau: Politics
among nations
4) Six Principles of realism as explained by Hans J. Morgenthau
i. Politics is governed by objective laws which are based on human nature and
psychology.
ii. Concept of national interest in terms of power, understood only on rational
basis.
iii. Interest is not fixed and is molded by environments.
 13

iv. Universal moral principles cannot be applied to state’s actions and these must be
modified according to the circumstances of time and place.
v. Morgenthau does not find any identity between moral aspirations of a nation
and the moral law which govern the universe and asserts that political actors
pursue their national interests.
vi. Political sphere is as autonomous as the spheres of the economist, or the lawyer
or the moralist.
5) Power
i. Definition: several elements
 Absolute power and relative power
 Static power and dynamic power
 Resources and outcomes
ii. Measurement
 Characteristics (capabilities) of the state (e.g., Morgenthau’s)
 Material factors, psychological factors
 Is it really possible to presume a unitary state?
 Universal measurements of power; power related to time, place, and
issue
6) System
i. The concept of balance: Statism is the centerpiece of Realism. This involves two
claims. First, for the theorist, the state is the pre-eminent actor and all other
actors in world politics are of lesser significance. Second, state 'sovereignty'
signifies the existence of an independent political community, one which has
juridical authority over its territory. Key criticism: Statism is flawed both on
empirical (challenges to state power from 'above' and 'below') and normative
grounds (the inability of sovereign states to respond
to collective global problems such as famine, environmental degradation, and
human rights abuses).
ii. System as distribution of characteristics vs. system as interaction: Realism tries
to describe politics rationally, not on the basis of morality, but there is no
universally acceptable definition of power.
iii. Survival: The primary objective of all states is survival; this is the supreme
national interest to which all political leaders must adhere. Key criticism: Are
there no limits to what actions a state can take in the name of necessity?
iv. Is the international system a large collection of bi-state relations (dyadic
structure) or a condition of the whole?
 14

v. Anarchy and the structure of international relations: The realist conception of

the international system is an anarchical environment (no fixed rules). All states
have to rely upon their own resources to secure their interests, enforce
whatever agreements they may have entered into with other states, or maintain
a desirable domestic and international order.
vi. The principle of self-help: No other state or institution can be relied upon to
guarantee your survival. Key criticism: Self-help is not an inevitable consequence
of the absence of a world government; self-help is a logic that states have
selected. Moreover, there are historical and contemporary examples where
states have preferred collective security systems, or forms of regional security
communities, in preference to self-help.
vii. Rousseau’s stag hunt fable: Realists also think that there is a constant struggle of
power as power is the ultimate aim for all states, which is not necessarily the
case
7) Vulnerability: imbalance between strong and weak actors
i. Military (science and technology, weapons, organization, scale, leadership)
ii. Examples: the Russian border; the U.S.A. in Latin America
iii. Economic factors (food, oil, advanced technology): examples of the Great
Depression and the Middle East
iv.The hegemonic state: a source of peace and stability, or an object of fear and
envy?
8) Different Types Of Realism
i. Structural realism divides into two camps: those who argue that states are
security maximizers (defensive realism) and those who argue that states are
power maximizers (offensive realism).
ii. Neoclassical realists bring individual and unit variation back into the theory.
9) Criticism
i. Ambiguous and inconsistent with reality
ii. Wrongly assumes that all men and states seek their national interests in terms of
power
iii. Wrongly assumes that power is the most important goal that nations pursue
iv. Theory defective in so far it treats the world as static unit in which power is
permanent guiding factor.
v. Wrong to assume that national interest carries its own morality.
vi. Hardly any relationship or activity which does not involve power.
vii. Political sphere not autonomous
 15

10) Conclusion
i. Still it holds advantages; it is persuasive, supported by historical
evidences.
ii. Compelled scholars to re-evaluate their own assumptions iii.More
reliance on realist perspectives

The Classical Approaches-Idealism/Liberalism

1) Introduction
i. Liberalism (also known in American circles as idealism) is generally considered
the second great body of theory in contemporary international politics
ii. The liberal tradition in political thought goes back at least as far as the thinking
of John Locke in the late seventeenth century. From then on, liberal ideas have
profoundly shaped how we think about the relationship between government
and citizens.
2) Underlying Concepts
i. Liberalism is a theory of both government within states and good governance
between states and peoples worldwide. Unlike Realism, which regards the
'international' as an anarchic realm, Liberals seek to project values of order,
liberty, justice, and toleration into international relations.
ii. The high-water mark of liberal thinking in international relations was reached in
the inter-war period in the work of Idealists who believed that warfare was an
unnecessary and outmoded way of settling disputes between states.
iii. Domestic and international institutions are required to protect and nurture these
values. But note that these values and institutions allow for significant variations
which accounts for the fact that there are heated debates within Liberalism.
iv. Liberals disagree on fundamental issues such as the causes of war and what kind
of institutions are required to deliver liberal values in a decentralized,
multicultural international system.
v. An important cleavage within Liberalism, which has become more pronounced in
our globalized world, is between those operating with a positive conception of
Liberalism, who advocate interventionist foreign policies and stronger
international institutions, and those who incline towards a negative conception,
which places a priority on toleration and non-intervention.

3) Evolution of Liberalism
 16

i. Early liberal thought on international relations took the view that the natural
order had been corrupted by undemocratic state leaders and outdated policies
such as the balance of power. Prescriptively, Enlightenment liberals believed that
a latent cosmopolitan morality could be achieved through the exercise of reason
and through the creation of constitutional states. In addition, the unfettered
movement of people and goods could further facilitate more peaceful
international relations.
ii. Although there are important continuities between Enlightenment liberal
thought and twentieth-century ideas, such as the belief in the power of world
public opinion to tame the interests of states, liberal Idealism was more
programmatic. For idealists, the freedom of states is part of the problem of
international relations and not part of the solution. Two requirements follow
from their diagnosis. The first is the need for explicitly normative thinking: how
to promote peace and build a better world. Second, states must be part of an
international organization, and be bound by its rules and norms.
iii. Central to Idealism was the formation of an international organization to
facilitate peaceful change, disarmament, arbitration, and (where necessary)
enforcement. The League of Nations was founded in 1920 but its collective
security system failed to prevent the descent into world war in the 1930s.
iv. The victor states in the wartime alliance against Nazi Germany pushed for a new
international institution to be created: the United Nations Charter was signed in
June 1945 by 50 states in San Francisco. It represented a departure from the
League in two important respects. Membership was near universal and the great
powers were able to prevent any enforcement action from taking place which
might be contrary to their interests.
v. In the post-1945 period, liberals turned to international institutions to carry out
a number of functions the state could not perform. This was the catalyst for
integration theory in Europe and Pluralism in the United States. By the early
1970s Pluralism had mounted a significant challenge to Realism. It focused on
new actors (transnational corporations, non-governmental organizations) and
new patterns of interaction (interdependence, integration).
vi. Neo-liberalism represents a more sophisticated theoretical challenge to
contemporary Realism. Neo-liberals explain the durability of institutions despite
significant changes in context. In their view, institutions exert a causal force on
international relations, shaping state preferences and locking them into
cooperative arrangements.
vii. Democratic peace Liberalism and neo-liberalism are the dominant strands in
liberal thinking today
 17

4) Basic Principles
i. Internal order: a state's foreign policy is not determined entirely by the
international system around it, but rather by its own internal order - democratic,
communist, dictatorial, etc.
ii. Democratic governments and capitalistic economies: least aggressive states
hence democratization of currently authoritarian states
iii. Role of Non-state actors
iv. Prime objective is world peace.
v. The growth of international organizations and international law
vi. Promotion of universal human rights and conflict prevention in the United
Nations.
vii. Market liberalization through the World Trade Organization.
viii. Domestic and international reforms must be linked
ix. Absolute gains Vs relative gains: in other words, they are concerned with
achieving a measurable increase in their own power and prosperity on their own
terms, rather than more narrowly with increasing their power and prosperity
relative to other states.
x. Neo-conservatism under the late Clinton and Bush administrations owes much to
liberal idealism.
5) Strengths and Weaknesses
i. first major body of international political theory to focus explicitly on
the problem of war and peace
ii. allows for the analysis of non-state actors
iii. democratic peace theory is one of the strongest claims to truth
iv. theoretical incoherence and a Western-centric perspective
v. naive to think that world peace is achievable, and wrong to include corporations
and international organizations as important actors
vi. liberalism ignores the frequently violent foreign policies of imperial democracies
vii. limitations of concepts like "human rights," which are merely Western rather
than truly universal.
6) Important Scholars
i. Immanuel Kant (Perpetual Peace)
ii. John Locke (Two Treatises of Civil Government
iii. Hugo Grotius (On the Law of War and Peace)
iv. Emerich de Vattel (The Law of Nations).
 18

The Scientific Revolution-Behavioral Approach, System Approach

1) Traditional Approach
a. In view of the complex variables influencing behavior of states, the traditionalists
focus on the observed behavior of governments.
b. They explain observable government behavior on the basis of concepts like
balance of power, national interest, diplomacy etc. (related to realist)
c. Traditional realists try to understand and resolve the clashing interests that
inevitably lead to war (primary occupation is to have such interests that do not
clash with others)
d. They regard ir as a sub-discipline of history and political science
e. There are historical, philosophical and legal variants to the traditional approach
2) Scientific Approach
a. Scientific scholars challenged the traditionalist, arguing that IR is too broad and
complex a field to be a sub-discipline of political science.
b. They began constructing conceptual frameworks and partial models of
international systems, and tried to collect and analyze data to refute or validate
a formulated hypothesis. (Empirical evidence)
c. Such theorists focus on statistical correlations between variables like incidence
of war and alliance policies for e.g. world wars 1 and 2( the effect of alliances on
wars)
d. This approach has brought a methodological rigor to IR but it relies more on
process analysis than experimentation in order to prove its hypothesis. (a
weakness, cannot be taken to labs)
e. Even obtaining data is difficult in IR and the units of analysis vary(terrorism for
e.g. is a relative term, another weakness, no one will give the info regarding
nuclear assets for instance, no universal understanding on one issue, everyone
has their own definitions of terrorism for example) accuracy k lihaz say faiday
hain but constraints b hain
3) Behavioral Approach
a. In the 1960s and 70s, scholars began arguing that politics cannot be studied
factually without reference to values
b. Behavioral approach is informed by socio-anthropological and psychological
perspectives. It focuses on understanding the reasons behind the
action/behavior of states and other international actors. Values are connected
with politics
 19

c. This approach has contributed to understanding how people and organizations

of different cultures interact, the effects of propaganda and stereotypical views
on conflict situations and IR. (propaganda is a tool to convince others e.g. Nazi
propaganda that convinced people to kill Jews)
d. It is difficult to determine the behavior of states, which is the aggregate behavior
of a large number of individuals and of superimposing authorities.
4) Post-Behavioral Approach
a. In the 1980s, an attempt was made to combine normative and empirical
approaches to study IR. (two approaches and combines them)
b. This approach can be used to test the validity of idealist’s hypothesis for example
to see if democratic or authoritarian states are more likely to be engaged in
internal conflicts.
5) Systems Approach
a. This approach places more emphasis on the complex interaction between and
within state, while retaining a post-behavioral scientific orientation.
b. It does so by focusing on international systems which are interdependent and
interrelated.
c. These systems range from small systems to intermediate and large systems. Such
as the UN system, individual nations, ethnic groups, individual voters, political
parties, MNCs etc can all be categorized into corresponding systems to
understand the complex nature of IR

Neo-realism, Neo-liberalism

1) Introduction
a) The neo-neo debate has been the dominant focus in international relations
theory scholarship in the USA for the last 10–15 years.
b) More than just theories, neo-realism and neo-liberalism represent paradigms or
conceptual frameworks that shape individuals' images of the world and influence
research priorities and policy debates and choices.
c) There are several versions of neo-realism or neo-liberalism. Rational choice
approaches and game theory have been integrated into neo-realist and neo-
liberal theory to explain policy choices and the behaviour of states in conflict and
cooperative situations.
Neo-realist and neo-liberal theories are status quo-oriented problem-solving
theories. They share many assumptions about actors, values, issues, and power
arrangements in the international system. Neo-realists and neo-liberals study
different worlds. Neorealists study security issues and are concerned with issues
 20

of power and survival. Neo-liberals study political economy and focus on

cooperation and institutions.
2) Neo-Realism
a) Kenneth Waltz's structural realism has had a major impact on scholars in
International Relations. Waltz claims that the structure of the international
system is the key factor in shaping the behaviour of states. Waltz's neo-realism
also expands our view of power and capabilities. However, he agrees with
traditional Realists when he states that major powers still determine the nature
of the international system.
b) Structural realists minimize the importance of national attributes as
determinants of a state's foreign policy behaviour. To these neorealists, all states
are functionally similar units, experiencing the same constraints presented by
anarchy.
c) Structural realists accept many assumptions of traditional Realism. They believe
that force remains an important and effective tool of statecraft and balance of
power is still the central mechanism for order in the system.
d) Joseph Grieco represents a group of neo-realists or modern realists who are
critical of neo-liberal Institutionalists who claim states are mainly interested in
absolute gains. Grieco claims that all states are interested in both absolute and
relative gains. How gains are distributed is an important issue. Thus, there are
two barriers to international cooperation: fear of those who might not follow the
rules and the relative gains of others.
e) Scholars in security studies present two versions of neo-realism or modern
realism. Offensive neo-realists emphasize the importance of relative power. Like
traditional Realists, they believe that conflict is inevitable in the international
system and leaders must always be wary of expansionary powers. Defensive
realists are often confused with neo-liberal Institutionalists. They recognize the
costs of war and assume that it usually results from irrational forces in a society.
However, they admit that expansionary states willing to use military force make
it impossible to live in a world without weapons. Cooperation is possible, but it is
more likely to succeed in relations with friendly states.
3) Neo-liberalism
a) Neo-liberalism in the academic world refers most often to neoliberal
Institutionalism. In the policy world, neo-liberalism is identified with the
promotion of capitalism and Western democratic values and institutions.
b) Contemporary neo-liberalism has been shaped by the assumptions of
commercial, republican, sociological, and institutional Liberalism.
 21

c) Commercial and republican Liberalism provide the foundation for current neo-
liberal thinking in Western governments. These countries promote free trade
and democracy in their foreign policy programmes. Neo-liberal Institutionalism,
the other side of the neo-neo debate, is rooted in the functional integration
theoretical work of the 1950s and 1960s and the complex interdependence and
transnational studies literature of the 1970s and 1980s.
v. Neo-liberal Institutionalists see institutions as the mediator and the means to
achieve cooperation in the international system. Regimes and institutions help
govern a competitive and anarchic international system and they encourage, and
at times require, multilateralism and cooperation as a means of securing national
interests.
vi. Neo-liberal Institutionalists recognize that cooperation may be harder to achieve
in areas where leaders perceive they have no mutual interests.
vii. Neo-liberals believe that states cooperate to achieve absolute gains and the
greatest obstacle to cooperation is 'cheating' or non-compliance by other states.
4) Comparative Analysis of Neo-Liberalism and Neo-Realism
a) The neo-neo debate is not a debate between two polar opposite worldviews.
They share an epistemology, focus on similar questions, and agree on a number
of assumptions about international politics. This is an intra-paradigm debate.
b) Neo-liberal Institutionalists and neo-realists study different worlds of
international politics. Neo-realists focus on security and military issues. Neo-
liberal Institutionalists focus on political economy, environmental issues, and,
lately, human rights issues. iii.Neo-realists explain that all states must be
concerned with the absolute and relative gains that result from international
agreements and cooperative efforts. Neo-liberal Institutionalists are less
concerned about relative gains and consider that all will benefit from absolute
gains.
iv. Neo-realists are more cautious about cooperation and remind us that the world
is still a competitive place where self-interest rules.
v. Neo-liberal Institutionalists believe that states and other actors can be
persuaded to cooperate if they are convinced that all states will comply with
rules and cooperation will result in absolute gains.
vi. This debate does not discuss many important issues that challenge some of the
core assumptions of each theory. For example, neorealism cannot explain
foreign policy behaviour that challenges the norm of national interest over
human interests.
5) Globalization and Neo-Liberalism and Neo-Realism
 22

a) Globalization has contributed to a shift in political activity away from the state.
Transnational social movements have forced states to address critical
international issues and in several situations that have supported the
establishment of institutions that promote further cooperation, and
fundamentally challenge the power of states.
b) Neo-realists think that states are still the principal actors in international politics.
Globalization challenges some areas of state authority and control, but politics is
still international.
c) Neo-realists are concerned about new security challenges resulting from uneven
globalization, namely, inequality and conflict. Globalization provides
opportunities and resources for transnational social movements that challenge
the authority of states in various policy areas. Neo-realists are not supportive of
any movement that seeks to open critical security issues to public debate.
d) Free market neo-liberals believe globalization is a positive force. Eventually, all
states will benefit from the economic growth promoted by the forces of
globalization. They believe that states should not fight globalization or attempt
to control it with unwanted political interventions.
e) Some neo-liberals believe that states should intervene to promote capitalism
with a human face or a market that is more sensitive to the needs and interests
of all the people. New institutions can be created and older ones reformed to
prevent the uneven flow of capital, promote environmental sustainability, and
protect the rights of citizens. 6)Conclusion

Post-modernism, Critical Theory, Feminism, Constructivism

Alternative Approaches to International Theory

1) Theories can be distinguished according to whether they are explanatory or constitutive

and whether they are foundational or anti-foundational. As a rough guide, explanatory
theories tend to be foundational and constitutive theories tend to be anti-foundational.
2) The three main theories comprising the inter-paradigm debate were based on a set of
positivist assumptions.
3) Since the late 1980s there has been a rejection of positivism.
4) The current theoretical situation is one in which there are three main positions: first,
rationalist theories that are essentially the latest versions of the Realist and Liberal
theories; second, alternative theories that are post-positivist; and third, Social
Constructivist theories that try to bridge the gap.
 23

5) Alternative approaches at once differ considerably from one another, and at the same
time overlap in some important ways. One thing that they do share is a rejection of the
core assumptions of rationalist theories.
6) Historical sociology has a long history. Its central focus is with how societies develop the
forms that they do. It is basically a study of the interactions between states, classes,
capitalism, and war.
7) Charles Tilly looks at how the three main kinds of state forms that existed at the end of
the Middle Ages eventually converged on one form, namely the national state. He
argues that the decisive reason was the ability of the national state to fight wars.
8) Michael Mann has developed a powerful model of the sources of state power, known as
the IEMP model.
9) The concerns of historical sociology are compatible with a number of the other
approaches surveyed in this chapter including feminism and post-modernism.
10) Liberal feminism looks at the roles women play in world politics and asks why they are
marginalized.
11) Marxist/socialist feminists focus on the international capitalist system and patriarchy.
12) Standpoint feminists want to correct the male dominance of our knowledge of the
world.
13) Post-modernist feminists are concerned with gender as opposed to the position of
women as such. They look into the ways in which masculinity and femininity get
constructed.
14) Post-colonial feminists work at the intersection of gender, race, and class on a global
scale. Lyotard defines post-modernism as incredulity towards metanarratives, meaning
that it denies the possibility of foundations for establishing the truth of statements
existing outside of discourse.
15) Foucault focuses on the power–knowledge relationship and sees the two as mutually
constituted. It implies that there can be no truth outside of regimes of truth. How can
history have a truth if truth has a history?
16) Derrida argues that the world is like a text in that has to be interpreted. He looks at how
texts are constructed, and proposes two main tools to enable us to see how arbitrary
the seemingly 'natural' oppositions of language actually are. These are deconstruction
and double reading.
17) Given the state-centrism and positivism of IR, post-colonial approaches have been
largely ignored until recently as old disciplinary boundaries are breaking down.
18) Post-colonialism essentially focuses on the persistence of colonial forms of power in
contemporary world politics, especially how the social construction of racial, gendered,
and class differences uphold relations of power and subordination.
 24

19) Racism, in particular, continues to operate in both obvious and sometimes subtle ways
in contemporary world politics but this is not captured in traditional approaches to
international theory.
20) Post-colonial research seeks to offer positive resources for resistance to imperial and
other forms of power and not just critique.

Social Constructivisim

1) Constructivists are concerned with human consciousness, treat ideas as structural

factors, consider the dynamic relationship between ideas and material forces as a
consequence of how actors interpret their material reality, and are interested in how
agents produce structures and how structures produce agents.
2) Knowledge shapes how actors interpret and construct their social reality.
3) The normative structure shapes the identity and interests of actors such as states.
4) Social facts such as sovereignty and human rights exist because of human agreement,
while brute facts such as mountains are independent of such agreements.
5) Social rules are regulative, regulating already existing activities, and constitutive, making
possible and defining those very activities.
6) Social construction denaturalizes what is taken for granted, asks questions about the
origins of what is now accepted as a fact of life and considers the alternative pathways
that might have produced and can produce alternative worlds.
7) Power can be understood not only as the ability of one actor to get another actor to do
what she would not do otherwise but also as the production of identities and interests
that limit the ability of actors to control their fate.
8) Although the meanings that actors bring to their activities are shaped by the underlying
culture, meanings are not always fixed and the fixing of meaning is a central feature of
politics.
9) Although Constructivism and rational choice are generally viewed as competing
approaches, at times they can be combined to deepen our understanding of global
politics.
10) The recognition that the world is socially constructed means that Constructivists can
investigate global change and transformation.
11) A key issue in any study of global change is diffusion, captured by the concern with
institutional isomorphism and the life-cycle of norms.
12) Although diffusion sometimes occurs because of the view that the model is superior,
frequently actors adopt a model either because of external pressures or its symbolic
legitimacy.
 25

13) Institutional isomorphism and the internationalization of norms raise issues of growing
homogeneity in world politics, a deepening international community, and socialization
processes.

Gender in world politics: Feminism

1) Feminism is a movement dedicated to achieving political, social, and economic equality

for women.
2) The goal of feminist theory is to explain why women are subordinated. Feminists believe
that we cannot separate knowledge from political practice and that feminist knowledge
should help improve women's lives.
3) There are a variety of feminist theories, such as liberal, Marxist, socialist, post-modern,
and post-colonial. Each gives us different explanations for women's subordination.
4) Feminists define gender as distinct from sex. Gender is a set of socially constructed
characteristics that define what we mean by masculinity and femininity. It is possible for
women to display masculine characteristics and vice versa.
5) Gender is a system of social hierarchy in which masculine characteristics are more
valued than feminine ones.
6) Gender is a structure that signifies unequal power relationships between women and
men.
7) IR feminists use gender-sensitive lenses to help them answer questions about why
women often play subordinate roles in global politics. IR feminists build on other IR
theories, such as liberalism, critical theory, Constructivism, post-modernism, and post-
colonialism. They go beyond them by introducing gender as a category of analysis.
8) Liberal feminists believe women's equality can be achieved by removing legal obstacles
that deny women the same opportunities as men.
9) Post-liberal feminists disagree with liberal feminists. They claim that we must look more
deeply at unequal gendered structures in order to understand women's subordination.
10) Feminist critical theory examines how both ideas and material structures shape people's
lives. IR feminist critical theorists show how changes in the meaning of gender have
changed the practices of international organizations over time.
11) Feminist constructivists show us the various ways in which ideas about gender shape
and are shaped by global politics. Elisabeth Prügl shows us how these ideas shaped the
framing of international legal conventions.
12) Post-modern feminists are concerned with the link between knowledge and power.
They suggest that men have generally been seen as knowers and as subjects of
knowledge. This influences how we see global politics.
 26

13) Post-colonial feminists criticize Western feminists for basing feminist knowledge on
Western women's lives and for portraying Third World women as lacking in agency.
They suggest that women's subordination must be differentially understood in terms of
race, class, and geographical location, and that all women should be seen as agents
rather than victims.
14) Traditional stories about war portray men as protectors and women and children as
being protected. In today's wars, women and children are being killed and injured in
large numbers. This challenges the myth of protection.
15) War is associated with masculinity. Our image of a soldier is a heroic male. This image is
being challenged by an increasing number of women in militaries around the world.
There is a debate among policy-makers and in militaries, and even among some
feminists, as to whether women should fight in military combat.
16) Militarized masculinity is popular when states are preoccupied with national security
threats. This has larger consequences. Conciliatory options in policy-making tend to get
discounted. It makes it difficult for women's voices to be seen as legitimate, particularly
in matters of security policy.
17) Feminists define security broadly to include the diminution of all forms of violence,
physical, economic, and ecological. The national security of states, defined in masculine
terms that emphasize military strength, can cause a trade-off with the physical and
economic security of individuals.
18) In every society, women are disadvantaged relative to men in terms of material well-
being. We need to put on our gender lenses to explain why. This gender-sensitive
perspective helps us see how women's relative disadvantage is due to the gendered
division of labour.
19) The gendered division of labour dates back to seventeenth century Europe and the
subsequent separation of paid work in the public sphere from unpaid work in the
private sphere. The role distinction between workers in the public and private spheres
has an effect on the kind of work that women do in the public sphere.
20) Women are disproportionately clustered in low-paying jobs in garment industries and
services. Home-based workers are predominantly women also. Women do more
subsistence agriculture than men and men more often work with advanced agricultural
technologies.
21) In addition to paid work, women perform most of the reproductive and caring labour in
the private sphere. This is known as the double burden. The double burden constrains
women's choices in the public sphere. When it is not paid, household labour is invisible
in economic analyses.
 27

22) We must not overgeneralize about the negative effects of the gendered division of
labour. When women have more opportunities for waged work, this is empowering.
However, women often perform the same tasks for lower wages than men.

_______________________________________________________________________
 28

International Political Security (IPS):

Conceptualization of security in theTwenty-First century

1) Introduction
i. Security is a 'contested concept'.
ii. The meaning of security has been broadened to include political, economic,
societal, environmental, and military aspects.
iii. Differing arguments exist about the tension between national and international
security.
iv. Different views have also emerged about the significance of 9/11 for the future
of international security.
v. Debates about security have traditionally focused on the role of the state in
international relations.
2) Theorists View of Conceptualization of Security
i. Realists and Neo-realists
i. Realists and neo-realists emphasize the perennial problem of insecurity.
ii. The 'security dilemma' is seen by some writers as the essential source of
conflict between states.
iii. Trust is often difficult between states, according to realists and neo-
realists, because of the problem of cheating.
iv. Realists and neo-realists also point out the problem of 'relative gains'
whereby states compare their gains with those of other states when
making their decisions about security.
v. Neo-realists reject the significance of international institutions in helping
many to achieve peace and security.
ii. Liberal Institutionalism
i. Contemporary politicians and academics, who write under the label of
Liberal Institutionalism see institutions as an important mechanism for
achieving international security.
ii. Liberal Institution a lists accept many of the assumptions of Realism
about the continuing importance of military power in international
relations, but argue that institutions can provide a framework for
cooperation which can help to overcome the dangers of security
competition between states.
iii. Globalization
 29

i. can be seen in the fields of economic development, communications,

and culture. Global social movements are also a response to new risks
associated with the environment, poverty, and weapons of mass
destruction.
ii. The 'fracture of statehood' is giving rise to new kinds of conflict within
states rather than between states which the state system cannot deal
with. This has helped encourage an emerging politics of global
responsibility.
iii. There are disputes about whether globalization will contribute to the
weakening of the state or simply to its transformation, and over whether
a global society can be created which will usher in a new period of peace
and security.
3) Six Major Catalysts Of Change
i. New ideas about international relations
ii. Emergence of new threats and perceptions of threats
iii. Shift in the distribution of power and new international leadership
iv. New Warfare (including technological changes that bring it about)
v. Domestic political change (including regime security and not necessarily
democratization)
vi. Advocacy by international institutions
4) Changing Security Discourses
i. National Security was the security concept which is the protection of a state’s
sovereignty and territorial integrity from external military attack in the 1940s,
reason being Technological change/New warfare. Main National, Institutional
and epistemic advocates in Asia were US, SEATO, and Five Power Defence
Arrangements.
ii. In the 1960s Comprehensive Security started due to Domestic politics and
regime legitimation. Non-traditional security (NTS) is protection of a state’s
institutions and governing capacity from non-military threats. Comprehensive
security (East Asia): NS + NTS. Japan, Malaysia, Indonesia, ASEAN, ASEAN-ISIS
were main advocates.
iii. Common/Cooperative Security in 1970s/1980s due to Ideational prior,
institutions; Common Security is security with (as opposed to security against) a
potential or actual adversary realized through transparency, mutual confidence
and conflict resolution measures and mechanisms. Cooperative Security: Asia-
Pacific rendering (localization) of common security (minus human rights)
 30

iv. Human Security in 1990s-2000s whose main catalysts were Ideational prior,
institutions, domestic political change
v. Non-Traditional Security in 1990s-2000s due to New Threats and main advocates
were China, ASEAN Plus Three, and NEAT.
5) China’s new security doctrine

i. Integrated security, calling for a comprehensive partnership, with intertwined

traditional and non-traditional security threats.
ii. Common security. No country can address transnational security threats alone.
iii. Inclusive security, the third element, emphasizes the need for mutual trust, and
rejects exclusive military alliances (reference to US alliances with Japan, South
Korea and other
Asia Pacific countries) which are targeted against other countries
iv. Cooperative security, implies that security is to be achieved through
cooperation, which would involve mutually beneficial partnerships and leads to a
“win-win” situation for all involved.
v. Evolving security, it states that the understanding of security by China and other
nations is not static, or dependent on short-term calculations or single incident,
but a long-term process subject to changes that will overcome historical
animosities.
6) Concept Of Security For Asia And The World In The 21st Century
a. Looking at developments associated with new warfare and the growing
academic and policy prominence of non-traditional security concepts, Asia
seems still wedded to the idea of national security, the policy rhetoric of and
speech acts by leaders and Track-II conferences notwithstanding
b. National security remains especially dominant in Northeast Asia and Southeast
Asia,
c. While non-traditional security (although it does not necessarily conflict with
national security) appears increasingly important in Southeast Asia.
d. The rise of China, India and Japan is unlikely to change this equation, although
China, driven by domestic concerns, is striving to achieve a balanced mix
between national and nontraditional security.
e. It seems to be dealing with its North East Asian neighbours in mainly national
security terms, while adopting a primarily non-traditional security approach
towards Southeast Asians.
f. Human security, the most direct opposite of national security, remains a distant
prospect in Asia.
 31

g. War as a national security referent is not dead, but its effects would reverberate
ever more than before across national and sub-regional, even regional
boundaries.
h. In Asia today, the prevailing security paradigm consists of no single concept, but
an interplay of national, non-traditional and human security ideas and
approaches.
i. Perhaps the new security concept for Asia and the world in the 21st century is
better described as transnational security, incorporating national security events
and instruments that have wide regional and international implications non-
traditional security issues that challenge state institutions and governance
capacity, and human security concerns that are fundamentally geared towards
security, well-being and dignity for the people
7) Conclusion
a. Recent redefinitions of security have come about as the result of factors other
than the shifts in the distribution of power.
b. the emergence of concepts such as common security, comprehensive security,
and human security were slow-moving, voluntary and evolutionary constructions
featuring ideas and debates that fundamentally reflected dissatisfaction with the
orthodox notions of security
c. The 9/11 attacks spawned the “new” doctrine of homeland security, which to
many was nothing other than the return of the national security state (Homeland
security: internal security measures against terrorism)

IPS: Power. Elements of National Power

1) Introduction
a) The concept of power politics is far more useful in describing a dynamic world
in which power is a means by which the demands for change and resistance to
change are advanced. J.W. Burton
b) Political power; a psychological relation between those who exercise it and
those over whom it is exercised. It gives the former control over certain actions
of the latter through the influence which the former exerts on the latter’s mind.
c) Whatever the ultimate aim of international politics, power is always the
immediate aim.
d) Power involves control of the mind: “The political objective of war itself is not
per se the conquest of territory and the annihilation of enemy armies, but a
 32

change in the mind of the enemy which will make him yield to the will of the
victor” (p. 36)
2) Meaning of Power
e) According to Hans J. Morgenthau power is a man’s control over the minds and
actions of other men. There are Four key distinctions;
i. Power v. influence: e.g., an advisor can have influence but not power to
impose his will.
ii. Power v. force: the threat of force is inherent in politics but its use
“signifies the abdication of political power in favor of military… power”
(p. 33).
iii. Usable v. unusable power: the nuclear threat against a nuclear-armed
enemy is cancelled out by the fear of reprisal, so it’s unusable.
iv. Legitimate v. illegitimate power--whether based on laws and morals.
Legitimate power is “likely... more effective”
f) Power is a multi-faceted and complex notion, and it makes sense to think of the
term under three headings, always bearing in mind that the three are inter
related
i. Power is an attribute: something that people or groups or states possess
or have access to
ii. Power is a relationship: ability that people or groups or states have to
exercise influence on others.
iii. Property of a structure: power can only be exercised by an actor or agent
3) Domestic and International Power: Lack of generally agreed upon rules globally
lead states having to protect their rights and rectifying injuries through use of force.
4) Foundations of National Power
a. Geography; large size of a country leads to more power; territory swallows the
conqueror (Japan unable to disintegrate China in its attack in 1937); helps in
developing effective defense, typography Himalayas china india. Advancement in
science and technology.
b. Natural Resources
c. Technology; industrial, communications and military
d. Population
e. National Character and Morale; National morale is the degree of determination
with which a nation supports the home and foreign policies of its government in
times of peace or war.
f. Economic Development
 33

g. Political Structure: Balance between resources and policy formulation leading to

its execution by the government, while ensuring people’s participation, through
political institutions.
h. Ideological Element; Ideology definition
i. Leadership; “without leadership people cannot even constitute a state; without
it there can be no well-developed or integrated technology…” Palmer and
Perkins
j. Military Preparedness
k. Diplomacy: diplomacy is the brain of national power, as national morale is its
soul. Morgenthau says “it is the quality of a nation’s diplomacy which gives
‘direction and weight’ to other elements of national power.
5) Evaluation of National Power
According to hans the nations commit three types of errors in evaluating their
own power and the power of other nations, viz., the relativity of power, the
permanency of a certain factor and the fallacy of the single factor.
6) Limitations on National Power
a. The balance of power
b. Pattern of Direct opposition: one state offers direct opposition to the other
state with a view to preserve status quo.
c. Pattern of Competition: two nations compete with one another to establish
control over the third nation.
d. International Morality: All states are expected to observe universally
accepted moral code of conduct.
e. World Public Opinion
f. International Law; formation of arrangements called collective security by a
group of nations to oppose collectively.
g. Disarmament
h. International Organization

IPS: Balance of Power

1) Definitions of Balance of Power
a. The equilibrium of power among members of the family of nations as will
prevent anyone of them from becoming sufficiently strong to enforce its will
upon the others.
(Prof. Sydney Bay) Formed opinion
 34

b. The distribution of existing power between states is based on an assessment of

each state’s relative power capabilities.
2) BoP from historical perspective
a. From 1648(peace of Westphalia) to 1789 (French Revolution) was a golden age
of classical balance of power, when the princes of Europe began accepting BoP
as the supreme principle of foreign policy.
b. The Concert of Europe (from 1815 to 1870) is also a good example of major
European states striving to balance power. The increasing power of Germany
began seeing bipolar sets of alliances leading to World Wars, and followed by the
Cold War.
3) Techniques used to achieve BoP
a. Alliances (NATO-U.S.) and Counter-Alliances (WARSAW Pact(in Poland)-Soviet
Union) [In cold war]
b. Armament (arms race in the subcontinent spurred by need to maintain BoP) and
Disarmament (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)
c. Intervention (Soviets and U.S. incursion in Afghanistan in the 1980’s) and Non
Intervention (France and Britain’s’ non-interference in Spain’s civil war of 1936)

4) Different Kinds of BOP

a. Simple or Complex: Simple BoP requires parity between powers but in more
complex situations competing powers can achieve balance from additional
sources e.g. alliance.
b. General or Particular: General BoP lacks preponderant power whereas Particular
BoP can imply regional preponderance.
c. Subjective or Objective: BoP based on appearances is subjective and fragile
whereas that based on actual capabilities is objective and more stable.
d. Fortuitous or Contrived: Fortuitous Bop is not based on particular policies (on
luck or chance) whereas Contrived BoP is based on conscious policies of either or
both sides.
 35

5) Theories concerning Balance of Power( How Power is balanced)

a. Threat rather than power is balanced, so distance, interdependence, and
ideology matter.
b. External balancing through alliances but risks dependency and requires trust
(NATO,
WARSAW Pact for example)
c. Internal Balancing by building own capacities (US-Soviet arms race)
6) Degree of Polarization
a. Tightness of poles-all states in one camp or other
b. Discreteness of poles-degree of interaction between states on each side(No
contact indicates trouble)
c. Level of animosity
7) BOP and War
a. Truly unipolar system would make major war less frequent, since one state can
prevent others from arming for war. ( we can handle the nuclear
power/capacity, you can’t! they feel threatened. jahan power concentrate hoti
jati hai wo yehi chahti hai k dosron ko power na milay kiun k us ki apni power
threaten hoti hai) U.S. has become a hyper state cux it could not retain its
power)
b. War is most likely during transitions in balance. Rising power gains strength,
challenges previously superior state and, given newness of capacities, war occurs
because each side thinks it can win. (transition or flux creates uncertainty)( to
acquire more power states constantly engage in war)
8) Morton Kaplan’s Rules of BOP
a. All states act to increase capabilities but prefer to negotiate rather than fight.
b. All states fight rather than pass up an opportunity to increase their capabilities.
c. All states stop fighting rather than eliminate an essential state.(destroy a state
completely)
d. All states act to oppose any coalition or single state which tends to assume a
position of dominance within the system.
e. All states act to constrain states who subscribe to supranational (having power
or influence that transcends national boundaries) organizing principles.( who try
to impose it on others)
f. All states permit defeated or constrained states to re-enter the system as
potential partners.
 36

9) BOP in the Modern World

a. Creation of superpowers made it impossible to negotiate individual BoP.
( nuisance value of individual states had increased as both the superpowers
wanted them to be on their side)
b. Increasing disparity between states has made maintaining BoP very difficult.
c. Ideological positioning makes switching sides very difficult in the multi-polar
world. Everyone has their own ideology and they consider it superior among
others.

Foreign Policy, Determinants, Decision Making and Analysis

1)Introduction
i.No foreign policy — no matter how ingenious — has any chance of success if it is
born in the minds of a few and carried in the hearts of none. Henry A. Kissinger
ii.It is the The policy of a sovereign state in its interaction with other sovereign states
iii.“The foreign policy of a country is in a sense a projection of its internal policies,
social, political and economic.” (F. M. Muhammad Ayub Khan).
2) Stages of Foreign Policy
i. Making Foreign policy makers follow the same five steps with
which public policy gets made: Agenda setting: A problem or issue
rises to prominence on the agenda.
ii. Formulation: Possible policies are created and debated.
iii. Adoption: The government adopts one policy.
iv. Implementation: The appropriate government agency enacts the policy.
v. Evaluation: Officials and agencies judge whether the policy has been successful.
3) Tools of Foreign Policy
Diplomacy is the tool of foreign policy, and war, alliances, and international trade
may all be manifestations of it.
4) Kinds of Diplomacy
i. “Diplomacy is a game of chess in which the nations are checkmated.” (Karl Kraus)
ii. Track 1 Diplomacy: Official discussions typically involving high-level political and
military leaders and focusing on ceasefires, peace talks, and treaties and other
agreements.
 37

iii. Track 2 Diplomacy: Unofficial dialogue and problem-solving activities aimed at

building relationships and encouraging new thinking that can inform the official
process. academic, religious, and NGO leaders and other civil society actors.
iv. Track 3 Diplomacy: People-to-people diplomacy undertaken by individuals and
private groups to encourage interaction and understanding between hostile
communities and involving awareness raising and empowerment within these
communities. meetings and conferences, generating media exposure, and
political and legal advocacy for marginalized people and communities. SAFMA
v. Backchannel or Backdoor Diplomacy: Secret lines of communication held open
between two adversaries. It is often communicated through an informal
intermediary or through a third party.
vi. Multitrack diplomacy; A term for operating on several tracks simultaneously,
including official and unofficial conflict resolution efforts
5) Approaches to Foreign Policy
i. There are few kinds of approaches of foreign policy, which help in understanding
the foreign policy but they are used in different period of history.
ii. Historical or Traditional Approaches; these approaches have been adopted for
the study of diplomatic events of a particular period with accuracy, precision, so
as to learn lesson for future on the basis of past experience.
iii. Legalistic Approach This approach lays emphasis on the study of foreign policy
in legalistic terms. Efforts are made to study the external relations of the states
in the light of international law, treaties, constitutional provisions etc.
iv. Descriptive Approach The scholars adopting this approach pick up some specific
problems or conceptual framework, using their own judgement on the weighing
of various factors.
v. Analytical Approach This approach differs from all other approaches of study not
only with regards to the method but also in of international politics.
vi. Comparative Approach The comparative approach for the study of foreign
policies is of relatively recent origin and draws inspiration from the study of
comparative government.
vii. Ideological Approach This approach tries to analyze foreign policy as an
expression of the prevailing political, social or religious beliefs. Thus, the policies
are classified as democratic or authoritarian; liberal and socialistic, peace-loving
or aggressive. However, the study of foreign policy purely on ideological basis is
not possible because when there is clash between ideology and rational
interests, the former is abandoned.
 38

6) Making foreign policy; Models of decision making

i. The foreign policy process is a process of decision making
ii. States take action because people in governments, decision makers, choose
those actions
iii. Decision making is a strong process in which adjustments are made as a result of
feedback from the outside world
iv. A common starting point for studying the decision-making process is the rational
model. In this decision makers set goals, evaluate their relative importance,
calculate the costs and benefits of each possible course of action, then choose
the one with the highest benefits and lowest costs.
v. Alternative to this is organizational process model. In this, foreign policy decision
makers generally skip the labor-intensive process of identifying goals and
alternative actions, relying instead for most decisions on standardized responses
or standard operating procedures.
vi. One more alternative is government bargaining (or Bureaucratic politics) model,
in which foreign policy decisions result from the bargaining process among
various government agencies with somewhat divergent interests in the outcome.
7) Determinants of Foreign Policy
i. Size
i. Size of State’s territory as well as its population
ii. Leaders and people of countries with small territory and population do
not expect their country to carry great weight in international affairs and
vice versa
ii. Geography
i. Geography including its fertility, climate, location in relation to their land
masses , and water ways influence this
ii. A major factor in determining self-sufficiency of a country
iii. Culture and History
Generally people possessing a unified common culture and historical
experience can pursue an effective foreign policy because of the support of
all sections of society who share the same values and memories.
iv. Economic Developments
Generally, the industrially advanced countries feel more deeply involved in
relation with other countries because they have to import different kinds of
raw materials and commodities from other countries.
v. Technology
 39

i. It influences Foreign policy idirectly

ii. Countries which possess advance technology are able to provide
technical know-how to less developed and developing nations and thus
exert necessary influence on their foreign policies
vi. National Capacity
It depends on its military preparedness, its technological advancements and
economic development
vii. Social Structure
A society which is sharply divided on the basis of wealth, religion, regional
imbalances can’t pursue effective Foreign policy on account of division and
lack of co-operation among various groups.
viii. Public mood
i. It usually follows rather than guides the top leading to progress
ii. It can exercise a lot of influence on the determination of a foreign policy
if the basic realignment in the prevailing great power structure takes
place and the state becomes more involve/isolated from world’s affairs.
Political organization
i. Generally under authoritarian system, quick foreign policy decisions are
possible because the decision making power rests with an individual
assisted by his clique.
ii. Under this system undesirable opposition can be suppressed through
censorship and promulgation of regulations.
x. Role of Press
It does so by supplying factual information on the basis of which the people
take decision by publishing specialized articles on current international
developments which enable the people to understand the significance of
developments in their country in relation to the past developments and by
analyzing the policy of the government in regard to foreign affairs.
xi. Political Accountability
Generally in an open political system, the demands of citizen and group get
articulated and transmitted to foreign policy formulation
xii. Leadership
Qualities of leadership have a deep impact on the country’s foreign policy but
their role is greatly constrained by the government and social structure
Conclusion
 40

Sovereignty

1) Introduction
1. The term “Sovereignty” has been derived from the Latin word “Superanus”
which means supreme or paramount
2. Although the term “Sovereignty” is modern yet the idea of “Sovereignty” goes
back to Aristotle who spoke of the “supreme power of the state”.
3. Sovereignty is the central organizing principle of the system of states
4. A more sophisticated view of sovereignty now envisions states and nonstate
actors as engaged in a continual process of renegotiating the nature of
sovereignty.
5. Sovereignty is granted in a socio-legal context
2) Concept of Sovereignty
1. “Sovereignty is the sovereign political power vested in him whose acts are not
subject to any other and whose will cannot be over-ridden”. -Grotius
2. In political theory, sovereignty is a substantive term designating supreme
authority over some polity.
3. Confusion regarding the concept due to these factors
i. Sovereignty is in fact a relatively recent innovation connected to the
emergence of the nation-state as the primary unit of political
organization.
ii. A number of contemporary issues have placed increasing limits on the
exercise of sovereign authority.
4. It means the possession of absolute authority within a bounded territorial
space.
i. Internal dimension: a sovereign government is a fixed authority with a
settled population that possesses a monopoly on the use of force
ii. External dimension: sovereignty is the entry ticket into the society of
states. Recognition on the part of other states, participating in diplomacy
and international organizations on an equal footing
3) Prerequisites for a political community to be sovereign
i. Territory
ii. Population
iii. Effective Rule Over That Territory And Population
iv. Recognition Of Other Nation-States
 41

4) Characteristics or Attributes of Sovereignty (Acc to Dr, Garner)

i. Permanence;
ii. Exclusiveness; There cannot exist another sovereign state within the existing
sovereign state.
iii. All-Comprehensiveness; the sovereign power is universally applicable
iv. Inalienability; “Sovereignty can no more be alienated than a tree can alienate its
right to sprout or a man can transfer his life or personality to another without
self-destruction”.
v. Unity.
vi. Imprescriptibility; if the sovereign does not exercise his sovereignty for a certain
period of time, it does not lead to the destruction of sovereignty
VII.Indivisibility.
vii. Absoluteness or illimitability.
viii. Originality; the sovereign wields power by virtue of his own right and not by
virtue of anybody’s mercy.
5) Concept of Sovereignty under Nation-State
i. It evolved in the 16th century in France during the conflict between the state
and the church.
ii. Many theorists have defined sovereignty. Hobbes focused on its absolutist
aspect, while Austin focused on legalistic or juristic notions of sovereignty.
iii. The modern doctrine of popular sovereignty has transferred the source of
absolute power from the monarch to the people.
iv. The notion of sovereignty is important but it can become rigid unless applied to
the evolving pattern of inter-state relations.
v. Most notably, it appears in Article 2, Principle #7 of the United Nations Charter:
"Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to
intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any
state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under
the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of
enforcement measures under Chapter Vll."
6) Historical Development
I. The development of a system of sovereign states culminated in Europe at the
Peace of Westphalia in 1648. This agreement allowed the ruler to determine the
religion within his borders.
II. As Europe colonized much of the rest of the world from the fifteenth through
the nineteenth centuries, the state system spread around the globe. sovereign
 42

authority was clearly not extended to non-Europeans, the process of drawing

boundaries to clearly demarcate borders would be critical for defining sovereign
states during decolonization.
III. The second movement appears to be the gradual circumscription of the
sovereign state, which began after World War II. Much of international law was
designed to reinforce sovereignty.
IV. The post-war period also saw the growth of intergovernmental organizations to
help govern interstate relations in areas ranging from trade and monetary policy
to security.
V. Granting former colonies independence and recognizing them as sovereign
states, they joined intergovernmental organizations and were ostensibly the
equals of European states.
VI. Now, sovereignty also entitles developing states to development assistance.
VII. As a result, in many instances, these post-colonial states have lacked the
internal dimension of sovereignty.
7) Contemporary Challenges
I. The Rise Of Human Rights; The emergence of human rights as a subject of
concern in international law effects sovereignty because these agreed upon
principles place clear limits on the authority of governments to act within their
borders.
II. Economic Globalization; The growth of multinational corporations and the free
flow of capital have placed constraints on states' ability to direct economic
development and fashion social and economic policy.
III. The Growth Of Supranational Institutions being partially driven by economic
integration and the cause of human rights; supranational organizations have
emerged as a significant source of authority that, at least to some degree, place
limits on state sovereignty.
IV. Transnational Terrorism: recent US action in Middle East suggests that
sovereignty will be further constrained in the fight against transnational
terrorism. 8)Conclusion

National Interest

1. Origins Of National Interest

a. The word ‘interest’ is derived from Latin and means ‘it concerns, or it makes a
difference to’
b. In 1930 Charles Bears wrote the first book on national interest.
 43

c. In IR, national interest describes the underlying rationale for the behavior of
states in a threatening global environment, which preserves and protects one’s
values against another.
d. Statesmen who are responsible for and to their separate publics, and who
operate in an uncertain milieu, often have little choice but to put the interest of
their own entity above those of others.
e. National interest is understood to mean a state of affairs valued solely for its
benefit to the nation.
f. National interest often becomes synonymous with national egoism, with its
disposition of transferring self love onto the national group. (army esp in wars)
g. One cannot speak about national interest without reference to values, even if
they are a culmination of those held by some or all members of a given society.
2. What does national interest include?
a. Scholars define national interest in various ways. Some put self-preservation
(territorial integrity, political independence and fundamental government
institutions) at the head of the list.
b. Other categories of national interest focus on self-sufficiency, prestige and
aggrandizement.( a sense missions, expand centers’ of influence)
c. Charles Bear focused on the notion of territory and commerce as being the
defining features of national interest.
d. Morgenthau says that a country’s national interests should be proportionate to
its capacities. (e.g. Britain and France after WWII had superpower ambitions, not
commiserate to their capacities) the sun never sets on the british raj.
3. Criteria for defining National Interest
a. Ideological Criteria: If one country’s ideology is liberal-democratic, it will make
policies supporting democratic governments and movements and oppose
totalitarian ones.
b. Moral and legal Criteria: The imperative to act honestly and make decisions in
accordance with international laws.
c. Pragmatic Criteria: Unemotional, calculated decisions to deal with ground
realities.
d. Bureaucratic Criteria: Each organization tends to exaggerate its specific funding
request, and to argue in the name of national interest rather than its own
interest.
e. Partisan Criteria: To equate the success of one’s own political party with an
entire nation’s success.
 44

f. Racial Criteria: National Interest defined in terms of an ethnic or racial minority

or majority.
g. Class-status Criteria: A particular class will defend its interests while defining
national interest.
h. Foreign dependency Criteria: Protector states define policy obligations of their
dependencies.
4. Variations in National Interest
a. Primary Interests: Preservation of physical, political and cultural identity of the
nation state.
b. Secondary Interests: Protection of citizens abroad and ensuring diplomatic
immunity of foreign missions.
c. Permanent Interests: Long-term interests of strategic, ideologoical or economic
nature which do not change easily, for example with changes in domestic
policies.
d. Variable Interests: Short term interests vary with cross-currents of personalities,
public opinion, partisan politics, sectional interests etc
e. Complementary Interests: Though not identical, these interests can serve as
basis for agreement on specific issues e.e us pak security cooperation
f. Conflicting interests: Interests which bring countries at odds with each other,
Yet these interests can also undergo change due to varying internal
circumstances and a changing external scenario.
g. General Interests: Involve a large number of nations, such as economic interests
or diplomatic norms
h. Specific interests : Location and issue specific interests emerging from more
general interests(e.g. bilateral terms of trade)
i. Identical Interests: Interests held in common by different states(e.g. climate
protection concerns)
5. The means to promote National Interest
j. Coercive means: Indirect so they don’t infringe directly on other sovereign
nations (e.g. embargos, boycotts, severing diplomatic relations) or Direct (e.g.
seizure of property of offending state, suspension of treaties), and if the other
state responds with escalating moves, It leads to an outbreak of war
k. Alliances: based on complementary or identical interests and strengthened by
ideology, alliances can promote national interest.
 45

l. Diplomatic Negotiations: Common interests are most effectively perpetuated by

means of diplomacy. Also useful in negotiating conflicting national interests
without resorting to coercive means.
m. Economic Aid: can only be used by affluent and developed states
n. Propaganda: ‘It is a systematic attempt to affect the minds, emotions and
actions of a given group for a specific public purpose’
o. Collective Security: The system of collective security, which operates on the
principle that international peace and security is the common objective to be
secured by all the states through collective action against any violation of
internal peace and security, also restricts the national power.
National Interest and Foreign Policy
a. Defense of the state is naturally the primary concern of foreign policy.
b. Promotion of economic interest, including securing favorable conditions of trade,
is a vital objective of foreign policy-makers.
c. Maintenance of international peace, respect for international law, pacific
settlement of international disputes and strengthening of the system of
international organization.
d. There are some world leaders who believe that their foreign policy must be
committed to a certain ideology, such as propagation of Fascism or communism
or the containment of communism. But, realist statesmen emphasize only the
national interest. Consequently, the role of ideology has lately declined.

7. National vs. Global Interests

a. Given the complexities of International politics, Morgenthau for example
opposes state action based on universal principles. Instead he advocates a
pragmatic approach of acting based on national interests. Yet, issues of global
concern like growing inequalities and environmental problems require world
leaders to think beyond the narrow ambit of national interests.
_________________________________________________________________________
4.Strategic Approach to International Relation: War

1. The Changing Character Of War

i. War has been a central feature of human history. Since the end of the cold war
both the frequency and lethality of war has shown a sharp decline.
ii. War between the great powers in particular has become much more unlikely
than in previous eras. Changes in the international system may be changing the
character of war.
 46

iii. War in the contemporary era is not always easy to define. War is a brutal form of
politics.
iv. Contemporary warfare is being influenced by globalization.
v. War requires highly organized societies. War can be a powerful catalyst for
change.
vi. The nature of war remains constant, but its form reflects the particular era and
environment in which it occurs. Dramatic technological advances mean that a
revolution in military affairs may be underway. Few states currently possess such
technology.
vii. The 'information age' is increasingly reflected in 'information warfare'.
Opponents with little or no access to RMA technology are likely to use
'asymmetric warfare' to fight the war on their own terms.
viii. Most recent conflicts have been characterized by the kind of ferocity that was
typical of 'modern' war, but overall casualty levels have been much lower. The
post-modern age has seen warfare take numerous, varied forms.
2. Types of War
Although all wars are violent, not all wars are the same. In fact, there are many different
types of wars, which can be classified according to which people actually fight, the
intensity of the conflict, and the extent of combatants’ use of violence, among other
factors.
a) Total war
i. A total war is a war in which combatants use every resource available to destroy
the social fabric of the enemy.
ii. Total wars are highly destructive and are characterized by mass civilian casualties
because winning a total war often requires combatants to break the people’s will
to continue fighting.
iii. World Wars I and II were total wars, marked by the complete destruction of the
civilian economy and society in many countries, including France, Germany, the
Soviet Union, Italy, Great Britain, and Japan.
b) Limited war
i. A limited war is a war fought primarily between professional armies to achieve
specific political objectives without causing widespread destruction.
ii. Although the total of civilian casualties may be high, combatants do not seek to
completely destroy the enemy’s social and economic frameworks.
iii. The Persian Gulf War of 1990–1991 was a limited war in which the United States
and its allies forcibly removed Iraqi troops from Kuwait.
 47

c) Guerrilla war
i. A guerrilla war is a war in which one or both combatants use small, lightly armed
militia units rather than professional, organized armies.
ii. Guerrilla fighters usually seek to topple their government, often enjoying the
support of the people.
iii. These wars are often very long but also tend to be successful for the insurgents
as evidenced by Mao Zedong’s victory over Chiang Kai-shek in China in the
1940s, the Vietcong’s victory over the United States in the Vietnam War, and the
Mujahideen’s victory over the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

d) Civil war
i. A civil war is a war fought within a single country between or among different
groups of citizens who want to control the government and do not recognize
another group’s right to rule.
ii. Civil wars are almost always total wars because each side feels compelled to
destroy the enemy’s political support base.
iii. Regional rifts, such as the American Civil War between the North and the South,
characterize some civil wars, whereas other civil wars have been fought among
ethnic rivals, religious rivals, and rival clans. Revolutions can spark civil wars as
well.
e) Proxy war
i. A proxy war is a war fought by third parties rather than by the enemy states
themselves. Many of the militarized conflicts during the Cold War, such as the
Korean War and the Vietnam.
ii. War, can be interpreted as proxy wars between the United States and the Soviet
Union, neither of which wanted to fight each other directly.
f) Categorizing Wars
i. A war can often be a limited war, a guerrilla war, and a civil war all at the same
time.
ii. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 is a great example. The United States
sent trainers, money, and weapons to Afghan rebels to fight against the
invaders, making it a low-intensity, limited conflict from the U.S. point of view.
iii. The Afghan resistance mostly relied on guerrilla tactics. And the war split
Afghanistan, so it was also a civil war.
g) Intervention
i. Intervention is a fairly common way for a third-party state to get involved in a
civil war or a war between two or more other states.
 48

ii. A state intervenes when it sends troops, arms, money, or goods to help another
state that is already at war.
iii. During the Cold War, the term intervention was used to describe one of the
superpowers becoming involved in a smaller country’s war (often a developing
country).
iv. But states sometimes intervene in order to bring peace. This type of
intervention occurs when a country (or countries) sends military forces into
another state to act as peacekeepers or to block other forces from attacking.
Sometimes these interventions are organized or conducted by the United
Nations or another international governmental organization.
v. Example: The United States, along with other NATO nations, sent troops into
the former Yugoslavia on a number of occasions to protect people from war. A
successful example of this peaceful intervention occurred during the 1999 U.S.
bombing campaign in Kosovo, which helped stop a slaughter of Kosovars by
attacking Serbs.
h) 'Virtual war', with few casualties, is an attractive option, but is extremely difficult and
probably impossible to achieve in practice.
i) 'New wars', following state collapse, are often conflicts over identity as much as
territory. The new wars in fact follow a pattern of warfare that has been typical since
the late 1950s. Such conflicts typically occur in countries where development is lacking
and there is significant economic insecurity
j) Asymmetric War
i. Asymmetric warfare can describe a conflict in which the resources of two
belligerents differ in essence and in the struggle, interact and attempt to exploit
each other's characteristic weaknesses.
ii. Such struggles often involve strategies and tactics of unconventional warfare, the
weaker combatants attempting to use strategy to offset deficiencies in quantity or
quality. Such strategies may not necessarily be militarized.
iii. The 9/11 terrorist attacks and the war in Afghanistan are among the best-known
recent examples of asymmetric warfare: conflicts between nations or groups that
have disparate military capabilities and strategies.
3. Causation of War
i. opposing interests and capabilities (specific sociocultural
differences and similarities between the parties),
ii. contact and salience (awareness)
iii. significant change in the balance of powers
iv. individual perceptions and expectations
 49

v. disrupted structure of expectations

vi. a will-to-conflict.
vii. It is aggravated by; sociocultural dissimilarity, cognitive imbalance, status
difference, coercive state power.
viii. It is inhibited by; sociocultural similarity, decentralized or weak, coercive state
power.

Strategic Culture, Determinants of Pakistani Strategic Culture.

1) Introduction
a. ‘Strategic culture can be defined as a set of beliefs, attitudes and norms towards
the use of military force’, often moulded according to historical experience
b. It serves as a screen through which the policymakers observe the dynamics of
the external security environment, interpret the available in formation and
decide about the policy options in a given situation.
c. Determine the role and efficacy of military force in interstate political affairs
d. Strategic culture is a useful concept for explaining the profile and behavior of the
security policymakers of a state.
e. It conditions their worldview, interpretation of political and military
developments, perception of the adversary, and selection of policy options.
2) Influencing factors for Pakistan’s Security Managers
a. historical experiences, especially in the early years of independence
b. their perception of the regional security environment and
c. Pakistan’s security handicaps, and their threat perceptions.
3) Features of Pakistan’s Strategic Culture
a. An acute insecurity developed in the early years of independence due to
troubled relations with India and problems with Afghanistan.
b. A strong distrust of India and a history of acrimonious Indo-Pakistani relations
reinforced by the historical narratives of the pre-independence period and the
troubled bilateral interaction in the post-independence period.
c. Aversion to an India-dominated regional power arrangement for South Asia.
d. An active search for security to maintain its independence in deciding about
foreign policy options and domestic policies.
e. A close nexus between Islam and strategic thinking, leading to connections
between Islamic militancy and foreign policy.
 50

4) Determinants of Pakistan’s Strategic Culture

a. an advocacy of a pluralist power arrangement for South Asia
b. greater attention to external security
c. acquisition of military capacity to raise the cost of war for the adversary
d. liberal allocation of resources to defense
e. weapons procurement from abroad
f. the use of diplomacy and alliance-building with other states, especially with the
United
States, for strengthening its position in the region
g. the acquisition of an overt nuclear status in response to India’s nuclear
explosions
h. the use of Islamic militancy to pursue foreign policy goals.
5) Role of Other Factors in the formulation of Strategic Culture
a. Realism, Professionalism and organizational imperatives
b. As a professional and disciplined institution, the Pakistani military cannot be
oblivious to realities on the ground.
c. Realism and organizational imperatives have influenced their outlook and
decisions on many occasions.
d. At times, the dictates of different approaches conflict with each other and the
policymakers may be unwilling or unable to make a clear-cut choice. This is the
case with the approach of Pakistan’s security managers towards the militant
Islamic groups in the post-9/11 period.

6) Significance of Strategic Culture

a. The strategic culture approach helps us understand the historical and
psychological dynamics of decisionmaking.
b. It highlights the impact of ideological and other societal variables on
policymaking
c. It offers a better understanding of the socio-cultural and political context within
which the policymakers function.
d. Any study of a state’s strategic profile and the possible reaction to security
pressures requires, inter alia, a good appreciation of the strategic culture of the
country concerned.
e. This facilitates communication between the security policymakers and the
outside actors, i.e., individuals, states, and organizations, on security-related
issues and helps to identify ways and means to change their policy outputs.
 51

f. This is quite important for promoting arms control in conventional and

nonconventional fields.

Global Strategic Environment

Area: Global Strategic Environment

1. Deterrence
2. Nuclear Weapon States- Programs and Postures
3. Indian-Pakistan Nuclear Doctrines
4. Arms Control /Disarmament 5.Weapons of Mass Destruction:
6. Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
7. Nuclear Non –Proliferation Regime: International Atomic Energy Agency, Nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty; Nuclear Supplier Group; Partial Test Ban Treaty; Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty; Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty
8. Challenges of Non-Proliferation, Cooperation for Nuclear Energy
9. The Missile Defence Systems and their impact on global strategic environment
10. Militarization and Weaponization of Space.

Deterrence: Theory and Practice with Special reference Nuclear India and Pakistan

Defining Deterrence

• “Deterrence is an attempt by P to prevent I from undertaking a course of action (attack)

that P regards as undesirable, by threatening to inflict unacceptable costs upon I in the
event that the action is taken.” Phil Williams
• Alexander George, “An effort byactor P to persuade actor I not to take action of some
kind against his interests by the convincing the actor I that the costs and risks of doing
so will outweigh what he hopes to gain thereby”.
• Simply “dissuasion by means of threat”.
• The term deterrence with French roots means “to frighten from”.
 “If One wants peace prepare for war”. Romans
The most developed form of the deterrence coincides with the advent of Nuclear era in IR. 
It is threat of punishment which is the defining characteristic of deterrence.

Deterrence in Nuclear Era

1. The idea was articulated by Bernard Brodie in 1946;

 52

2. “The chief purpose of our military establishment has been to win wars, from now on its
purposewould be to avert them”.
3. Riffat Hussain points out three general effects of Nuclear weapons on state-to-state
relations.
4. First, nuclear weapons provide the nuclear State with an “infrangible guarantee of its
independence and physical integrity”. Deterrence in Nuclear Era
5. Second, mutual deterrence among enemy nuclear States places limits on violence and in
turn acts as a brake on total war.
6. Third, by altering the „offence-defence‟ balance in favour of defence, nuclear weapons
have made it possible for weaker States to defend themselves effectively against larger
power countries.

Components of Deterrence

1. Capability
2. The intention to employ it
3. The ability to communicate both capability and resolve.
4. Deterrence Effect?
5. Deterrence Effect =Estimated Capability x Estimated Intent
Steps in Deterrence

1. Evaluate interests at the stake (e.g. Pak India)

2. Convey commitment to defend those interests
3. Back commitments by threats to respond if the opponent acts.
4. Make such threats appear credible and sufficient in the eyes of the opponent.
How is it different from defence?

1. Defence - is the ability to defend oneself against an act of aggression

2. Deterrence is the ability to persuade the adversary from committing an act of
aggression.
3. Defence starts when deterrence fails.
4. Deterrence is based on the threat of retaliation with force to inflict unacceptable
damage.
Assumptions of Deterrence Theory

1. Decisions by both defender and the challenger will be based on rational calculations of
costs and gains.
2. A high level of threat such as use of Nukes prevent the aggressive behaviour.
3. Both defender and offender place their security at the top.
4. Both have strong communication.
 53

5. Both Sides maintain tight or centralized decision making.

Nuclear Deterrence in Indo-Pak case …
1. India - Pak jealously protect their strategic autonomy and nuclear weapons capability.
2. India and Pakistan rejected UN Resolution 1172 which urges India and Pakistan, to
become party to NPT and CTBT.
3. India and Pakistan share the long-standing well developed theory of deterrence that
emerged from the Cold War.
4. However, the cost-benefit calculus that supports deterrence may be clouded by the
introduction of a new kind of weapon — missile defence systems.

Negative View;
1. Indian and Pakistani nuclearization has not deterred limited conventional war 1999
Kargil, and 2001-2002 stand off….
2. Possibility of Indian surgical strikes inside Pakistan in the aftermath of the Mumbai &
Uri attacks.
Positive View;
India and Pakistan had agreed to some confidence-building and nuclear risk-reduction
measures, e.g. non-attack on each other’s nuclear installations & Missile Test/military
exercise notifications.

NUCLEAR PROGRAM OF PAKISTAN

a. Pakistan’s nuclear program has been under the scope of the international community for a
very long time. International overblown concerns that Pakistani nuclear weapons or
components might fall into the wrong hands. It is true that Pakistan acquired a lot of its
nuclear capabilities through a clandestine program by importing crucial technologies from
the Western World, but it is equally true that the all the other nuclear powers have
acquired their capabilities through their own clandestine programs.
b. Pakistan has effectively dismantled the Abdul Qadeer Khan Network and has enhanced
security mechanisms inside their nuclear facility. Islamabad has taken a number of steps to
improve its nuclear security and to prevent further proliferation of nuclear- related
technologies and materials. A number of important initiatives, such as strengthened export
control laws, improved personnel security, and international nuclear security cooperation
programs have improved Pakistan’s security situation in recent years. Thus, it is safe to
conclude that international concerns regarding Pakistan’s nuclear program are overblown
and Pakistan’s nuclear program is very safe.
 54

c. In the mid-1970s Pakistan embarked upon the uranium enrichment route to acquire a
nuclear weapons capability. Pakistan conducted nuclear tests in May 1998, shortly after
India's nuclear tests, declaring itself a nuclear weapon state. Pakistan currently possesses a
growing nuclear arsenal.
d. Capabilities: Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris characterize Pakistan as having, "the
world's fastest-growing nuclear stockpile." According to the SIPRI 2014 Yearbook, Pakistan
possesses between 100 and 120 nuclear weapons. However, the International Panel on
Fissile Materials concluded in 2013 that Pakistan possesses fissile material sufficient for over
200 weapons. Islamabad has stockpiled approximately 3.0 ± 1.2 tons of highly enriched
uranium (HEU), and produces enough HEU for perhaps 10 to 15 warheads per year. Pakistan
currently has a stockpile of 150 ± 50 kg ofweapons-grade plutonium, with the ability to
produce approximately 12 to 24 kg per year. Plutonium stocks are expected to continue to
increase as Pakistan brings more production reactors online at its Khushab facility. The Khan
Research Laboratories greatly increased its HEU production capacity by employing more
efficient P-3 and P-4 gas centrifuges.
e. History
i. Establishing a Nuclear Program: 1956 to 1974: Pakistan asserts the origin of its nuclear
weapons program lies in its adversarial relationship withIndia; the two countries have
engaged in several conflicts, centered mainly on the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Initial
steps toward the development of Pakistan's nuclear program date to the late 1950s,
including with the establishment of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) in
1956. President Z.A. Bhutto forcefully advocated the nuclear option and famously said in
1965 that "if India builds the bomb, we will eat grass or leaves, even go hungry, but we
will get one of our own." After the December 1971 defeat in the conflict with India,
Bhutto issued a directive instructing the country's nuclear establishment to build a
nuclear device within three years. India's detonation of a nuclear device in May 1974
further pushed Islamabad to accelerate its nuclear weapons program, although the
PAEC had already constituted a group in March of that year to manufacture a nuclear
weapon.
ii. A.Q. Khan's Contribution: 1975 to 1998: The Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission,
headed by Munir Ahmad Khan, focused on the plutonium route to nuclear weapons
development using material from the safeguarded Karachi Nuclear Power Plant
(KANUPP), but its progress was inefficient due to the constraints imposed by the nuclear
export controls applied in the wake of India's nuclear test. Around 1975 A.Q. Khan, a
metallurgist working at a subsidiary of the URENCO enrichment corporation in the
Netherlands, returned to Pakistan to help his country develop a uranium enrichment
program. Having brought centrifuge designs and business contacts back with him to
Pakistan, Khan used various tactics, such as buying individual components rather than
 55

complete units, to evade export controls and acquire the necessary equipment. By the
early 1980s, Pakistan had a clandestine uranium enrichment facility, and A.Q. Khan
would later assert that the country had acquired the capability to assemble a first-
generation nuclear device as early as 1984. Pakistan also received assistance from
states, especially China. Beginning in the late 1970s Beijing provided Islamabad with
various levels of nuclear and missile-related assistance, including centrifuge equipment,
warhead designs, HEU, components of various missile systems, and technical expertise.
Eventually, from the 1980s onwards, the Khan network diversified its activities and
illicitly transferred nuclear technology and expertise to Iran, North Korea, and Libya.
The Khan network was officially dismantled in 2004, although questions still remain
concerning the extent of the Pakistani political and military establishment's involvement
in the network's activities.
f. Pakistan as a Declared Nuclear Power: 1998 to the Present
i. On 11 and 13 May 1998, India conducted a total of five nuclear explosions, which
Pakistan felt pressured to respond to in kind. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif decided to
test, and Pakistan detonated five explosions on 28 May and a sixth on 30 May 1998. In a
post-test announcement Sharif stressed that the test was a necessary response to India,
and that Pakistan's nuclear weapons were only "in the interest of national self-defense…
to deter aggression, whether nuclear or conventional."
ii. With these tests Pakistan abandoned its nuclear ambiguity, stating that it would
maintain a "credible minimum deterrent" against India. In 1998, Pakistan commissioned
its first plutonium production reactor at Khushab, which is capable of yielding
approximately 11 kg of weapons-grade plutonium annually. Based on analysis of the
cooling system of the heavy water reactors at Khushab, Tamara Patton, of the Vienna
Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, estimates the thermal capacity and thus
the plutonium production capacity of Khushab-2 and Khushab-3 to be ~15 kg and ~19 kg
per annum respectively.
iii. Construction of a fourth plutonium production reactor at Khushab is ongoing and is
estimated to be more than 50% complete based on satellite imagery analysis. Patton
estimates that "if Khushab-4 has at least an equivalent thermal capacity as Khushab-3,
the entire complex could be capable of producing 64 kg of plutonium per year or
enough fissile material for anywhere from 8–21 new warheads per year depending on
their design." Associated facilities and their associated security perimeters are also
being expanded, including the plutonium separation facilities at New Labs, Pakistan
Institute of Science and Technology, to reprocess spent fuel from the new reactors at
Khushab.
iv. Islamabad has yet to formally declare a nuclear doctrine, so it remains unclear under
what conditions Pakistan might use nuclear weapons. ] In 2002 then- President Pervez
 56

Musharraf stated that, "nuclear weapons are aimed solely at India," and would only be
used if "the very existence of Pakistan as a state" was at stake. General Khalid Kidwai
further elaborated that this could include Indian conquest of Pakistan's territory or
military, "economic strangling," or "domestic destabilization."
v. Because of India's conventional military superiority, Pakistan maintains the ability to
quickly escalate to the use of nuclear weapons in case of a conventional Indian military
attack.

g. Disarmament and Nonproliferation Policies

i. Pakistan is not a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
(NPT), and is the sole country blocking the negotiations of the Fissile Material Cut-Off
Treaty (FMCT). Pakistanis argue that in the face of India's increasing conventional
capability, it is unreasonable to expect Pakistan to cap its fissile materials production.
Furthermore, they argue that the FMCT legitimizes India's fissile material stocks. At the
Conference on Disarmament (CD) in January 2011, Pakistan reiterated its opposition to
the commencement of negotiations towards an FMCT.
ii. While declaring its opposition to the FMCT in its current format at the CD in January
2010, Islamabad called for the CD's agenda to be enlarged to consider aspects of
regional conventional arms control and a regime on missile-related issues, while also
maintaining its opposition to a treaty that did not cover fissile stocks retroactively.
iii. In general, Pakistan's position on nuclear disarmament is that it will only give up nuclear
weapons if India gives up its own nuclear arsenal, and in 2011 the National Command
Authority "reiterated Pakistan's desire to constructively contribute to the realization of a
world free of nuclear weapons."
iv. However, given Islamabad's objective of balancing India's conventional military and
nuclear superiority, Pakistan is unlikely to consent to a denuclearization agreement.
Islamabad has also consistently refused to sign the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban
Treaty (CTBT), and from 2009 to 2010 official Pakistani statements indicated that even if
India signed the treaty, Islamabad would not necessarily follow suit.
v. Pakistan is a member of some multilateral programs, including the Global Initiative to
Combat Nuclear Terrorism. Islamabad has also put into place more stringent export
control mechanisms, including the 2004 Export Control Act and the establishment of the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs' Strategic Export Control Division (SECDIV) to regulate exports
of nuclear, biological, and missile-related products.
vi. The Export Control (Licensing and Enforcement) Rules were published in 2009, and in
July 2011 Islamabad issued an updated control list including nuclear and missile-related
dual-use goods to bring its restrictions in line with those of the Nuclear Suppliers Group
(NSG), the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), and the Australia Group (AG).
 57

Pakistan acceded to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material

(CPPNM) in 2000. Additionally, Pakistan has been involved in the U.S. government's
Secure Freight Initiative through the stationing of systems at Port Qasim to scan
containers for nuclear and radiological materials.
vii. Nuclear Weapons Security
viii. The security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons has been of significant concern to the
international community in recent years, with increased terrorist and insurgent violence
and expanded geographical areas of the country under Taliban control. Senior Al Qaeda
leaders have also expressed an interest in coopting Pakistan's nuclear weapons. Such
developments increase the likelihood of scenarios in which Pakistan's nuclear security is
put at risk. Since 2007, Taliban-linked groups have successfully attacked tightly guarded
government and military targets in the country. Militants carried out small-scale attacks
outside the Minhas (Kamra) Air Force Base in 2007, 2008, and 2009, and gained access
to the site during a two-hour gunfight in August 2012.
ix. Pakistani officials have repeatedly denied claims that the base, which houses the
Pakistan Aeronautical Complex, is also used to store nuclear weapons, and a retired
army official asserted that Pakistan's nuclear weapons are stored separately from
known military bases. However, several Pakistani nuclear facilities, including the
Khushab facility and the Gadwal uranium enrichment plant, are in proximity to areas
under attack from the Taliban. Additionally, there have been some attempts to kidnap
officials and technicians working at nuclear sites in western Pakistan, although it is not
clear who was responsible or what their intentions were.
x. Nevertheless, Islamabad has consistently asserted that it has control over its nuclear
weapons, and that it is impossible for groups such as the Taliban or proliferation
networks to gain access to the country's nuclear facilities or weapons. After 11
September 2001 and the exposure of the A.Q. Khan network, Pakistan has taken
measures to strengthen the security of its nuclear weapons and installations and to
improve its nuclear command and control system.
xi. The National Command Authority (NCA), composed of key civilian and military leaders,
is the main supervisory and policy-making body controlling Pakistan's nuclear weapons,
and maintains ultimate authority on their use. In November 2009, Pakistani ex-
President Asif Ali Zardari announced that he was transferring his role as head of the
National Command Authority to the ex -Prime Minister, Yusuf Gilani. The Strategic Plans
Division (SPD) is the secretariat of the NCA, and is responsible for operationalizing
nuclear doctrine and strategy, managing nuclear safety and security, and implementing
the command and control system.
xii. Pakistan has also strengthened its personnel reliability program (PRP) to prevent
radicalized individuals from infiltrating the nuclear program, although various experts
believe that potential gaps still exist. Pakistani analysts and officials state that they have
 58

developed their own version of "permissive action links" or PALs to safeguard their
warheads, and have not relied on U.S. assistance for this technology. Satellite imagery
also shows increased security features around Khushab-4. In recent years, the United
States has provided various levels of assistance to Pakistan to strengthen the security of
its nuclear program.
xiii. According to reports in April 2009, with the expansion of Taliban control in western
Pakistan, Islamabad shared some highly classified information about its nuclear program
with Western countries in order to reassure them of the country's nuclear security. At
the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague in 2014, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif
announced that Pakistan is considering ratification of the 2005 Amendment to the
Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM).
h. Civilian Nuclear Cooperation
i. Pakistan has been critical of the U.S.-India nuclear cooperation agreement, but at the
same time has periodically sought a similar arrangement for itself, a demand
Washington has so far turned down. In 2008 Islamabad pushed for a criteria-based
exemption to the rules of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which unlike the country-
based exception benefiting only India could have made Pakistan eligible for nuclear
cooperation with NSG members. Despite its reservations about the India special
exception, Islamabad joined other members of the Board of Governors in approving
India's safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in
August 2008.
ii. At the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington in April 2010, Islamabad again sought
"non-discriminatory access" to civilian nuclear technology, while also offering nuclear
fuel cycle services covered by IAEA safeguards to the international community. At the
Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague in 2014, Pakistan called for its inclusion in
international export control regimes.
i. Recent Development and Current Status
1) In response to the U.S.-India deal, Pakistan has sought to increase its civilian nuclear
cooperation with China. Under a previous cooperation framework China had supplied
Pakistan with two pressurized water reactors, CHASNUPP-1 and CHASNUPP-2, which
entered into commercial operation in 2000 and 2011 respectively. In April 2010, reports
confirmed long-standing rumors that the China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC)
had agreed to supply two additional 650-MW power reactors to Pakistan, CHASNUPP-3
and CHASNUPP-4.
2) These reactors are currently under construction at the Chashma Nuclear Complex and
will also be placed under IAEA safeguards. CHASNUPP-3 and CHASNUPP-4 are expected
to be completed by 2016 and 2017, respectively. China, a member of the Nuclear
Suppliers Group since 2004, did not pursue an exemption to NSG guidelines for Pakistan,
instead arguing that Chashma 3 and 4 are "grandfathered in" under the pre-2004 Sino-
 59

Pakistan nuclear framework. While the United States has consistently rejected this
argument, the deal has been accepted as a "fait accompli" in international fora such as
the NSG and the IAEA. In November 2013, Pakistan announced the construction of two
additional Chinese-supplied 1,100 MW reactors, KANUPP-2 and KANUPP-3, under a $9
billion agreement. As of early 2014, the Pakistani government has begun a bid for three
additional nuclear power plants, reportedly to be built in the Muzaffargarh district,
Punjab province. At a cost of approximately USD 13 billion, this bid could enable
Pakistan to meet its 2030 goal of generating 8,800 MW of nuclear energy to solve its
chronic power shortages.
Types of Missiles

• Missile: an object which is forcibly propelled at a target, either by hand or from a

mechanical weapon; a weapon that is self-propelled or directed by remote control,
carrying conventional or nuclear explosive.
• Conventional guided missiles
• Air-to-air missile; Air-to-surface missile; Anti-ballistic missile; Anti-satellite weapon
• Cruise missiles: a low-flying missile which is guided to its target by an on-board
computer.
• Ballistic missiles: a missile with a high, arching trajectory, which is initially powered and
guided but falls under gravity on to its target.
• Tactical ballistic missile
• Short-range ballistic missile; Medium-range ballistic missile
• Theatre ballistic missile; Air-launched ballistic missile
• Intermediate-range ballistic missile
• Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBMs)
• Submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBMs)

Definition: Arms Control

• "Disarmament" became the fashionable term during the nineteenth century,

particularly during and after the Hague Conference of 1899, to describe all efforts to
limit, reduce, or control the implements of war.
• some individuals may employ disarmament as total elimination of armaments; The
United Nations uses it as a generic term covering all measures, "from small steps to
reduce tensions or build confidence, through regulation of armaments or arms control,
up to general and complete disarmament.“
 60

• Most arms controllers sought to enhance the nuclear deterrence system, and only
occasionally sought force reductions, while literal "disarmers" dismissed arms control as
a chimera and supported proposals seeking general and complete disarmament.

Basic Techniques

1. Limitation and Reduction of Armaments: put specified limits on the mobilization,

possession, or construction of military forces and equipment

2. Demilitarization, Denuclearization, and Neutralization: removing or placing restrictions

on military forces, weapons, and fortifications within a prescribed area of land, water, or
airspace.

3. Regulating or Outlawing Specific Weapons: regulate the military use or the possession of
specific weapons

4. Controlling Arms Manufacture and Traffic: restrictions, including embargoes, on the sale
or transfer of weapons and munitions. It may prohibit the manufacture of specific
weapons.

5. Laws of War: lessen the violence and damage of war

6. Stabilizing the International Environment: lower international tensions through

lessening the possibility of an uncontrollable cause célèbre provoking an unwanted war

Methods Of Achieving Arms Control And Disarmament Objectives

1. Retributive Measures
1. Extermination: ancient and drastic means of ensuring no future warlike
response from one's opponent; elimination of some American Indian tribes

2. Imposition: when victors force arms limitation measures on the vanquished,

such as the terms imposed upon Germany and other enemy states in 1919 and
1945

2. Unilateral Measures

1. Unilateral Neglect: a nation's decision not spend for defense, as in the U.S.
unilateral reduction of army and naval forces after the Civil War (1866)

2. Unilateral Decision: consciously decided policy of self-imposed military

restrictions or limitations, as in Japan's post–World War II constitution and the
Austrian Peace Treaty (1955), both restricting armaments to defensive purposes.
 61

3. Reciprocal Measures

1. Bilateral Negotiation: two nations seek mutually acceptable solutions to

tensions heightened by armaments, as with the Rush-Bagot Agreement (1817)
and the SALT, START, and INF treaties.

2. Multilateral Negotiation: regional and global military-political problems that

involve the interests of several nations. The Hague treaties (1899, 1907) and the
Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty (1968) Justifications for Armament vs.
Disarmament
Armament:

• Weapons are not causes but the consequences of conflictive relations.

• A historical survey of the arms race indicates that during the past two centuries this
form of international competition often ends peacefully in recognition of the military
superiority of one side or the other.(Armament increases the chances of peace)
• Countries that have no adequate defense tempt aggressors and therefore preparing for
war is the best way to achieve peace. (Keep all aspects in mind to make an intelligent
opinion). (Einstein and Openheimer’s research lead to atom bomb)

Disarmament

• Arms and arms races are costly and potentially very bloody. (Saint Augustine-book on
the justification of war)
• Arms reduction can curtail defense burden and allow economic investment for
productive purposes.
• Unchecked growth of armaments without economic means can lead to internal
repression and
external aggression.( backup your argument with solid pragmatic approach, nothing is
wrong)
History of Disarmament

• Disarmament attempts can be traced back to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, which
stipulated against the need for building fortifications.
• In 1816, the Czar of Russia proposed to the British government the reduction of
armaments, this call was not very well received.
• In 1863 and in 1869, France made similar calls for disarmament in Europe, but it too was
ignored.
• In 1898, the Tsar of Russia called on European powers to gather at The Hague to discuss
disarmament, a suggestion which was well received, leading to the First Hague Peace
Conference attended by 28 states.
 62

• In 1907, another conference was held at The Hague for the same purpose. Both
Conferences called upon military and naval experts to propose reducing military
expenditures through disarmaments, but the major powers were not ready for such
moves in practice.

Disarmament after WW1

• The devastation caused by WWI impelled statesmen of the world to give serious
thought to disarmament. Woodrow Wilson in one of his famous fourteen points
asserted armament should be reduced to ‘the lowest point consistent with domestic
safety’.
• The treaty of Versailles (1919) also recognized that ‘the maintenance of peace requires
the reduction of national armaments’.
• The League of Nations was given the duty to secure a general agreement on
disarmament and its covenant stated that only those countries be allowed membership
who accepted the proposed agreement. A permanent advisory commission was
established in the League,
• The Council of the League appointed another commission in 1920, the Temporary Mixed
Commission, with a fixed four year mandate and comprised primarily of civilians.
• In 1926, the League set up another preparatory commission for disarmament which
prepared a draft treaty considered at the League conference in Geneva in 1932 by 61
states.

Disarmament after WW2

• The devastation unleashed by WW2 again led to calls for disarmament  The UN
Charter laid much emphasis on the need for disarmament.
• The UN established a military Staff Committee to assist the Security Council to regulate
armaments and explore means for disarmament.

Atoms for Peace Plan

• In 1953, Eisenhower proposed establishing a pool of fissionable materials, donated by

nuclear states to the Atomic Energy Commission, to be provided to other countries
strictly for peaceful purposes.
• The Soviets opposed this plan arguing that an agreement on prohibiting nuclear
weapons was necessary prior to disseminating nuclear technology.
 63

UN Disarmament Efforts

• UN Atomic Energy Commission included all 5 SC members and Canada.

• The UN Atomic commission was to explore mechanisms for peaceful transfer of nuclear
technology, to identify safeguards for inspections of compliant states to prevent hazards
or violations, and work toward eliminating nuclear weapons.
• Both superpowers agreed to cooperate but their divergent stances (US argued that
control must take precedence over disarmament and USSR wanted the reverse) failed to
help achieve the Commission goals.
• The UN General Assembly also established a Commission on Conventional Armaments,
which too fell victim to Cold War divergence. Ultimately, the USSR pulled out of both
Commissions due to China’s representation on them.
• In April 2004 the United Nations (UN) Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution
1540 on the proliferation of NBC weapons and their means of delivery.
• In December 2004 UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan released the report of the UN High-
level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change. The two areas of concern were:
• how to ensure universal adherence to multilateral agreements intended to establish
global norms and rules of behavior; and
• how to ensure that those states which do adhere to the agreements comply fully with
the commitments that they have made.

Other Notable Efforts

• Many disarmament and arms control efforts were undertaken through bilateral means
between
US and USSR, the biggest proliferations of armaments in the post WW2 period (NTBT,
NPT, SALT I AND II)
• In 1985 six nation summits in New Delhi was indicative of the growing concern amongst
developing countries about nuclear weapons.
• In 2001 the administration of U.S. president George W. Bush announced that it would
unilaterally withdraw from the ABM Treaty, laying the groundwork for the deployment
of defenses against long-range ballistic missiles.
• The Bush administration, however, also pursued an arms reduction agreement with the
Russian Federation, and the two nations signed a treaty in 2002 to deactivate about 75
percent of their strategic nuclear arsenals.
 64

• In December 2003 the EU also adopted a Strategy against the Proliferation of Weapons
of Mass Destruction (WMD Strategy) setting out measures to be used, ideally, to
prevent proliferation from taking place.
• In 2004, following up a proposal made by its Director General in October 2003, the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) initiated a study of multilateral approaches
to the nuclear fuel cycle.

Limiting Nuclear Weapons Systems

Bargaining between the United States and the Soviet Union (later Russia) began in the late
1960s, and eventually these efforts resulted in a series of bilateral agreements: the two SALT I
pacts of 1972 (the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the Interim Agreement on Strategic Offensive Weapons); the
SALT II
Treaty of 1979; the INF agreement of 1987; the START I Treaty of 1991; and the START II Treaty
of 1993.

SALT I and II Negotiations

• In late 1966, President Lyndon Johnson notified Soviet leaders that he wanted to limit
strategic nuclear arms.
• the need to restrict antiballistic missiles (ABMs) because they lessened the deterrent
effect of their strategic nuclear systems, the Soviet leader angrily pounded the table and
exclaimed: "Defense is moral, offense is immoral!"
• United States also had decided to develop a new multiple, independently targetable,
reentry vehicle (MIRV), which, after being carried aloft on a single missile, was capable
of delivering two or more warheads to different targets. In late June 1968, Soviet
Foreign Minister Andrey
Gromyko asked that discussions on limiting both offensive and defensive weapons begin
on 30 September; unfortunately, Soviet and Warsaw Pact forces intervened in
Czechoslovakia in August, causing Johnson to postpone the talks.
• At the Moscow summit, 18–22 May 1972, terms were agreed to on the Antiballistic
Missile (ABM) Treaty and an Interim Agreement. Each side would deploy no more than
100 ABM launchers at each of two sites, one at the capital and the other at least 1,300
kilometers from the capital. The treaty called for verification by national technical
means (satellite reconnaissance, electronic monitoring) without interference, and
established a U.S.–Soviet Standing Consultative Commission to considering questions
about such issues as compliance and interference.
 65

SALT I and II Negotiations

• a quantitative limit on both intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs)—1,054 for the

United States, 1,618 for the Soviets—and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs),
but no limits on warheads. Using a formula that exchanged dismantled ICBMs for
SLBMs, the United States could have up to 710 SLBMs on 44 submarines, and the
Soviets 950 SLBMs on 62 submarines.
• The pact was to last five years (1972–1977), during which time both sides would work
for a permanent treaty.
• the Defense Department and Joint Chiefs of Staff had insisted on pursuing new strategic
weapons systems—including the Trident submarine, an ABM site, a submarine-launched
cruise missile, and multiple, independently targeted warheads—before giving their
approval.
After ratification of SALT I, the second phase focused on "quantitative" limits, with
delegates meeting at Geneva to seek "qualitative" restrictions on the capabilities of
weapons systems, a very difficult assignment; each side should be limited to 2,400
ICBMs, SLBMs, and long-range bombers, of which 1,320 could have multiple warheads.

Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces: INF Proposals

• the Reagan administration offered its "zero option" concept—the United States would
cancel its scheduled deployment in the unlikely event the Soviets withdrew their
intermediate-range missiles with l, 100 warheads.
• Moscow rejected the proposal, and U.S.–Soviet relations deteriorated under the Reagan
administration's abusive rhetoric.
• After Secretary-General Mikhail Gorbachev assumed power in 1985, the two sides
examined a variety of INF proposals until in 1987 he stunned NATO and Washington
leaders by accepting the U.S. zero option with its disproportionate reductions and,
ultimately, the removal of Soviet intermediate-range missiles from Asia.
• Gorbachev also agreed to America's extensive 1986 verification demands, and on 8
December 1987 he and Reagan signed the INF Treaty in Washington, D.C. To carry out
the on-site inspections that would verify compliance with treaty provisions, the United
States created a new umbrella organization, the On-Site Inspection Agency.

START I and II Negotiations

• On 9 May 1982, Reagan outlined his plan for the "practical, phased reduction" of
strategic nuclear weapons in two-stages. In phase I, warheads would be reduced by a
 66

third, with significant cuts in ballistic missiles; in phase II, a ceiling would be put on
ballistic missile throw weights and other elements.
• In March 1983 Reagan had announced his Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) proposal,
which was to render nuclear weapons "impotent and obsolete." The Soviets, and many
NATO allies, opposed SDI (also dubbed "Star Wars") because it threatened the existing
mutual nuclear deterrent system. Although the Geneva summit made little progress,
both men agreed to work for a 50 percent reduction in strategic forces.
• After eight and a half frustrating years, President Bush and Soviet President Gorbachev
signed the complex 750-page START I treaty on 31 July 1991.
• As the realization settled in that the Cold War was over, the START II treaty was quickly
put in place on 3 January 1993 (although ratification was delayed—the United States
took three years and Russia nearly seven years). This agreement further reduced the
number of strategic nuclear warheads to be held by each party on 1 January2003 to no
more than 3,500.
• The demise of the Soviet Union and the chaos that followed led to the sometimes
controversial 1991 Cooperative Threat Reduction Program (often called the Nunn-Lugar
Program), which provided U.S. funds to aid in consolidating the former Soviet arsenal
and ensuring its custodial safety. Belatedly, the program was expanded to provide
financial and technical assistance in disposal of chemical weapons and of fissile
material extracted from nuclear warheads. The cost of disarming proved to be
considerably more than expected.

Nuclear Test Bans and Nonproliferation

• The nonnuclear states' search for a comprehensive test ban was closely linked to the
major nuclear powers' desire to restrict the spread of nuclear weapons through a
nonproliferation treaty.
• The inability to achieve a comprehensive test ban was a source of friction between the
two groups for five decades, especially during the periodic nonproliferation treaty
review conferences.
• Beginning with President Dwight Eisenhower, successive administrations declared that a
comprehensive test ban was their goal although they varied greatly in efforts for its
accomplishment.
 67

Limited (Partial) Test Ban

• The spread of radioactive fallout resulting from atmospheric nuclear tests aroused
public protests in the 1950s; When a 1957 Gallup Poll revealed that 63 percent of the
American people favored banning tests, compared with 20 percent three years earlier,
the president initiated the tripartite (U.S.–British–Soviet) test ban negotiations.
• Eisenhower turned to technical experts to develop a verification system.
• experts were vital to the proper shaping of negotiating positions; however, they often
complicated issues to a point where they become technically, and therefore politically,
insoluble  While Eisenhower's efforts resulted only in obtaining an informal test
moratorium, John F. Kennedy came to the presidency committed to obtaining a
comprehensive ban on tests. His sobering encounter with Khrushchev at Vienna in 1961
and the subsequent Berlin crisis, however, derailed his plans. The October 1962 Cuban
missile crisis, paradoxically, brought Kennedy and Khrushchev closer and led to the
signing on 5 August 1963 of the Limited (or Partial) Nuclear Test Ban (LNTB).
• The 1963 Moscow experience again suggests that successful arms control negotiations
cannot be structured as an engineering or technical exercise; they must be essentially a
political undertaking.
• The Kennedy administration's inability to provide absolute guarantees of Soviet
compliance resulted in the LNTB's banning all tests except those conducted
underground. From 1964 to 1998, the United States conducted 683 announced tests,
compared with 494 for the Soviet Union. Washington's emphasis on the "safeguard"
continued to be used to justify testing after the Cold War ended.

The Non-Proliferation Treaty

• The People's Republic of China's first nuclear test on 16 October 1964, focused
President Lyndon B. Johnson's attention on the dangers of nuclear proliferation.
In 1965 both the United States and Soviet Union responded to the UN call to prevent
the proliferation of nuclear weapons by submitting their own draft treaties to ENDC, 18
Nation Disarmament Committee and, after resolving a few differences, became identical
by 1967.
• The committee's nonaligned members argued that a nonproliferation treaty must not
simply divide the world into nuclear "haves" and "have nots," but must balance mutual
obligations. Thus, to stop states from engaging in "horizontal" proliferation (the
acquisition of nuclear weapons), the nuclear powers should agree to end their "vertical"
proliferation (increasing the quantity and quality of their weapons).
 68

• The nonaligned nations specified the necessary steps, in order of priority: (1) signing a
comprehensive test ban; (2) halting the production of fissionable materials designed for
weapons; (3) freezing, and gradually reducing, nuclear weapons and delivery systems;
(4) banning the use of nuclear weapons; and (5) assuring the security of nonnuclear
states.
• The Non-Proliferation Treaty was signed on 1 July 1968, after the United States and
Soviet Union reluctantly agreed "to pursue negotiations in good faith" to halt the
nuclear arms race "at the earliest possible date" (the fig leaf they tried to hide behind),
and to seek "a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective
international control."
• The dubious adherence to this pledge has been a point of serious contention at each
subsequent review conference.
• The Non-Proliferation Treaty is the cornerstone of a carefully structured regime that
emphasizes the banning of nuclear tests and several other elements.
• The Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency was created in 1957—as the
coordinating body for Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace project—to promote and
safeguard peaceful uses of atomic energy.
• It has established a system of international safeguards aimed at preventing nuclear
materials from being diverted to military uses.
• During 1974 and 1975, the Nuclear Suppliers Group was established in London to
further ensure that nuclear materials, equipment, and technology would not be used in
weapons production.
• Finally, nuclear-weapons-free zones further extended the nonproliferation effort.

Comprehensive Test Ban

• The comprehensive test ban issue was dormant during the early years of Richard
Nixon's presidency, largely so it would not interfere with U.S.–Soviet negotiations on
strategic arms limitations.
• At a Moscow summit meeting with Premier Leonid Brezhnev in July 1974, the two
leaders resurrected the bilateral Threshold Test Ban Treaty, under which they agreed to
hold underground tests to less than 150 kilotons, restrict the number of tests to a
minimum, not interfere with the other's efforts at verification, and exchange detailed
data on all tests and test sites.
• The Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty, signed by Brezhnev and President Gerald Ford
in May
 69

1976, allowed nuclear explosives under 150 kilotons to be used in a peaceful manner—
such as
"digging" canals. The pact provided, for the first time, on-site inspections under certain
circumstances.
• President Jimmy Carter shifted his focus from the unratified threshold test ban back to
a comprehensive test ban.
• In 1977 the Soviet Union indicated that it was willing to accept a verification system
based on national technical means (each nation's intelligence-gathering system),
supplemented by voluntary challenge inspections and automatic, tamperproof seismic
monitoring stations known as "black boxes."
• When signs pointed to an agreement on a comprehensive ban, major opponents—
including the weapons laboratories, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Secretary of Energy
James Schlesinger— killed the effort by emphasizing America's need for periodic tests
to assure the reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile.
• In July 1982, President Ronald Reagan ended U.S. participation in the comprehensive
test ban talks, arguing that the Soviet Union might be testing over the 150-kiloton
threshold.
• He insisted that verification aspects of both the threshold ban and peaceful explosions
treaties must be renegotiated before a comprehensive accord could be considered.
• Critics pointed out that proving a test had taken place was much easier than verifying a
specific magnitude; therefore, the administration had things backward.
• When Premier Mikhail Gorbachev informed Reagan in December 1985 that he would
accept on-site inspections as part of a comprehensive ban, Reagan's refusal to consider
the offer made it clear that the administration's concern about verification was a sham
and that it had been used to avoid any agreement.
• CTBT Continued.
• President George H. W. Bush issued a policy statement in January 1990 that his
administration had "not identified any further limitations on nuclear testing … that
would be in the United States' national security interest."
• Negotiations proceeded on verification protocols for the 1974 threshold treaty and the
1976 peaceful explosions pact; in June 1990, Bush and Gorbachev signed the new
protocols clearing the way for their ratification.
• The UN General Assembly, supported by the United States, overwhelmingly adopted a
Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty on 10 September 1996. After a bitter partisan
battle, the Senate by a vote of 51–48 on 13 October 1999 refused to ratify the treaty.
Apart from political partisanship, opposition to the treaty centered on two old issues:
 70

whether the treaty's "zero-yield" test ban could be adequately verified; and the
potential long-term impact of a permanent halt on America's nuclear arsenal.
• there was no guarantee the custodianship program would work, and it would take five
to ten years to prove its effectiveness.

Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty

• The Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT) is a proposed international treaty to prohibit
the
further production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other explosive devices.
The treaty has not been negotiated and its terms remain to be defined.
• According to a proposal by the United States, fissile material includes high-enriched
uranium and plutonium(except plutonium that is over 80% Pu-238).
• According to a proposal by Russia, fissile material would be limited to weapons-grade
uranium (with more than 90% U-235) and plutonium (with more than 90% Pu-239).
Neither proposal would prohibit the production of fissile material for non-weapons
purposes, including use in civil or naval nuclear reactors.
• In a 27 September 1993 speech before the UN, President Clinton called for a multilateral
convention banning the production of fissile materials for nuclear explosives or outside
international safeguards.
• Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty
• In December 1993 the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 48/75L calling for the
negotiation of a "non-discriminatory, multilateral and international effectively verifiable
treaty banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear
explosive devices."
• The Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament (CD) on 23 March 1995 agreed to
establish a committee to negotiate "a non-discriminatory, multilateral and
internationally and effectively verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile material
for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.".However, substantive
negotiations have not taken place.
• In 2004, the United States announced that it opposed the inclusion of a verification
mechanism in the treaty on the grounds that the treaty could not be effectively verified.
• On November 4, 2004, the United States cast the sole vote in the First Committee of the
United Nations General Assembly against a resolution (A/C.1/59/L.34) calling for
negotiation of an effectively verifiable treaty.
 71

• The Bush Administration supported a treaty but advocated an ad hoc system of

verification wherein states would monitor the compliance of other states through their
own national intelligence mechanisms.
• On April 5, 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama reversed the U.S. position on verification
and proposed to negotiate "a new treaty that verifiably ends the production of fissile
materials intended for use in state nuclear weapons." On May 29, 2009, the CD agreed
to establish an FMCT negotiating committee,
• However, Pakistan has repeatedly blocked the CD from implementing its agreed
program of work, despite severe pressure from the major nuclear powers to end its
defiance of 64 other countries in blocking international ban on the production of new
nuclear bomb-making material, as well as discussions on full nuclear disarmament, the
arms race in outer space, and security assurances for non-nuclear states.
• Pakistan justified its actions when Chairman joint chiefs General Tariq Majid argued that
"a proposed fissile material cutoff treaty would target Pakistan specifically
• Status of FMCT
• Currently being discussed in the Conference on Disarmament (CD). Since negotiations
have not
yet begun, it is unclear if scope of the treaty will include pre-existing stocks of fissile
material.
States in favor of including stocks tend to call for a Fissile Material Treaty (FMT) while
States favoring a ban on production often refer to a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty
(FMCT). The designation FM(C)T, used by the International Panel on Fissile Materials
(IPFM), makes this disagreement explicit. Several draft treaties have been proposed
including one by Dr. Thomas Shea, a former IAEA safeguards officer (2003), and one by
Greenpeace International (2004). The United States submitted a draft treaty to the CD in
2006, and the IPFM released its own draft treaty in 2009.

Nuclear Supplier Group (Mr. Shahzeb Khalil)

• Est. after Smiling Buddha 1974 as LSG; later renamed NSG

• Purpose: a. to regulate nuclear trade (material, equipment, technology) b. to prevent
further proliferation.
• 48 members excluding Pakistan & India. 43 are non-nuclear members.
• Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) a. Bars non-nuclear states to possess nukes b. Legally
commits nuclear states for disbarment and non-assistance to other states for obtaining
nukes. c. All states can access nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, under
safeguards.
 72

• New member can only be added after CONSENSUS. The US proposed and put that bar.
• NSG members have to sign NPT, join CTBT, other equivalent treaties and allow IAEA to
verify proliferation activities regarding uranium or plutonium production.
Membership criteria

NSG; Pakistan-India Perspective

• India and Pakistan: i. Both struggling for NSG membership ii. Both are nuclear powers iii.
Both have not signed NPT iv. US supporting India; special trade waiver for India in 2008;
China’s principle stance against India’s application
• Case for Pakistan: i. A non-NPT but responsible state working as per IAEA standards ii.
Has robust command and control system under NCA for safety, nonproliferation etc. iii.
Est. Strategic Plans Division in 2000 to improve the control of nuclear operations. iv.
PNRA that collaborates with IAEA v. Export Control Act 2004 to regulate nuclear exports
vi. Member CERN – 37/300 Pakistani scientists; India is not even a member. vii. Has four-
decade long experience of safe and secure nuclear power plants. viii. All facilities are
under IAEA standards.

Benefits for Pakistan of Joining NSG

1. Pakistan’s energy thirst can be quenched by civil nuclear energy projects giving boost
to economy and industry simultaneously.
2. Nuclear trade doors will open.
3. Import for civil nuclear and save domestic stock for military purpose.
4. Access to advanced machinery, parts, labor etc. Developing pressure vessel by her
own. Strengthen expertise of civil and electrical work as well as vocational and training.
5. China – largest nuclear trade partner with two dozen nuclear power plants. Pakistan
can be subcontractor.
6. Countries such as France and South Korea will be able to trade with Pakistan.
7. Energy needs will be met along cooperation in other civil sectors.
Case for India/Apprehensions of Pakistan:

1. India can create problems for nuclear programs of Pakistan.

2. Can use Veto power against Islamabad’s membership request.
3. India’s membership may result in regional instability owing to its hegemonies.
4. May lobby to undo Pak’s nuclear programs.
5. India will accrue larger benefits than Pakistan in access of nuclear materials.
6. Exception for India means exception for other nations which should not be the case.
7. Strategic stability cannot be achieved with India ONLY membership. viii. Discriminatory
approach for membership may halt regional peace and security
8. Why to allow membership? Neither signed NPT, nor a party to nuclear weapon-free
zone treaty, nor fulfilled commitments after special waiver of 2008, nor committed
CTBT, nor separated civil and military nuclear reactors, then WHY?
 73

9. NSG put bar on trade with India after 1974 tests. How NSG will keep it by allowing India
in the room? Or will it compromise its own rules and procedures?
10. NSG is political will based group with shared objectives. Exception to one state can
pose to group objectives.
11. Credibility and effectiveness of group can be damaged if India as member uses veto
against any group objective.

Militarization and Weaponization of Space

The United Nations (U.N.) Outer Space Treaty provides the basic framework on international
space law, saying that space should be reserved for peaceful uses. It came into effect in
October 1967. following principles; the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out
for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind;
• outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States;
• outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of
use or occupation, or by any other means;
• States shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or
on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner;
• the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes;
• astronauts shall be regarded as the envoys of mankind;
• States shall be responsible for national space activities whether carried out by
governmental or non-governmental activities;
• States shall be liable for damage caused by their space objects; and
• States shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies.

Militarization of Space

• There are no weapons deployed in space or terrestrially (in air, sea, or on the ground)
meant to attack space objects, such as satellites; nor are satellite weapons deployed
against terrestrial targets.
• Space is an increasingly vital part of our military activities from which the US obtains
great advantages with respect to other nations.
• We use space for communication; for surveillance and targeting over the battlefields;
for weather prediction; for precise mapping and positioning of our own and opposition
military assets; for early warning of missile and air attacks; and for general military,
economic, and technological intelligence worldwide.
• Thus space is “militarized” though not yet “weaponized.”
 74

• space is a de facto sanctuary – a region in which we further our competitions, military

and otherwise, with other nations, but without actually fighting.

What’s Up There Now? What Could Threaten It?

• Since the beginning of the “space age”, roughly 5400 man-made objects have been
placed in orbit around the earth, 1500 of them by the U.S., 3100 by the S.U. and its
descendents. Some 580 of these satellites are believed to be still functioning as they
were intended. About 270 of these functioning satellites are in LEO - “Low Earth Orbits”.
T
• U.S. plans to place the “SBIRS Low” (Space Based Infrared System Low) network of two
dozen infrared missile-tracking satellites for “TMD” and “NMD” (Theater Missile
Defense and National Missile Defense) in this region.
• U.S. commercial systems such as: Globalstar’s 48 satellites providing mobile
communications
(e.g., real time voice, data, fax) and telecommunications; Orbcom’s 35 mobile
communications satellites
It is this LEO region, closest to earth, which will be most vulnerable in the near future to
earth based ASATs, “Anti-Satellite” weapons (missiles, lasers, particle beams, etc.),
currently under development by several states.

What’s Up There Now? What Could Threaten It?

• There are some 40 to 50 satellites in MEO, “Middle Earth Orbits”, orbiting at altitudes
between 1000 and 35786 kilometers above the surface of the earth. Presently in this
region are science satellites (e.g., the U.S. Chandra and GGS Polar, Japan’s Halca and
Nozomi, Europe’s XMM), and navigation satellites (used for personal, commercial, and
military transportation as well as for military targeting).
• The U.S. military/civilian NAVSTAR Global Positioning System embodies 29 of these
satellites whereas the Russian Cosmos, Glonass, and Parus series totals 19 navigation
satellites; some of these are non-operating spares.
• Finally, there are about 300 satellites in GEO, “Geostationary Earth Orbits”. These
circulate easterly, precisely 35786 kilometers above the Equator with a period of 24
hours; hence they remain stationary with respect to any given position on the surface of
the earth.
• For the foreseeable future, the only threats to such “far-out” satellites would come
either from other such satellites (firing lasers or missiles such as “Brilliant Pebbles”) or
from the rockets capable of launching such satellites from ground to GEO (releasing
 75

conventional or nuclear space mines or gravel clouds). At present only China, France,
India, Japan, Russia, Ukraine, and the U.S. possess such rocketry.

Space Sanctuary or Space War?

• One possible U.S. policy is the development and deployment of active defense and
offense in space – the ability to conduct war in space. Terrestrial and satellite based
ASATs would be intended to target enemy ASATs as well as the opponent’s militarily
relevant satellites. I
• Opponents in such a race would be able to threaten the U.S. with nuclear weapon
carrying ICBMs while also endangering its early warning satellites. We would be
returned to the terror of the Cold War - without its stabilizing contribution of certain
knowledge of the opponent’s pre attack actions
• The alternative is passive defense of space assets together with a treaty guaranteeing a
space sanctuary (= no weaponization of space). Though an overwhelming majority of
nations in the UN (including all of the technologically adept ones, except the U.S.) have
expressed support for a treaty Preventing an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS), such a
treaty by itself would not be sufficient. There would always be fear of surreptitious
weaponization of space by the opponent.
• In as much as an emphasis on commerce, rather than military, has always seemed to be
a preferable approach to peaceful and prosperous relations among states in the
international system, it would seem that the PAROS approach to space should be the
preferable one.

Major Successes of Non-Proliferation

South Africa dismantling its nuclear weapons and joining the NPT
• Argentina and Brazil joining the NPT
• Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine – which had nuclear weapons on their territories on
the dissolution of the USSR – joining the NPT
• indefinite extension of the NPT in 1995 – and near-universalisation of membership 
Libya’s decision to renounce WMD.
• A number of factors have contributed to this overall success, including:
• the political commitment by most states to honour their non-proliferation obligations
• verification of treaty observance through IAEA safeguards (“trust but verify”)
• the limited availability for most states of fissile materials and the means to produce
them (i.e.
enrichment and reprocessing)
 76

• until the 1990s, the stability of the Cold War period.

Major Challenges to Non-Proliferation

• a lessening of commitment to non-proliferation

• shown by the non-compliance cases – Iraq, Romania, DPRK, Libya, Iran, Syria – and now,
North Korea
• as well as political ambivalence by many governments – or at least their diplomats
• benefits of non-proliferation not always recognised – too often seen as a “North-South”
issue
• the spread of sensitive nuclear technologies (enrichment and reprocessing)
• particularly through an active black market – including even nuclear weapon designs
• practical limits to the IAEA’s verification capability – detecting undeclared nuclear
programs presents a major challenge.
• Perhaps the greatest challenge today – with profound implications for the future – is
how to deal with treaty violations:Iran’s violations of the NPT and its safeguards
agreement, and its defiance of IAEA and Security Council resolutions, undermine the
rules-based approach to international relations.

Nuclear Disarmament Issues

• Nuclear disarmament depends on stable strategic environment – especially effective

nonproliferation, and effective regimes against other WMD.
• Controls on the spread of proliferation-sensitive technologies especially important
• and also more effective non-proliferation verification, transparency measures, etc.
• Need to draw non-NPT states into disarmament commitments and processes
• starting with the CTBT – which will impose qualitative limit on development of nuclear
weapons.
• Another major priority is to establish a fissile material control regime
• capping production of fissile material for nuclear weapons, establishing a quantitative
limit – as in the proposed Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT) – and working towards
bringing excess military stocks under irreversible peaceful use commitment
fissile material control will apply to recognised NWS – filling a gap in the NPT – and
importantly will also draw in the non-NPT states.
• Nuclear Disarmament Issue Contd.
• Effective verification will be an essential part of disarmament
• the FMCT will introduce verification to the nuclear activities of the nuclear-armed states
 77

• already substantial work has been done by the US, Russia and the IAEA on verification of
fissile material from nuclear weapon dismantlement (“Trilateral Initiative”), and there
have been studies on verification of dismantlement itself
• developing effective verification against incomplete declarations – the possibility of
undeclared nuclear weapons – will be a major challenge
• this will be of vital importance as nuclear weapon numbers diminish.
• Nuclear disarmament involves much more than developing the verification and other
technical approaches needed to provide confidence in the process
• it is essential to address the underlying security concerns that led states to develop
nuclear weapons
• the NPT recognizes this by calling for negotiation of a general disarmament treaty
• probably necessary to find case-by case solutions
• it is not the purpose of this paper to discuss these broader disarmament issues – but a
serious commitment to the principles of collective security will surely be an essential
step in the path towards a world free of nuclear weapons.

Future of Disarmament

• implications of nuclear expansion – will the non-proliferation regime be weakened?

• further spread of enrichment and reprocessing
• to date, proliferation has involved undeclared nuclear programs
• but for the future, declared (and safeguarded) programs could be destabilising –
providing rapid breakout capability
• safeguards alone can provide only limited assurance of future intent
• and a wider use of plutonium recycle could present major proliferation and terrorism
problems if not properly addressed.
• If the international community is not prepared to take effective action to uphold treaty
obligations the non-proliferation regime will have a limited futurethe dire predictions of
a large number of nuclear-armed states could eventuate after all
• rather than nuclear disarmament, the world will be facing increasing proliferation and
an everincreasing risk of nuclear war.

International political community:

Nationalism
1) Introduction
 78

i. "This term is used in two related senses. In the first usage, nationalism seeks to
identify a behavioral entity - the nation - and thereafter to pursue certain
political and cultural goals on behalf of it. In the second usage, nationalism is a
sentiment of loyalty toward the nation which is shared by people."
ii. Nationalism claims that the nation exists and should form the basis of the
political order.
iii. Nationalism can be considered as ideology, as sentiments, and as politics.
iv. There are different typologies of nationalism, such as ethnic/civic, elite/mass,
statestrengthening/state-subverting.
v. The most important debates on nationalism concern whether it is cause or
consequence of nation, the relative importance of culture, economics and
politics, and the different roles played by internal and external factors.
2) Different Aspects of Nationalism
i. It is impossible to define a 'nation-state' in objective terms without accepting the
assumptions of nationalism. Therefore, nation-state will be defined largely in
terms of its self-description and that of the international community.
ii. There is no simple sequence leading either from nationalism to nation-state
formation to changes in the global political order or the other way round.
iii. There is no single, dominant form of nationalism. Instead it can take ethnic, civic,
and other forms, be elite or popular, strengthen or subvert existing states.
iv. The best place to start is with the central political actors. These are the most
important state or states in each historical phase.
3) Evolution of Nationalism
i. The political ideology of states matters most because they have the most power
and others tend to respond to their power and ideologies. At the start of our
history global conflict is shifting power to extensive middle classes in Britain and
France, and the national idea justifies demands for reforms which challenge 'top-
down' ideals of power based on religion, monarchy, and privilege.
ii. Once the process is in motion it develops its own momentum. British victory over
France popularizes its liberal, constitutionalist nationalism which is taken up in
imitative form by elites elsewhere. These elites are able, especially when linked
to modernizing states like Prussia, Japan, and the North in the American Civil
War, to form powerful nationstates.
iii. Those nation-states generate new forms of nationalism. Subordinate
nationalities react against new state nationalism. These states take up illiberal,
imperialist nationalism to challenge British hegemony. Such imperialist
nationalism provokes colonial societies to develop counter-nationalism.
 79

iv. State-subverting nationalism usually cannot on its own defeat imperial powers.
Also important is that those powers are weakened in global conflict with each
other. Therefore the ability of state-subverting nationalism to form nation-states
is based on a combination of its own social base and political organization, the
power and policy of the state it confronts, and a favourable international
situation.
v. The sacrosanct principle of state sovereignty was weakened with the end of the
cold war, new nation-state formation, and new economic and cultural forms of
globalization.
vi. This provoked a first wave of state-subverting ethno-nationalisms which could
lead to violence and ethnic cleansing.
vii. However, international recognition for new states as civic, territorial entities,
along with new forms of intervention and pressure, put pressure on nationalism
to move away from this ethnic and statesubverting character.
4) Conclusion
i. There is a state-strengthening nationalism which focuses on the threats
globalization pose to the nation-state. This nationalism can paradoxically get
stronger the more the nation-state is weakened.
ii. However, perhaps more important is the shift of nationalism away from a state
focus towards concerns with devolution, cultural recognition, and transnational
linkages. Nationalism, once again, is showing how adaptive it is to changes in the
nature of global politics.

Globalization

1) Introduction
i. Globalization is evident in the growing extensity, intensity, velocity, and
deepening impact of worldwide interconnectedness.
ii. Globalization denotes a shift in the scale of social organization, the emergence of
the world as a shared social space, the relative deterritorialization of social,
economic, and political activity, and the relative denationalization of power.
iii. Globalization can be conceptualized as a fundamental shift or transformation in
the spatial scale of human social organization that links distant communities and
expands the reach of power relations across regions and continents.
iv. Globalization is to be distinguished from internationalization and
regionalization.
 80

v. The contemporary phase of globalization has proved more robust in the

aftermath of 9/11 than the sceptics recognize. Contemporary globalization is a
multidimensional, uneven, and asymmetrical process.
vi. Globalization is transforming but not burying the Westphalian ideal of sovereign
statehood. It is producing the disaggregated state.
2) What is globalization?
i. Material aspects: Communication and transportation, Manufacturing and
finance, Movement of people and goods, Standardization, Institutional links,
Ecological commons
Immaterial aspects: Closeness of identification and values, Cultural (including
linguistic) similarities, Symbols of politics and organization, Shared ideas and
ideologies
3) Types of Globalization (based on Robert Kudrle)
i. Communication globalization: Economic effect, Cultural effect, Comparison
effect.
ii. Market globalization: Trade, Capital mobility, Labor mobility, Options for states .
iii. Direct globalization:, The environmental “commons”, Other public goods:
“existence value”, Labor rights and human rights, Enforcement patterns and
issues
4) International Relations and Globalization
i. From sovereignty to transsovereignty: Terrorism, Criminal gangs, Infectious
disease,
New actors, new norms, new regimes, new networks
ii. International organizations at the end of the twentieth century: States and
beyond, International civil service, Interactions with nongovernmental
organizations, Reform of the United Nations, New round of negotiations in WTO,
Governance by international conferences
iii.Civil society: Multinational corporations, NGOs, Participation and democratization
5) Evaluating globalization: light and shadow
i. Rescue from poverty vs. increasing gap between rich and poor.
ii. Advanced medical treatment vs. epidemics on a global scale
iii. Policies to protect the environment vs. global environmental pollution and
warming
iv. The good and bad sides of the information society
 81

6) Globalization and Global Politics

i. Globalization requires a conceptual shift in our thinking about world politics from
a primarily geopolitical perspective to the perspective of geocentric or global
politics—the politics of worldwide social relations.
ii. Global politics is more accurately described as distorted global politics because it
is afflicted by significant power asymmetries.
iii. Globalization creates a double democratic deficit in that it places limits on
democracy within states and new mechanisms of global governance which lack
democratic credentials.
iv. Global politics has engendered its own global political theory which draws upon
cosmopolitan thinking.
v. Cosmopolitanism offers an account of the desirability and feasibility of the
democratization of global politics.
vi. Distorted global politics can be interpreted as expressing a contest between the
forces of statism and cosmopolitanism in the conduct and management of world
affairs.
7) Globalization and The Transformation Of Political Community
i. The members of a political community are usually committed to self-
government. Because of expectations of war, states have tried to persuade their
citizens to place obligations to the 'national community' ahead of duties to other
associations. Most forms of political community in human history have not
represented the nation or the people.
The idea that the state should represent the nation is a European development
which has dominated politics for just over two hundred years.
iii. War and capitalism are two reasons why the nation-state became the dominant
form of political community.
iv. The extraordinary power of modern states—the growth of their 'intensive' and
'extensive' power—made global empires possible.
v. States have been the principal architects of global interconnectedness over the
last five centuries. The global spread of the state and nationalism are key
examples of global interconnectedness.
vi. Citizenship rights developed by way of reaction to the growing power of modern
states.
vii. The demand to be recognized as a free and equal citizen began with struggles for
legal and political rights to which welfare rights were added in the nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries.
 82

viii. The stability of modern forms of political community has owed a great deal to
the fact that citizens won these rights. Indeed, some modernization theorists in
the 1960s believed that liberal democracies had largely solved the social conflicts
of earlier centuries. Modernization theory also assumed that non-Western
societies would emulate Western paths of development. This thesis resurfaced in
the West at the end of the bipolar era. It was linked with the belief that liberal
democracies belong to a unique sphere of peace.
8) Globalization and Different Theorists
i. Totalitarian states attempted to make the political community absolute.
Liberaldemocratic states recognize that their citizens value their membership of
many communities alongside the nation-state.
ii. Some liberals have argued that globalization promises a new era of peace
between the great powers. This is a condition in which more cosmopolitan
political communities may develop.
iii. Many realists have argued that the war on terror and the renewed risk of nuclear
proliferation indicate that globalization will not alter the basic features of world
politics.
iv. Huntington's notion of the Clash of Civilizations challenged the idea that
globalization will lead to a world moral and political consensus.
v. Cosmopolitan approaches which envisage an international system in which all
individuals are respected as equal have flourished in the contemporary phase of
globalization.
vi. Communitarians argue that most people value their membership of a particular
political community; they are unlikely to shift their loyalty from the nation-state
to the human race.
vii. Post-structuralists argue that all forms of political community contain the danger
of domination or exclusion.
9) Globalization and Nationalism
i. Globalization and fragmentation are two phenomena that challenge traditional
conceptions of community and citizenship.
Ethnic fragmentation is one reason for the failed state in Europe as well as in the
Third World, but demands for the recognition of cultural differences exist in all
political communities.
iii. Globalization theorists have defended cosmopolitan democracy on the grounds
that national democracies are unable to influence the global forces which affect
them.
 83

iv. The apex of nationalism in relations between the great powers occurred in the
first half of the twentieth century.
v. Nationalism remains a powerful force in the modern world but globalization and
fragmentation have led to discussions about the possibility of new forms of
political community.

Internationalism

1. Definition: Internationalism
• Internationalism is a political principle which transcends nationalism
• advocates a greater political or economic cooperation among nations and people
• Internationalists believe that the people of the world should unite across
national, political, cultural, racial, or class boundaries to advance their common
interests
• the governments of the world should cooperate because their mutual long-term
interests are of greater importance than their short-term disputes.
• Internationalism is, in general, opposed to nationalism, jingoism or chauvinism,
and war,
• proponents can include supporters of any of the four socialist Internationals and
organizations such as the United Nations or the World Federalist Movement.
2. Characteristics
• appreciation for the diverse cultures in the world
• a desire for world peace
• nations and peoples should cooperate instead of preoccupying themselves with
their respective national interests or pursuing uncoordinated approaches to
promote them
• based on the existence of sovereign nations but aims to encourage
multilateralism; world leadership not held by any single country
• create some formal and informal interdependence between countries, with
some limited supranational powers given to international organizations
• New International should be “without status ... without coordination, without
party, without country, without national community, without co-citizenship,
without common belonging to a class.
3. Analysis of Internationalism
• a liberal internationalist strand of political thought epitomized by Richard
Cobden and John Bright.
• Free Trade
 84

• idea of the moral law and an inherent goodness in human nature

• socialist political theory> working-class people of all countries must unite across
national boundaries and actively oppose nationalism and war in order to
overthrow capitalism
• appreciation for the diverse cultures in the world, and a desire for world peace
• not only being a citizen of their respective countries, but of being a citizen of the
world
• assist the world through leadership and charity
 85

Approaches to Peace:

Diplomacy

1) Introduction
i.Every foreign policy has two sides—one is the making (formulation) of the policy,
and the other its implementation. If national interest is associated with the
formulation part, diplomacy is linked with the implementation part of a foreign
policy.
2) Definition and Use of diplomacy
i. Diplomacy is the management of IR through negotiations or the method by
which these relations are adjusted or managed.
ii. Diplomacy tries to achieve the maximum objectives (national interests) with a
minimum of costs in a system of politics where war remains a possibility.
3) Diplomacy from a historical perspective
i. Rudimentary forms of diplomacy can be traced into ancient history but
organized diplomacy became evident in the city-states of Greece (around 5 BC).
ii. Envoys became negotiators rather than being just messengers.
iii. During the middle ages (6th to 18th century) the scope of diplomacy did not grow
much and diplomats were mostly confined to maintaining archives rather than
negotiating them.
iv. In the late middle ages, in Genova, the Duke of Milan (Italy) established the first
foreign mission. But this was still diplomacy of the court rather than that of the
people.
v. After the American and French revolutions, diplomacy became more democratic
and less aristocratic.
vi. The Congress of Vienna (1815) laid down procedures for diplomatic
immunities(safety) and defined diplomatic hierarchies.
4) How Diplomacy Functions
i. Diplomacy functions through a network of foreign officers, embassies,
consulates, and special missions operating around the globe.
ii. Diplomacy is bilateral in character but as a result of growing international and
regional organizations, it is becoming increasingly multi lateral in character.
5) What’s the difference between Diplomacy and Foreign Policy (FP)?
i. Diplomacy is one of the instruments for the application of foreign policy. In that
sense, diplomacy as a concept is narrower in scope than foreign policy.
 86

ii. Diplomacy is the method and process by which foreign policy is pursued but it is
not a policy onto itself. (diplomat is a cricketer, cricket or FP remains the same)
iii. Outcome of diplomatic negotiations can affect foreign policy options.

6) Traditional vs. Modern Diplomacy

i. Traditional diplomacy assumed that major European powers had special
responsibility for maintaining world peace and the colonies had no more
significant diplomatic role than that of satellites.
ii. Traditional diplomacy was professional but secretive and relied on a limited
cadre rather than extended diplomatic channels.
iii. Modern diplomacy is more open and democratic; it requires reciprocal bargains
and compromises so it is not possible for diplomats to spell out a given stance in
advance.
iv. Multilateralism is increasingly evident in the practice of modern diplomacy, with
behind the scenes preparations by diplomatic officials.
7) Instruments of Diplomacy
i. Most nation-states maintain Ministries of Foreign Affairs
ii. Foreign office officials include career diplomats and political diplomats appointed
by home governments.
iii. Ambassadors head foreign missions and serve as the personal representative of
the home state in host country (they can be career diplomats or political
appointees)
iv. Councilors of embassies rank second to the ambassador and they are career
diplomats.
v. Secretaries, with first, second and third rankings are mid-career officials
implementing foreign policies of their home countries.
vi. Attaches are junior career or non-career personnel focusing on specific areas
(commercial, agricultural, naval, press attaches are common)
8) Diplomatic Procedures and Practices
i. Agreation: Credentials of diplomatic envoys are approved by host countries
where they are to be appointed. Presentation of credentials and assuming
charge in host country involves interaction with the host governments.
ii. Diplomatic missions and personnel enjoy certain immunities and privileges like
the rights of extraterritoriality and inviolability. (safety, the rules on diplomats
are the same as that of their country)
 87

iii. Home states can dismiss diplomats or they can be declared persona-non-grata
by host countries.
9) Functions of Diplomacy
i. Representation: Their main duties are to implement the foreign policies of their
governments and to protect the national interests of their countries in the alien
land. For exercising their duties successfully, they have to cultivate social
contacts on foreign land.
ii. Negotiation: Negotiating includes transmission of messages between foreign
ministries of host and home states and the pursuit of agreements by
compromise and direct contact.
iii. Reporting: Reporting socio-cultural, economic and political conditions of host
country for formulating diplomatic strategies and foreign policies (Economic,
military attaches and political officers are sent to get feedback to frame foreign
policy);
iv. Protection of the interests of the nation and its citizens in foreign lands; As per
provisions of different bilateral and international treaties and agreements, a
diplomat shall protect the interests of his nation and its citizens in a foreign land.
10) Tasks of Diplomacy
i. to determine the major objectives of the state, and the power actually available
to fulfill these objectives;
ii. diplomacy must assess the objectives of other states and the power actually
available to fulfill these objectives;
iii. diplomacy must assess to what extent these objectives are compatible with each
other; iv.diplomacy must employ the means suited to the pursuit of its
objectives.
v.According to Morgenthau, ‘Failure in any one of these tasks may jeopardize the
success of foreign policy and with it the peace of the world.’
11) Open and Secret Diplomacy
i. Diplomacy, since its inception to the later part of the nineteenth century, was a
clandestine affair. So, for a very large period diplomatic activities were
conducted secretly. The Berlin Congress Treaty of 1878 was kept a secret.
ii. From the first half of the twentieth century, the demand for open diplomacy
gained ground. People started to denounce secret diplomacy mainly for two
reasons: the spread of democratic ideas and the hatred that a nation incurred
due to secret diplomacy.
 88

iii. Woodrow Wilson, the former US President, was an ardent supporter of open
diplomacy iv.Features of open diplomacy; rejection of the conclusion of secret
treaties; Conducting of diplomatic negotiations in full public glare.
12) Economic Diplomacy
i. Economic diplomacy means enhancing cooperation with other states through
increasing trade and commercial relations.
ii. Economic diplomacy avoids political differences, and places greater emphasis on
strengthening friendship through economic cooperation.
iii. In a changed international order after the Cold War, economic diplomacy
gradually gained momentum in different parts of the world.
iv. The Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan or the Warsaw Pact were forms of
economic diplomacy in some way or the other.
v. The onset of globalization gave a fillip to economic diplomacy. By the 1980s,
third world countries had started liberalizing their economies. This liberalization
programme had presented an unprecedented opportunity to the developed
world to engage in economic diplomacy with the third world countries
13) Future of Diplomacy
i. In an age of spectacular development of information technology, the role and
importance of professional diplomats are coming under scrutiny.
ii. With the spread of democratic ideals and growing demands for open diplomacy,
the traditional form of diplomacy is also facing a crisis. Democratic institutions
like the Parliament, media and peoples ‘organizations are trying to influence the
process of diplomacy.
iii. The world of diplomacy is, therefore, no longer the exclusive domain of the
professional diplomats only; science and technology and democratic ideals have
made deep inroads into this exclusive world.
iv. The groundwork and issues for talks between heads of different states have to
be prepared by the diplomats, because the politicians are not always very well
acquainted with every detail of foreign policies.
14) Diplomatic prerequisites
i. Diplomacy must be divested of the crusading spirit; those who try to achieve
higher (or singular) cause become impractical and impede negotiations.(to
understand the weaknesses and strengths of the other side, where they are
coming from, not to lose your cool and asses the other side).
ii. Foreign policy objectives must be defined in terms of national interest and
supported by adequate power, to enable diplomats to negotiate effectively.
 89

iii. Diplomats must be able to realize the objectives and interests of other nations as
well. iv.Nations must be willing to show flexibility on issues not vital to them or
else diplomacy will be in vain.

International Law

1) Introduction
i. States have strong incentives to free themselves from the insecurities of
international anarchy. States face common coordination and collaboration
problems, yet cooperation remains difficult under anarchy.
ii. To facilitate cooperation, states create international institutions, of which three
levels exist in modern international society: constitutional institutions,
fundamental institutions, and issue specific institutions or 'regimes'. We are
concerned with fundamental institutions, of which international law is one of the
most important.
iii. The quest for global governance is pushing international law into new areas,
raising questions about whether international law is transforming into a form of
supranational law.
iv. Individuals, and to some extent collectivities, are gradually acquiring rights and
responsibilities under international law, establishing their status as both subjects
and agents under international law.
v. Non-governmental actors are becoming increasingly important in the
development and codification of international legal norms.
2) What is International Law?
i. International laws are rules which relate to the functioning of individuals,
institutions and states in the international arena.
ii. International law has various ingredients including general principles of law and
justice, which are equally suited to regulating the conduct of individuals,
organizations within a state and states themselves.
3) Evolution of International Law
i. Formulation of international law can be traced back to the third and fourth
millenniums
B.C.
ii. Early rulers had made international rules to safeguard emissaries, initiation and
cessation of hostilities and arrangement of truces, and maritime laws.
 90

iii. To aid governance, the Romans devised principles of just gentrium or law of the
people. By the time the Roman Empire fell, application of these laws was widely
accepted.
iv. European states also contributed to international laws at a later stage in history.
By the 14th century, scholars were writing about international law. Hugo Grotius,
for example, produced a momentous work on laws concerning war and peace,
emphasizing the independent nature of law.
v. During the eighteenth century, three prominent schools of thought concerning
international law were evident; the positivists, the naturalists and the Grotians.
vi. The naturalists believed in upholding morality through laws. The positivists
focused on practicalities and the consensual nature of these laws. The Grotians
combined both naturalists and positivist elements.
vii. In the past century, the League and the UN system, and subsequently the
International Court of Justice have made important contributions to
international law. Other institutions like IMF or WTO influence laws concerning
trade economic laws.
4) Different Types of International Law
i. Private and Public Laws: private law concerns individuals, whereas public law
concerns the behavior of organizations and even states.
ii. Procedural and Substantive Laws: Procedural laws define types of permitted
behavior whereas substantive laws concern territorial rights of states.
iii. Laws of War and Peace: There are laws governing behavior of states in a state of
war (concerning rights of prisoners of war) and those meant to prevent outbreak
of violence and promote peace.
iv. Particular and General Laws: General or universal laws are applicable to all
sovereign states, whereas particular laws are defined by bilateral or regional
agreements.
5) Another Perspective on International Laws
i. The laws of power, coordination and reciprocity; Laws of power regulate
master-slave relations. Those of coordination regulate relations amongst
members of the same group. Laws of reciprocity refer to the intermediary
interaction which implies mutual benefit.
ii. Naturalists vs. Positivists; Naturalism and positivism developed side by side.
Naturalists argued that Divine authority was the source of all laws. Positivists
argued that only those international laws had validity, which were adopted
by consent of sovereign states.
6) Sources of International Law
 91

i. Article 38 of the ICJ recognizes natural laws, general laws, custom and legal
commentaries as the basic sources of international law.
ii. Based on principles of universal acceptability, some natural laws are applicable
across the world.
iii. Based on the implicit or explicit consent of states, customary laws are mainly
based on customs or treaties.
iv. General laws defined with reference to terms like justice or rights, enables jurists
to fill in the gaps left by positivist laws.
v. Legal commentaries help clarify, elaborate upon and apply the broad nature of
laws to specific circumstances
7) Formulation & Implementation of International Laws
i. There is no formal institution to make international laws, so they are made
outside of formal institutions. Issue of Treaties.
ii. If a sufficient number of states follow a customary practice, it becomes an
international custom.
iii. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), which is composed of UN member states
recommended by the Security Council, has an advisory capacity to interpret
treaties, but it lacks the authority of national courts.
iv. International tribunals also lack the authority of national judicial institutions.
8) Modern International Law and its Evolution
i. Modern international law is a historical artefact, a product of the revolutions in
thought and practice that transformed the governance of European states after
the French Revolution (1789).
ii. Prior to the French Revolution, in the 'Age of Absolutism', law was understood
principally as the command of a legitimate superior, and international law was
seen as a command of God, derived from natural law. In the modern period law
has come to be seen as something contracted between legal subjects, or their
representatives, and international law has been seen as the expression of the
mutual will of nations.
iii. Because of its historical roots, the modern institution of international law has a
number of distinctive characteristics, informed largely by the values of political
Liberalism.
iv. The most distinctive characteristics of the modern institution of international law
are its multilateral form of legislation, its consent-based form of legal obligation,
its language and practice of justification, and its discourse of institutional
autonomy.
 92

v. So long as international law was designed to facilitate international order, it was

circumscribed in key ways: states were the principle subjects and agents of
international law; international law was concerned with the regulation of inter-
state relations; and the scope of international law was confined to questions of
order.
9) International Law and Views of Different Theories
i. Realists argue that international law is only important when it serves the
interests of powerful states.
ii. Neo-liberals explain how self-interested states come to construct dense
networks of international legal regimes.
iii. Constructivists treat international law as part of the normative structures that
condition state and non-state agency in international relations. Like other social
norms, they emphasize the way in which law constitutes actors' identities,
interests, and strategies.
iv. New Liberals emphasize the domestic origins of state preferences and, in turn,
international law. Within international law, they stress the need to disaggregate
the state to understand transnational legal integration and interaction, and they
prioritize international humanitarian law.
v. Critical legal studies concentrate on the way in which the inherent Liberalism of
international law seriously curtails its radical potential.
10) International Humanitarian Law and War
i. International law is increasingly affecting domestic legal regimes and practices,
and the rules of the international legal system are no longer confined to issues of
order. As international humanitarian law evolves, issues of global justice are
permeating the international legal order.
ii. Placing limits on the legitimate use of force is one of the key challenges of the
international community, and the laws of war have evolved to meet this
challenge.
iii. The laws of war have traditionally been divided into those governing when the
use of force is legitimate, jus ad bellum, and how war may be conducted, jus in
bello.
iv. Laws governing when war is legally permitted have changed dramatically over
the history of the international system, the most notable difference being
between the nineteenth-century view that to wage war was a sovereign right to
the post-1945 view that war was only justified in self-defence or as part of a UN
mandated international peace enforcement action.
 93

v. Laws governing how war may be conducted divide, broadly, into three
categories: those governing weaponry, combatants, and non-combatants.
11) International versus National Laws
i. National laws have much greater legitimacy than international laws.
ii. While individuals rarely have recourse to self-help within nations, states rely on
selfhelp as a matter of norm lest they are bound by a treaty of some sort.
iii. With the passage of time, international laws are becoming more accepted and
complex sanctions and international censure ensure states to oblige to them.
12) Relevance of International Laws
i. Despite its limitations, international law helps give shape to international order.
ii. It influences and channels bilateral or even multilateral economic, social and
political cooperation.
iii. It provides the normative background based on which independent states can
make their decisions.
 94

[
Global Political Economy

International Political Economy; Theories in IPE: Mercantilism, EconomicLiberalism, and Neo-

Marxism

1) Evolution of International Political Economy

i. Immediately after the Second World War international institutions were created
to facilitate cooperation in the world-economy.
ii. The onset of the cold war postponed the operation of these institutions, as the
United States stepped in directly to manage the reconstruction of Europe and
the international monetary system based on the dollar.
iii. The Bretton Woods system of managed exchange rates and capital flows
operated until its breakdown in 1971 when the USA announced it would no
longer convert the dollar to gold.
iv. The 1970s were marked by a lack of international economic cooperation among
the industrialized countries, which floated their exchange rates and indulged in
new forms of trade protectionism.
v. Developing countries' dissatisfaction with the international system came to a
head in the 1970s when they pushed unsuccessfully for a new international
economic order.
vi. Trade negotiations were broadened to include many new areas but this led to
later resistance from emerging economies.
vii. In 2007 a power shift became more obvious in the global economy, with
emerging economies such as China and India playing a more prominent role in
negotiations in trade, finance, and development assistance.

2) Different Theorists and International Political Economy

i. Rational choice explains outcomes in IPE as the result of actors' choices, which
are assumed always to be rationally power or utility maximizing within given
particular incentives and institutional constraints.
ii. Institutionalists apply rational choice to states in their interactions with other
states in order to explain international cooperation in economic affairs.
iii. Constructivist approaches pay more attention to how governments, states, and
other actors construct their preferences, highlighting the role of identities,
beliefs, traditions, and values in this process.
iv. Neo-Gramscians highlight that actors define and pursue their interests within a
structure of ideas, culture, and knowledge which itself is shaped by hegemonic
powers. Institutionalists argue that international institutions will play an
 95

important and positive role in ensuring that globalization results in widely spread
benefits in the worldeconomy.
v. Realists and neo-realists reject the institutionalist argument on the grounds that
it does not account for the unwillingness of states ever to sacrifice power
relative to other states.
vi. Constructivists pay more attention to how governments, states, and other actors
construct their preferences, highlighting the role that state identities, dominant
beliefs, and ongoing debates and contestation plays in this process.
3) International Political Economy in an Age Of Globalization
a) Globalization poses some new constraints for all states, including the most
powerful. In particular, the emergence of global capital markets means that all
governments have to be cautious in their choice of exchange rate and interest
rate policies.
b) On other issues of economic policy, wealthier and more powerful countries are
less constrained by globalization than is portrayed by the globalists. This is
because the firms and investors whom governments are keen to attract are not
solely concerned with levels of taxation and wages. They are equally concerned
with factors such as the skills of the workforce, the provision of infrastructure,
and proximity to markets.
c) At the international level the more powerful states in the system get to set (and
enforce) many of the rules of the new global economy.
4) Theories; Mercantilism
a) Introduction
i. The main goal was to increase a nation's wealth by imposing government
regulation concerning all of the nation's commercial interests. It was
believed that national strength could be maximized by limiting imports via
tariffs and maximizing exports.
ii. Beginning around 1650, the British government pursued a policy of
mercantilism in international trade.
iii. Mercantilism stipulates that in order to build economic strength, a nation
must export more than it imports.
iv. To achieve this favorable balance of trade, the English passed regulatory
laws exclusively benefiting the British economy.
v. These laws created a trade system whereby Americans provided raw
goods to Britain, and Britain used the raw goods to produce
manufactured goods that were sold in European markets and back to the
colonies.
 96

vi. As suppliers of raw goods only, the colonies could not compete with
Britain in manufacturing. English ships and merchants were always
favored, excluding other countries from sharing in the British Empire’s
wealth.
b) Triangular Trade
i. British mercantilism manifested itself in the form of the triangular trade.
Trade routes linked the American Colonies, West Indies, Africa, and
England. Each port provided shippers with a payoff and a new cargo.
New England rum was shipped to Africa and traded for slaves, which
were brought to the West Indies and traded for sugar and molasses,
which went back to New England. Other raw goods were shipped from
the colonies to England, where they were swapped for a cargo of
manufactured goods.
ii. Mercantilism and the triangular trade proved quite profitable for New
England tradesmen and ship builders. But in the Southern Colonies,
where the Navigation Acts vastly lowered tobacco prices, economies
suffered. The triangular trade also spurred a rise in the slave population
and increased the merchant population, forming a class of wealthy elites
that dominated trade and politics throughout the colonies.
iii. Tenents of Mercantilism
 That every little bit of a country's soil be utilized for agriculture,
mining or manufacturing.
 That all raw materials found in a country be used in domestic
manufacture, since finished goods have a higher value than raw
materials.
 That a large, working population be encouraged.
 That all export of gold and silver be prohibited and all domestic
money be kept in circulation.
 That all imports of foreign goods be discouraged as much as
possible.
 That where certain imports are indispensable they be obtained at
first hand, in exchange for other domestic goods instead of gold
and silver.
 That as much as possible, imports be confined to raw materials
that can be finished [in the home country].
 97

 That opportunities be constantly sought for selling a country's

surplus manufactures to foreigners, so far as necessary, for gold
and silver.
 That no importation be allowed if such goods are sufficiently and
suitably supplied at home.
5) Economic Liberalism
a) Economic liberalism is the ideological belief in organizing the economy on
individualist and voluntarist lines, meaning that the greatest possible number of
economic decisions are made by individuals and not by collective institutions or
organizations.
b) It includes a spectrum of different economic policies, such as freedom of
movement, but it is always based on strong support for a market economy and
private property in the means of production.
c) Although economic liberalism can also be supportive of government regulation
to a certain degree, it tends to oppose government intervention in the free
market when it inhibits free trade and open competition.
d) However, economic liberalism may accept government intervention in order to
remove private monopoly, as this is considered to limit the decision power of
some individuals.
e) While economic liberalism favours markets unfettered by the government, it
maintains that the state has a legitimate role in providing public goods.
f) Economic liberalism is most often associated with support for free markets and
private ownership of capital assets, and is usually contrasted with similar
ideologies such as social liberalism and social democracy, which generally favor
alternative forms of capitalism such as welfare capitalism, state capitalism, or
mixed economies.
g) Economic liberalism also contrasts with protectionism because of its support for
free trade and open markets.
h) Historically, economic liberalism arose in response to mercantilism and
feudalism. Today, economic liberalism is also generally considered to be opposed
to non-capitalist economic orders, such as socialism and planned economies
6) Neo-Marxism
i. Neo-Marxism is a pretty loose term, and tends to encompass most of the trends
of Marxist philosophy arising from the New Left.
ii. There is certainly no unified ideology of Neo-Marxism in the way that there is in
orthodox Marxism, and many of the former's currents are in fact not in
agreement with one another.
 98

iii. Broadly, Neo-Marxism seeks to answer questions traditional or orthodox

Marxism cannot, especially in light of technological advances and economic and
political developments that Marx and Engels did not address or foresee. iv.The
most influential and important current in Neo-Marxist thought is the Frankfurt
School, which founded the Institute for Social Research in 1923.
v. The Frankfurt School is critical of both capitalism and Soviet state communism,
and sought to rectify the inadequacies of traditional Marxist theory. To do so,
they draw from other schools of thought, such as antipositivist sociology,
Weberian sociology, psychoanalysis, and existentialism.
vi. Beyond the ISR, the original Frankfurt School thinkers were only loosely affiliated
as a group, but they shared a common philosophical approach, and a belief that
a different path of socio-economic development from Soviet communism was
needed.
vii. The current of Neo-Marxist thought that is probably the most important and
influential historically and today is Dependency Theory, which originated with
the work of Hans Singer and Raúl Prebisch.
viii. In Dependency Theory, economic processes are largely defined as external and
based on a core-periphery model of a world economy, rather than the internal
approach of orthodox Marxism that sees economic exploitation occurring on a
nation-state scale.
ix. Much of the work in the Dependency Theory school was done on Latin America
and the decolonizing world by scholars such as Andre Gunder Frank and Samir
Amin.
x. Today, Dependency Theory has evolved into World Systems Theory, whose
originator and leading scholar is Immanuel Wallerstein.
xi. World Systems Theory expands on many of the basic ideas of Dependency
Theory, but is an even more macro approach to economic and social change,
arguing that nationstates should not be the basic unit of socio-economic analysis
at all, but rather that international economic systems themselves are the key.
8)Conclusion

IPE: Theories of Imperialism, Dependence and Interdependence discourse

1) Introduction
a) a policy of extending a country's power and influence through colonization, use
of military force, or other means.
b) Imperialism is a type of advocacy of empire. Its name originated from the Latin
word "imperium", which means to rule over large territories.
 99

c) Imperialism is "a policy of extending a country's power and influence through

colonization, use of military force, or other means". Imperialism has greatly
shaped the contemporary world.
d) The term imperialism has been applied to Western (and Japanese) political and
economic dominance especially in Asia and Africa in the 19th and 20th centuries.
Its precise meaning continues to be debated by scholars. Some writers, such as
Edward Said, use the term more broadly to describe any system of domination
and subordination organised with an imperial center and a periphery
e) Imperialism is defined as "an unequal human and territorial relationship, usually
in the form of an empire, based on ideas of superiority and practices of
dominance, and involving the extension of authority and control of one state or
people over another."
2) Dependency Theory
a. Introduction
i. Dependency theory is the notion that resources flow from a "periphery"
of poor and underdeveloped states to a "core" of wealthy states,
enriching the latter at the expense of the former. It is a central
contention of dependency theory that poor states are impoverished and
rich ones enriched by the way poor states are integrated into the "world
system".
ii. The theory arose as a reaction to modernization theory, an earlier theory
of development which held that all societies progress through similar
stages of development, that today's underdeveloped areas are thus in a
similar situation to that of today's developed areas at some time in the
past, and that therefore the task in helping the underdeveloped areas
out of poverty is to accelerate them along this supposed common path of
development, by various means such as investment, technology
transfers, and closer integration into the world market.
iii. Dependency theory rejected this view, arguing that underdeveloped
countries are not merely primitive versions of developed countries, but
have unique features and structures of their own; and, importantly, are
in the situation of being the weaker members in a world market
economy.
iv. Dependency theory no longer has many proponents as an overall theory,
but some writers have argued for its continuing relevance as a
conceptual orientation to the global division of wealth.
 100

b) Premises of Dependency Theory

 Poor nations provide natural resources, cheap labour, a destination for
obsolete technology, and markets for developed nations, without which
the latter could not have the standard of living they enjoy.
 Wealthy nations actively perpetuate a state of dependence by various
means. This influence may be multifaceted, involving economics, media
control, politics, banking and finance, education, culture, and sport.
c) Criticism
 Corruption: State-owned companies have higher rates of corruption than
privately owned companies.
 Lack of competition: By subsidizing in-country industries and preventing
outside imports, these companies may have less incentive to improve
their products, to try to become more efficient in their processes, to
please customers, or to research new innovations.
 Sustainability: Industries reliant on government support may not be
sustainable for very long particularly in poorer countries and countries
which largely depend on foreign aid from more developed countries.
 Domestic opportunity costs: Subsidies on domestic industries come out
of state coffers and therefore represent money not spent in other ways,
like development of domestic infrastructure, seed capital or need-based
social welfare programs. At the same time, the higher prices caused by
tariffs and restrictions on imports require the people either to forgo
these goods altogether or buy them at higher prices, forgoing other
goods.
3) Political Theories
Examples: Morgenthau, Cohen
Imperialism is simply a manifestation of the balance of power and is the process by
which nations try to achieve a favorable change in the status quo. The purpose of
imperialism is to decrease the strategic and political vulnerability of a nation.
4) Conservative Theories
Examples: Disraeli, Rhodes, Kipling
Imperialism is necessary to preserve the existing social order in the more developed
countries. It is necessary to secure trade, markets, to maintain employment and
capital exports, and to channel the energies and social conflicts of the metropolitan
populations into foreign countries. There is a very strong ideological and racial
assumption of Western superiority within this body of thought. The Philippines and
The Belgian Congo
 101

5) Liberal Theories
Examples: Hobson, Angell
Imperialism is a policy choice, not an inevitable consequence of capitalism.
Increasing concentration of wealth within the richer countries leads to
underconsumption for the mass of people. Overseas expansion is a way to reduce
costs (and thereby increase or maintain profit levels) and to secure new
consumption. Overseas expansion is not inevitable, however. A state can solve the
problem of underconsumption by increasing the income levels of the majority of the
population either through legislation concerning wage levels (minimum wage laws,
legalization of unions, child labor laws) or through income transfers (unemployment
compensation, welfare).
6) Marxist Theories
Example: Lenin
Imperialism also arises because increased concentration of wealth leads to
undeconsumption. However, since the state represents the capitalist interest it is
not possible to reduce underconsumption effectively through liberal strategies. Both
strategies involve taking away money from the bourgeoisie and Marx and Lenin did
not view this strategy as possible. Ultimately, according to Lenin, the world would be
completely divided up and the rich countries would then fight over the redivision of
the world. This analysis served as his explanation for World War I.
7) Social-Psychological Theories
Example: Schumpeter
Imperialism is objectless expansion, a pattern simply learned from the behavior of
other nations and institutionalized into the domestic political processes of a state by
a "warrior" class. This warrior class is created because of the need for defense, but,
over time, the class will manufacture reasons to perpetuate its existence, usually
through manipulation of crises.
These theories have been updated and modified by theorists who see an alliance between the
warrior class and corporate interests.
 102

PART 2
International Relation between two Wars: Russian Revolution

1) General Summary
a) Debates about the origins of the First World War focus on whether
responsibility should rest with the German government or whether war came
because of more complex systemic factors.
b) The Paris Peace settlement failed to address the central problems of European
security, and in restructuring the European state system created new sources
of grievance and instability.
c) The rise of Hitler posed challenges that European political leaders lacked the
ability and will to meet.
d) The German attack on the Soviet Union extended the scope and barbarity of
the war from short and limited campaigns to extended, large-scale, and
barbaric confrontation, fought for total victory.
e) The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor brought America into the war in Europe
and eventually led Germany into war on two fronts (again)
f) Debate persists about whether the atomic bomb should have been used in
1945, and about the effect that this had on the cold war.
g) The First World War produced the collapse of four European empires (the
Russian, German, Austro-Hungarian, and the Ottoman Empire in Turkey).
h) Different European powers had different attitudes to decolonization after
1945: some, such as the British, decided to leave, while others sought to
preserve their empires, in part (the French) or whole (the Portuguese).
i) European powers adopted different attitudes to different regions/countries.
For example, British withdrawal from Asia came much more quickly after 1945
than from Africa.
j) The process of decolonization was relatively peaceful in many cases; it led to
revolutionary wars in others (Algeria, Malaya, and Angola), whose scale and
ferocity reflected the attitudes of the colonial power and the nationalist
movements.
k) The struggle for independence/national liberation became embroiled in cold
war conflicts when the superpowers and/or their allies became involved, for
example Vietnam.
l) Whether decolonization was judged successful depends, in part, on whose
perspective you adopt—that of the European power, the independence
movement, or the people themselves.
 103

m) There are disagreements about when and why the cold war began, and who
was responsible. Distinct phases can be seen in East–West relations, during
which tension and the risk of direct confrontation grew and receded.
n) Some civil and regional wars were intensified and prolonged by superpower
involvement; others may have been prevented or shortened.
o) The end of the cold war has not resulted in the abolition of nuclear weapons.
p) Nuclear weapons were an important factor in the cold war. How far the arms
race had a momentum of its own is a matter of debate.
q) Agreements on limiting and controlling the growth of nuclear arsenals played
an important role in Soviet–American (and East–West) relations.
r) Various international crises occurred in which there was the risk of nuclear
war. Judging how close we came to nuclear war at these times remains open to
speculation.
2) Russian Revolution
a) The Russian Revolution took place in 1917, during the final phase of World War
I. It removed Russia from the war and brought about the transformation of the
Russian Empire into the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), replacing
Russia’s traditional monarchy with the world’s first Communist state. The
revolution happened in stages through two separate coups, one in February
and one in October. The new government, led by Vladimir Lenin, would solidify
its power only after three years of civil war, which ended in 1920.
b) Although the events of the Russian Revolution happened abruptly, the causes
may be traced back nearly a century. Prior to the revolution, the Russian
monarchy had become progressively weaker and increasingly aware of its own
vulnerability (and therefore more reactionary). Nicholas II—the tsar who led
Russia in the years leading up to the revolution—had personally witnessed
revolutionary terrorists assassinate his grandfather and, subsequently, his own
father respond to the assassination through brutal oppression of the Russian
people. When Nicholas II himself became tsar in 1894, he used similarly severe
measures to subdue resistance movements, which were becoming bolder and
more widespread every year. As Nicholas’s newly imposed oppressions in turn
incited still more unrest, he was forced to make concessions after each
incident: it was in this manner that Russia’s first constitution was created, as
was its first parliament. These concessions continued gradually until Nicholas
II’s grip on power became very tenuous.
c) As Nicholas II grew weaker, Vladimir Lenin rose to prominence as the most
powerful figure in Russia. Although this famous leader of the October
Revolution was not even in Russia for the February Revolution—he had lived in
 104

self-imposed exile in Europe since 1900 and returned to Russia only in April
1917—he nonetheless exerted tremendous influence. Whatever history’s
judgment of him, few other Russian revolutionaries possessed Lenin’s
decisiveness and strength of vision for Russia’s future. Born in 1870 in the
provincial town of Simbirsk as Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov, the young Lenin was
profoundly affected by his older brother Alexander’s1887 execution for being
involved in a plot to assassinate the tsar. As a young adult, Vladimir joined the
resistance movement himself and took the pseudonym Lenin but swore that he
would never engage in the sort of “adventurism” that had ended his brother’s
life. Nevertheless, his actions would one day become very adventurous indeed.
d) The revolution that Lenin led marked one of the most radical turning points in
Russia’s 1,300-year history: it affected economics, social structure, culture,
international relations, industrial development, and most any other benchmark
by which one might measure a revolution. Although the new government
would prove to be at least as repressive as the one it replaced, the country’s
new rulers were drawn largely from the intellectual and working classes rather
than from the aristocracy—which meant a considerable change in direction for
Russia.
e) The revolution opened the door for Russia to fully enter the industrial age.
Prior to1917, Russia was a mostly agrarian nation that had dabbled in industrial
development only to a limited degree. By 1917, Russia’s European neighbors
had embraced industrialization for more than half a century, making
technological advancements such as widespread electrification, which Russia
had yet to achieve. After the revolution, new urbanindustrial regions appeared
quickly in Russia and became increasingly important to the country’s
development. The population was drawn to the cities in huge numbers.
Education also took a major upswing, and illiteracy was almost entirely
eradicated.
f) The Russian Revolution also had considerable international consequences.
Lenin’s government immediately pulled Russia out of World War I, changing
the balance of forces for the remaining participants. During the ensuing civil
war in Russia, several nations, including the United States, sent troops to
Russia in hopes of keeping the chaos from spreading beyond Russia’s
boundaries. Over the next several decades, the Soviet Union actively
sponsored and assisted Communist movements and revolutions around the
world in an effort to broaden its sphere of influence. The country also played a
fundamental role in the defeat of Nazi Germany during World War II.
 105

g) Threatened by the possibility of revolutions in their own lands, the

governments of many Western nations viewed Communism as a spreading
threat and moved to isolate the Soviet Union as much as possible. Following
World War II and the advent of the nuclear age, a confrontation between the
Soviet Union and the United States took center stage. As this Cold War got
under way, the two countries emerged as superpowers with much of the rest
of the world falling in behind one or the other. A protracted nuclear arms race
between the United States and Soviet Union would last until the USSR finally
collapsed in 1991.

Topic 2: Fascism

1) Introduction
i. A number of political movements which arose in Europe after the World War I
are generally given the name "Fascist".
ii. The common features of this movement were their hostility of democracy and
socialism and the aim of establishing dictatorships.
iii. They succeeded in many countries of Europe, such as Hungary, Italy, Poland,
Portugal, Germany and Spain. Their success in Italy and Germany had the most
serious consequences.
iv. The term Fascism is of Italian origin. It was first used from the movement which
started in Italy under the leadership of Benito Mussolini. The movement had
certain welldefined features.
v. Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany),
Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American
regimes.
2) Characteristics of Fascism (Dr. Lawrence Britt)
i. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant
use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags
are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
ii. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and
the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human
rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look
the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations,
long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
iii. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied
into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common
 106

threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists;

socialists, terrorists, etc.
iv. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread: domestic
problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government
funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are
glamorized.
v. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost
exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are
made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the
state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
vi. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the
government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government
regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship,
especially in war time, is very common. vii.
vii. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the
government over the masses.
viii. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend
to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public
opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government
leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to
the government's policies or actions.
ix. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a
fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power,
creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
x. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only
real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely,
or are severely suppressed.
xi. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and
tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon
for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free
expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
xii. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are
given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to
overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism.
There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist
nations.
 107

xiii. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed
by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government
positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends
from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources
and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government
leaders.
xiv. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete
sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or
even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting
numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist
nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

Topic 3: League of Nations

1) Structure of League of Nations

i. The League of Nations (LON) was the predecessor to the United Nations. It
represented a major attempt by the great powers after the First World War
(1914–18) to institutionalize a system of collective security, and its founding
Covenant was formulated as part of the Treaty of Versailles (1919).
ii. First Meeting: The first meeting was held in Geneva in 1920, with 42 states
represented. Over the next 26 years, a total of 63 states were represented at
one time or another. iii.Last Meeting: The last meeting was held in 1946, at the
end of which the League was formally replaced by the United Nations which
promptly moved its headquarters to New York, reflecting not only the status of
the United States but also disillusionment with the performance of the League.
iv. Like the United Nations, the League consisted of an Assembly, a Council, and a
Secretariat. The Assembly, consisting of every member state, convened annually
in Geneva. The Council was composed of several permanent members (France,
Britain, Italy, Japan, and later Germany and the Soviet Union) and some
nonpermanent members elected by the Assembly.
v. It met more often than the Assembly to consider political disputes and to focus
on the reduction of armaments. Its decisions had to be unanimous. The
Secretariat, the administrative branch of the League, consisted of a Secretary-
General and a staff of 500 people.
vi. Several other organizations were associated with the League such as the World
Court and the International Labour Organization. To some extent, the League
was an extension of liberal, parliamentary practice to international relations. It
 108

was based on the idea that political compromise arrived at by open discussion
was the best means to promote political stability, an idea deeply held by one of
the main architects of the League, US President Woodrow Wilson.
vii. Like so many international organisations, the League was also designed in light of
the alleged lessons of the First World War, of which three were particularly
important.
i. First, in 1914 Germany had crossed the border into France and Belgium.
It was believed that in future wars it would be easy to decide who was
the aggressor, a decision that was meant to trigger a range of collective
countermeasures, ranging from diplomatic boycotts to the imposition of
sanctions and ultimately war.
ii. Second, the system for the prevention of conflicts rested on the
assumption that war could be prevented by the application of reason
based on legal principles. The idea that power could be subordinated to
law was a common assumption among many idealists of the interwar
period.
iii. Third, the speed of political developments in 1914 led to the
implementation of several mechanisms of delay to slow down unilateral
decision-making in a crisis. Only after a period of three months
subsequent to bringing a dispute to the Council was resort to war legal. It
was assumed that such time limits would be respected.
viii. The role of the League of Nations was:
i.It was based on the Fourteen Points of the US President Woodrow
Wilson. ii.It was created to ensure that there would be no repeat of the
First World War.
iii. It was suppose to keep the peace by encouraging nations to negotiate
(talk) over disputes rather than resorting to war.
iv. Members of the League agreed to 26 Articles in a Covenant (list of rules).
v. Article 10 promised collective security whereby members agreed that if
one member were attacked all other members would come to their
protection.
vi. Initially 42 members joined which later grew to 59 members by the
1930s.
vii. The defeated countries like Germany were not allowed to join.
viii. The Soviet Union (Russia) was not allowed to join because it was
Communist. ix.The USA despite the fact Wilson’s had founded it refused
to join the League.
 109

2) Causes of Failure of League of Nations

i. The failure of the League to deter or punish aggression by Italy, Japan, and
ultimately Germany in the 1930s reflected some fundamental flaws in the design
of the League.
ii. It should be noted that the League was never fully representative of the
international community.
iii. The United States Senate did not ratify the treaties and did not become a
member of the League.
iv. South Africa and Liberia were the only African states.
v. The Soviet Union was not invited to Versailles, and did not join the League until
1934.
vi. Few South American states were represented, and only China, Japan, and
Thailand represented Asia.
vii. Germany was missing from the start in light of its alleged responsibility for the
First World War.
viii. Because the League was primarily a European body, the number of states that
were able to carry out any police action against an aggressor was effectively
limited to France and Britain. Without their consent, of course, no decision was
likely to be carried out, and France in particular was determined to use the
League to contain Germany in Europe.
ix. The ultimate failure of the League to maintain international peace and security
was a product of its limited membership, its preservation of a territorial
settlement that humiliated Germany, and its faith in the willingness of great
powers to subordinate their short-term national interests to the preservation of
international peace.
x. Confronted with the rise of fascism in Italy, Germany, and Japan in the 1930s – a
powerful bloc of states that glorified war and embarked on a sustained
rearmament programme to achieve their aim to reconfigure the global balance
of power in their favour – the League was impotent.
xi. Indeed, it was established during a period in which powerful states continued to
rely on war as a means of resolving conflict, and when new forms of nationalism
not only undermined some European empires (Austria, Hungary, Turkey) but
also justified new patterns of imperial domination.
xii. In light of the rapid shifts in power that were taking place in the first half of the
twentieth century, combined with the diplomatic isolation of the United States
and the Soviet Union, it is hardly surprising that the League participated in rather
than prevented the decline of Europe.
 110

xiii. During 1938, Britain and France tried a new policy - 'appeasement' (negotiating
directly with Hitler); this failed in 1939 when Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia.
xiv. When war broke out in 1939, the League closed down; its headquarters in
Geneva remained empty throughout the war.
xv. In 1943 - at a Conference in Tehran - America, Britain and Russia agreed to set up
a new international organisation (the 'United Nations') when the war finished.
xvi.On 12 April 1946, the League met in Geneva and formally abolished itself.
The British delegate, Robert Cecil, said: 'The League is dead. Long live the United
Nations'.
Powers of Council of League of Nations
i. To settle disputes between countries the League could: Start an inquiry by the
Council, Provide a hearing by an impartial neutral country, Ask for a ruling by the
Permanent Court of International Justice.
ii. The enforcement powers of the League of Nations included:
i. Moral Pressure (Turn world opinion against a guilty country).
ii. Economic Sanctions (Stop countries trading with a guilty country).
iii. Military Force (Go to war against a guilty country).
iii. The Strengths of the League were:
 It had the goodwill of governments and ordinary people
towards it.
 Most of the major countries had joined the League
 Defeated countries were later allowed to join the League.
 It provided a forum to end disputes peacefully.
iv. The Weaknesses of the League were:
 The USA did not join it.
 The Soviet Union (Russia) did not join until 1934.
 It had very little power and no permanent army.
 It failed to encourage disarmament.
 International suspicions and rivalries between countries
continued.
 Countries left the League when they disagreed with its
decisions. vii.Economic sanctions especially without US
support proved very ineffective.
 It had to uphold the Treaty of Versailles, which was
increasingly viewed as unfair.
 It failed to stop Japan (Manchuria), Italy (Abyssinia) or
Germany (Hitler’s breaking of the Treaty of Versailles).
 111

Second World War

1) Introduction
I. World War II (WWII or WW2), also known as the Second World War, was a
global war that lasted from 1939 to 1945, though related conflicts began earlier.
It involved the vast majority of the world's nations—including all of the great
powers—eventually forming two opposing military alliances: the Allies and the
Axis.
II. It was the most widespread war in history, and directly involved more than 100
million people from over 30 countries. In a state of "total war", the major
participants threw their entire economic, industrial, and scientific capabilities
behind the war effort, erasing the distinction between civilian and military
resources.
III. Marked by mass deaths of civilians, including the Holocaust (in which
approximately 11 million people were killed) and the strategic bombing of
industrial and population centres (in which approximately one million were
killed, and which included the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki), it
resulted in an estimated 50 million to 85 million fatalities.
2) Timeline
I. 1939: Hitler invades Poland on 1 September. Britain and France declare war on
Germany two days later.
II. 1940: Rationing starts in the UK. German 'Blitzkrieg' overwhelms Belgium,
Holland and France. Churchill becomes Prime Minister of Britain. British
Expeditionary Force evacuated from Dunkirk. British victory in Battle of Britain
forces Hitler to postpone invasion plans.
III. 1941: Hitler begins Operation Barbarossa - the invasion of Russia. The Blitz
continues against Britain's major cities. Allies take Tobruk in North Africa, and
resist German attacks. Japan attacks Pearl Harbor, and the US enters the war.
IV. 1942: Germany suffers setbacks at Stalingrad and El Alamein. Singapore falls to
the Japanese in February - around 25,000 prisoners taken. American naval
victory at Battle of Midway, in June, marks turning point in Pacific War. Mass
murder of Jewish people at Auschwitz begins.
V. 1943: Surrender at Stalingrad marks Germany's first major defeat. Allied victory
in North Africa enables invasion of Italy to be launched. Italy surrenders, but
Germany takes over the battle. British and Indian forces fight Japanese in
Burma.
 112

VI. 1944: Allies land at Anzio and bomb monastery at Monte Cassino. Soviet
offensive gathers pace in Eastern Europe. D Day: The Allied invasion of France.
Paris is liberated in August. Guam liberated by the US Okinawa, and Iwo Jima
bombed.
VII. 1945: Auschwitz liberated by Soviet troops. Russians reach Berlin: Hitler
commits suicide and Germany surrenders on 7 May. Truman becomes
President of the US on Roosevelt's death, and Attlee replaces Churchill. After
atomic bombs are dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan surrenders on 14
August.
3) Major Causes of WWII
I. The Rearmament of Germany
i. German rearmament began after Hitler left 1932-4 Geneva Disarmament
Conference, stating that as the powers would not disarm to his level, he
would rearm Germany to their level. By 1935 rearmament was well
underway. This involved conscription and munitions factories.
ii. Rearmament alarmed the French who, feeling insecure, reinforced the
Maginot line (built between 1929 and 1934). This was a line of steel and
concrete fortifications stretching from Belgium to Switzerland and was
called ‘a gate without a fence’ because Germany would be able to avoid
it and invade France via Belgium. France remained passive without
Britain’s support.
iii. Britain was sympathetic towards Germany and even signed an Anglo
German naval Treaty (June 1935) allowing Germany’s navy to be 35% of
the size of the Royal Navy. Hitler used his new found arms to support
Franco in the Spanish Civil War (1936-9) Hitler sent the Condor Legion of
the Luftwaffe to bomb Guernica on 26th April, 1937. Guernica was razed
to the ground and Franco went on to conquer the Basque areas of Spain.
Hitler had used Spain as a practise ground.
II. The Remilitarization of the Rhineland (1936)
i. Having broken the Treaty of Versailles once, Hitler risked doing it a
second time by marching 30,000 troops into Cologne on 7th March 1936.
France, with 250,000 troops mobilised, remained passive because Britain
would not support her. Britain took the view that Germany was
‘marching into her own back yard.’
ii. To show that his remilitarization was popular, Hitler held a plebiscite,
which showed that 98.8% were in favour. He went on to build his own
defensive fortification, the Siegfried Line.
 113

a) The Rome Berlin Axis (October 1936): Originally Mussolini did not want to be
Hitler’s ally and in 1935 talks were held with Britain and France at the Stresa
Front, but these came to nothing when Anthony Eden of Britain threatened oil
sanctions against Mussolini during the Abyssinian crisis. This caused the Rome-
Berlin Axis in 1936. Mussolini and Hitler strengthened their alliance on two
occasions. The Anti-Commintern Pact (November 1937) with Japan. The Pact of
Steel (May 1939).
b) Britain’s policy of Appeasement (May/June 1937 – March 1939)”: Neville
Chamberlain became British Prime Minister on 28th May 1937, and followed
the policy of appeasing Germany, believing that all Hitler wanted to do was
unite German speaking people. In so doing, Hitler would break the Treaty of
Versailles (28th June 1919) but Chamberlain did not believe Hitler would cause
war. Churchill disagreed, citing Mein Kampf (1924) where Hitler had written
that Germany must regain lands ‘in the East … by the power of the sword.’
Chamberlain had misinterpreted Hitler’s aims. (We have the benefit of
hindsight.)
c) The Anschluss with Austria (13th March, 1938): Austrian Fascists wanted to
unite with Germany but Schuschnigg, the Austrian Chancellor, wanted Austria
to be independent. He was unable to gain support from abroad (France and the
Little Entente) so agreed to meet Hitler in Berlin. He was persuaded to accept
Hitler’s henchman Seyss-Inquart as Minster of the Interior. Rioting in Vienna
increased under Seyss-Inquart’s leadership and Schuschnigg resigned. Seyss-
Inquart invited Hitler to assist him and on 13th March, 1938 troops from the
Wermacht entered Austria. In a plebiscite on the Anschluss a vote of 99.75% in
favour was recorded. This was ‘rigged’ by biased questioning. Hitler made it
seem that he had been invited into Austria, in fact he had incited the union.
d) Hitler Gained the Sudetenland (29th September, 1938)
v. The Sudetenland was lost by Austria in the Treaty of St. Germain (10th
September 1919) and hereby Czechoslovakia gained 3 million German speaking
people. After the Anschluss the Sudeten German leader, Konrad Henlein,
demanded a union with Germany. Unable to receive help from France, the Czech
Premier, Benes, mobilised alone. Fearing war, Chamberlain met Hitler on three
occasions at Berchtesgaden, Godesburg and at Munich.
vi. Munich Agreement (29th September, 1938)This was signed by Hitler,
Mussolini, Chamberlain and Daladier. Benes was not present. It said: Hitler could
take the Sudetenland the following day without a plebiscite, Hungary and Poland
could take border districts from Czechoslovakia, Britain and Germany would
never go to war.
 114

iii. Chamberlain’s Reaction: On his return to England, Chamberlain

announced that he had gained ‘peace with honour, peace in our time’.
The majority rejoiced, except Churchill.
iv. Hitler’s Reaction: In public Hitler seemed satisfied, but in private he
exploded saying ‘that fellow Chamberlain has spoiled my entry into
Prague.’
e) The Fall of Czechoslovakia (March 1939)
i.In March 1939, Hitler forced Lithuania to give him Memel where most
people spoke German. So far Hitler had only taken German speaking
territory, so Chamberlain could still appease Hitler. However, in March
1939, Hitler threatened to bomb Prague, so the Czechs surrendered.
Chamberlain realised appeasement had failed, so he began to rearm
Britain and guarantee peace in Poland.
f) Nazi-Soviet Pact (29th August, 1939) – The Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact
i. By the summer of 1939, Hitler’s plans to invade Poland were complete.
He realised that to invade Poland mighty cause Britain to attack him from
the West but he was more concerned to avoid a Russian attack from the
east. Therefore to avoid a war on two fronts, he arranged the Nazi-Soviet
Pact, which said that if either country went to war the other would
remain neutral.
ii. Hitler gained the chance to invade Poland with a war on one front, if
Britain supported Poland.
iii. Stalin of USSR gained time to rearm in case Hitler attacked him later, and
the chance to gain the eastern half of Poland. This would provide the
USSR with a bufferzone.
g) German Invasion of Poland (1st September, 1939) (Immediate Cause): German
tanks invaded West Prussia and Posen on the 1st September 1939 using
blitzkrieg tactics. (This is a lightning, sudden attack co-ordinating air, then land
forces). Chamberlain sent an ultimatum (a warning with a threat) saying that if
Hitler did not withdraw from Poland by 11am, 3rd September 1939, Britain
would declare war. On 3rd September, Britain, followed by France, declared
war on Germany.
h) Hitler’s Aims: To unite German speaking people (using NSD which had been
denied at the Treaty of Versailles. He wanted lebensraum (living space) in order
to gain selfsufficiency (autarky) He wanted to dominate Europe and the World
To achieve any of these aims would involve breaking the Treaty of Versailles
(28/6/1919), and this could lead to war.
 115

i) The aggression of Hitler’s Allies

Italy – Mussolini wanted a Fascist-Roman empire in the Mediterranean and
Africa (e.g. Abyssinian invasion in 1935.) Japan – Japan wanted a Nipponese
empire in the Pacific, extending into China and Australia (e.g. Manchurian
invasion in 1931). Germany, Italy and Japan were hostile to Communism
(USSR), and this way a cause of war and vice versa.
j) Democratic powers were passive
 USA – Isolated
 France – France was unlikely, and reluctant, to intervene against
Germany, because she could not rely on Britain’s and America’s support.
 Britain – Between 1934 and 1937, Britain was sympathetic to
German recovery.
Between May 1937 and March 1939, Britain appeased Germany.
 These powers could have stopped Fascist aggression earlier
than 1939.
k) The League of Nations failed to keep peace and control disarmament
l) The harshness of the Treaty of Versailles (28th June, 1919) on Germany:
Land losses, Reparations, and War Guilt.

Cold War:

Decolonization of Asia and Africa

1) Introduction
i. The decolonization of Asia and Africa was the gradual growth of independence
movements on the Asian and African continent, leading ultimately to the retreat
of foreign powers and the creation of a number of nation-states in the region.
ii. A number of events were catalysts for this shift, most importantly the Second
World War.
iii. Prior to World War II, some countries such as the Philippines during 1898 had
proclaimed independence from Spain.
iv. The first state to be de-colonised was the Philippines in 1898, and the last was
Macau in 1999.
2) Historical Background
i. In the mid to late 19th century, the European powers colonized much of Africa
and Southeast Asia. During the decades of imperialism, the industrializing
 116

powers of Europe viewed the African and Asian continents as reservoirs of raw
materials, labor, and territory for future settlement.
ii. In most cases, however, significant development and European settlement in
these colonies was sporadic. However, the colonies were exploited, sometimes
brutally, for natural and labor resources, and sometimes even for military
conscripts.
iii. In addition, the introduction of colonial rule drew arbitrary natural boundaries
where none had existed before, dividing ethnic and linguistic groups and natural
features, and laying the foundation for the creation of numerous states lacking
geographic, linguistic, ethnic, or political affinity. iv.During World War II Japan,
itself a significant imperial power, drove the European powers out of Asia.
v.After the Japanese surrender in 1945, local nationalist movements in the former
Asian colonies campaigned for independence rather than a return to European
colonial rule. In many cases, as in Indonesia and French Indochina, these
nationalists had been guerrillas fighting the Japanese after European surrenders,
or were former members of colonial military establishments. These
independence movements often appealed to the United States Government for
support.

3) Process of decolonization
i. There was no one process of decolonization. In some areas, it was peaceful, and
orderly. ii.In many others, independence was achieved only after a protracted
revolution.
iii. A few newly independent countries acquired stable governments almost
immediately; others were ruled by dictators or military juntas for decades, or
endured long civil wars.
iv. Some European governments welcomed a new relationship with their former
colonies; others contested decolonization militarily.
v. The process of decolonization coincided with the new Cold War between the
Soviet Union and the United States, and with the early development of the new
United Nations.
vi. Decolonization was often affected by superpower competition, and had a
definite impact on the evolution of that competition. It also significantly changed
the pattern of international relations in a more general sense.
 117

vii. The creation of so many new countries, some of which occupied strategic
locations, others of which possessed significant natural resources, and most of
which were desperately poor, altered the composition of the United Nations and
political complexity of every region of the globe
4) European powers and decolonization
i. In the mid to late 19th century, the European powers colonized much of Africa
and Southeast Asia.
ii. During the decades of imperialism, the industrializing powers of Europe viewed
the African and Asian continents as reservoirs of raw materials, labor, and
territory for future settlement. In most cases, however, significant development
and European settlement in these colonies was sporadic.
iii. However, the colonies were exploited, sometimes brutally, for natural and labor
resources, and sometimes even for military conscripts. In addition, the
introduction of colonial rule drew arbitrary natural boundaries where none had
existed before, dividing ethnic and linguistic groups and natural features, and
laying the foundation for the creation of numerous states lacking geographic,
linguistic, ethnic, or political affinity.
iv. During World War II Japan, itself a significant imperial power, drove the
European powers out of Asia. After the Japanese surrender in 1945, local
nationalist movements in the former Asian colonies campaigned for
independence rather than a return to European colonial rule.
v. These independence movements often appealed to the United States
Government for support. While the United States generally supported the
concept of national selfdetermination, it also had strong ties to its European
allies, who had imperial claims on their former colonies.
vi. The Cold War only served to complicate the U.S. position, as U.S. support for
decolonization was offset by American concern over communist expansion and
Soviet strategic ambitions in Europe.
vii. Several of the NATO allies asserted that their colonial possessions provided them
with economic and military strength that would otherwise be lost to the alliance.
Nearly all of the United States’ European allies believed that after their recovery
from World War II their colonies would finally provide the combination of raw
materials and protected markets for finished goods that would cement the
colonies to Europe.
viii. Whether or not this was the case, the alternative of allowing the colonies to slip
away, perhaps into the United States’ economic sphere or that of another
 118

power, was unappealing to every European government interested in postwar

stability.
ix. Although the U.S. Government did not force the issue, it encouraged the
European imperial powers to negotiate an early withdrawal from their overseas
colonies.
5) Cold War and Decolonization
i. As the Cold War competition with the Soviet Union came to dominate U.S.
foreign policy concerns in the late 1940s and 1950s, the Truman and Eisenhower
Administrations grew increasingly concerned that as the European powers lost
their colonies or granted them independence, Soviet-supported communist
parties might achieve power in the new states. This might serve to shift the
international balance of power in favor of the Soviet Union and remove access to
economic resources from U.S. allies.
ii. Events such as the Indonesian struggle for independence from the Netherlands
(1945– 50), the Vietnamese war against France (1945–54), and the nationalist
and professed socialist takeovers of Egypt (1952) and Iran (1951) served to
reinforce such fears, even if new governments did not directly link themselves to
the Soviet Union. Thus, the United States used aid packages, technical assistance
and sometimes even military intervention to encourage newly independent
nations in the Third World to adopt governments that aligned with the West.
iii. The Soviet Union deployed similar tactics in an effort to encourage new nations
to join the communist bloc, and attempted to convince newly decolonized
countries that communism was an intrinsically non-imperialist economic and
political ideology.
iv. Many of the new nations resisted the pressure to be drawn into the Cold War,
joined in the “nonaligned movement,” which formed after the Bandung
conference of 1955, and focused on internal development.
6) UN and Decolonization
i. The newly independent nations that emerged in the 1950s and the 1960s
became an important factor in changing the balance of power within the United
Nations.
ii. In 1946, there were 35 member states in the United Nations; as the newly
independent nations of the “third world” joined the organization, by 1970
membership had swelled to 127.
iii. These new member states had a few characteristics in common; they were non-
white, with developing economies, facing internal problems that were the result
of their colonial past, which sometimes put them at odds with European
 119

countries and made them suspicious of European-style governmental structures,

political ideas, and economic institutions.
iv. These countries also became vocal advocates of continuing decolonization, with
the result that the UN Assembly was often ahead of the Security Council on
issues of selfgovernance and decolonization.
v. The new nations pushed the UN toward accepting resolutions for independence
for colonial states and creating a special committee on colonialism,
demonstrating that even though some nations continued to struggle for
independence, in the eyes of the international community, the colonial era was
ending. 7)Conclusion

Cold War

1) Introduction
I. The Cold War refers to the phenomenon that overshadowed world politics
from the end of WWII until the fall of the former Soviet Union.
II. The Cold War was waged on political, economic, and propaganda fronts and
had only limited recourse to weapons.
III. The term was first used by the English writer George Orwell in an article
published in 1945 to refer to what he predicted would be a nuclear stalemate
between “two or three monstrous super-states, each possessed of a weapon by
which millions of people can be wiped out in a few seconds.” It was first used in
the United States by the American financier and presidential adviser Bernard
Baruch in a speech at the State House in Columbia, South Carolina, in 1947.
IV. The term Cold War signifies the state of affairs in which bitter relations, hostility
and confrontation between the two post-WWII superpowers (US and USSR).
V. The Cold War did result in an arms race, diplomatic confrontation, proxy
warfare, ideological competition which engulfed the entire world order. The
Cold War resulted in formation of eastern and western power blocks and
corresponding alliances and institutions under the Communist and Capitalist
power blocks. The United States accused the Soviet Union of seeking to expand
their version of communism throughout the world.
VI. The Soviets, meanwhile, charged the United States with practicing imperialism
and attempting to stop revolutionary activity in other countries. Cold War
tensions increased the likelihood of a third world war, which could have led to
devastating consequences due to the possibility of nuclear conflict. The Korean
War, the Vietnam War and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan were some of the
 120

violent conflicts indirectly fueled by the Cold War. Another manifestation was
in the propaganda wars between the United States and the USSR. Indeed, it
was far from certain that a global nuclear war wouldn't result from smaller
regional wars, which heightened the level of concern for each conflict. This
tension shaped the lives of people around the world almost as much as the
actual fighting did.
VII. In the war between the U.S.S.R. and U.S.A. a major arena was the strategy of
technology. This cold war also involved covert conflict, through acts of
espionage. Beyond the actual fighting and killing that went on through
intelligence services, the Cold War was heavily manifest in the concerns about
nuclear weapons and the wars which could be fought with them, as well as in
the propaganda wars between the United States and the USSR.
VIII. One major hotspot of conflict was Germany, particularly the city of Berlin.
Arguably, the most vivid symbol of the Cold War was the Berlin Wall. The Wall
isolated West Berlin (the portion of the city controlled by West Germany and
the Allies) from East Berlin and the territory of East Germany, which completely
surrounded it and was supported by the Soviets. Formation of Power Blocks
The eastern (communist) power block led by the Soviets and the western
(capitalists) power block by the US also formed alliances.
IX. The communist nations were held together by the Warsaw Pact and the
capitalist power block formed NATO.
X. Communist Ideology and Practice: The common ownership of means of
production and distribution provided the political and economic basis for the
spread of communism, based on Marx‟s philosophy of empowering the
proletariat. Communism in practice resulted in dominance of a single political
party and centralized decision making. The bureaucracy became the new
bourgeoisie under communism in practice.
XI. Capitalist Ideology and Practice: Capitalism is based on the notion of individual
liberty and the right to own private property. At the political level, capitalism
emphasized the need for democratic government, multiparty politics, the
independence of the judiciary, and freedom of press. In practice capitalism has
caused problems for minorities, growing inequalities and arguments concerning
the role of the state in managing the economy.
2) Types of War
I. Hot War: this is actual warfare. All talks have failed and the armies are fighting.
II. Warm War: this is where talks are still going on and there would always be a
chance of a peaceful outcome but armies, navies etc. are being fully mobilized
and war plans are being put into operation ready for the command to fight.
 121

III. Cold War: this term is used to describe the relationship between America and
the Soviet Union 1945 to 1980. Neither side ever fought the other – the
consequences would be too appalling – but they did ‘fight’ for their beliefs
using client states who fought for their beliefs on their behalf e.g.South
Vietnamwas anticommunist and was supplied by America during the war while
North Vietnam was pro-Communist and fought the south (and the Americans)
using weapons from communist Russia or communist China. In Afghanistan, the
Americans supplied the rebel Afghans after the Soviet Union invaded in 1979
while they never physically involved themselves thus avoiding a direct clash
with the Soviet Union.
3)Origins of the Cold War
I. Following the surrender of Nazi Germany in May 1945 near the close of World
War II, the uneasy wartime alliance between the United States and Great Britain
on the one hand and the Soviet Union on the other began to unravel.
II. By 1948 the Soviets had installed left-wing governments in the countries of
eastern Europe that had been liberated by the Red Army. The Americans and
the British feared the permanent Soviet domination of eastern Europe and the
threat of Soviet-influenced communist parties coming to power in the
democracies of western Europe.
III. The Soviets, on the other hand, were determined to maintain control of eastern
Europe in order to safeguard against any possible renewed threat from
Germany, and they were intent on spreading communism worldwide, largely for
ideological reasons. The Cold War had solidified by 1947–48, when U.S. aid
provided under the Marshall Plan to western Europe had brought those
countries under American influence and the Soviets had installed openly
communist regimes in eastern Europe.
4)The struggle between superpowers
I. The Cold War reached its peak in 1948–53. In this period the Soviets
unsuccessfully blockaded the Western-held sectors of West Berlin (1948–49);
the United States and its European allies formed the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO), a unified military command to resist the Soviet presence in
Europe (1949); the Soviets exploded their first atomic warhead (1949), thus
ending the American monopoly on the atomic bomb; the Chinese communists
came to power in mainland China (1949); and the Soviet-supported communist
government of North Korea invaded U.S.-supported South Korea in 1950, setting
off an indecisive Korean War that lasted until 1953.
II. From 1953 to 1957 Cold War tensions relaxed somewhat, largely owing to the
death of the longtime Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin in 1953; nevertheless, the
 122

standoff remained. A unified military organization among the Soviet-bloc

countries, the Warsaw Pact, was formed in 1955; and West Germany was
admitted into NATO that same year. Another intense stage of the Cold War was
in 1958–62. The United States and the Soviet Union began developing
intercontinental ballistic missiles, and in 1962 the Soviets began secretly
installing missiles in Cuba that could be used to launch nuclear attacks on U.S.
cities. This sparked the Cuban missile crisis (1962), a confrontation that brought
the two superpowers to the brink of war before an agreement was reached to
withdraw the missiles.
III. The Cuban missile crisis showed that neither the United States nor the Soviet
Union were ready to use nuclear weapons for fear of the other’s retaliation (and
thus of mutual atomic annihilation). The two superpowers soon signed the
Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty of 1963, which banned aboveground nuclear weapons
testing. But the crisis also hardened the Soviets’ determination never again to be
humiliated by their military inferiority, and they began a buildup of both
conventional and strategic forces that the United States was forced to match for
the next 25 years.
IV. Throughout the Cold War the United States and the Soviet Union avoided direct
military confrontation in Europe and engaged in actual combat operations only
to keep allies from defecting to the other side or to overthrow them after they
had done so. Thus, the
Soviet Union sent troops to preserve communist rule in East Germany (1953),
Hungary (1956), Czechoslovakia (1968), and Afghanistan (1979). For its part, the
United States helped overthrow a left-wing government in Guatemala (1954),
supported an unsuccessful invasion of Cuba (1961), invaded the Dominican
Republic (1965) and Grenada (1983), and undertook a long (1964–75) and
unsuccessful effort to prevent communist North Vietnam from bringing South
Vietnam under its rule.
5)Toward a new world order
I. In the course of the 1960s and ’70s, however, the bipolar struggle between the
Soviet and American blocs gave way to a more-complicated pattern of
international relationships in which the world was no longer split into two
clearly opposed blocs. A major split had occurred between the Soviet Union and
China in 1960 and widened over the years, shattering the unity of the
communist bloc. In the meantime, western Europe and Japan achieved dynamic
economic growth in the 1950s and ’60s, reducing their relative inferiority to the
United States. Less-powerful countries had more room to assert their
 123

independence and often showed themselves resistant to superpower coercion

or cajoling.
II. The 1970s saw an easing of Cold War tensions as evinced in the Strategic Arms
Limitation Talks (SALT) that led to the SALT I and II agreements of 1972 and
1979, respectively, in which the two superpowers set limits on their antiballistic
missiles and on their strategic missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons.
That was followed by a period of renewed Cold War tensions in the early 1980s
as the two superpowers continued their massive arms buildup and competed
for influence in the Third World. But the Cold War began to break down in the
late 1980s during the administration of Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev. He
dismantled the totalitarian aspects of the Soviet system and began efforts to
democratize the Soviet political system. When communist regimes in the Soviet-
bloc countries of eastern Europe collapsed in 1989–90, Gorbachev acquiesced in
their fall. The rise to power of democratic governments in East Germany,
Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia was quickly followed by the unification of
West and East Germany under NATO auspices, again with Soviet approval.
III. Gorbachev’s internal reforms had meanwhile weakened his own Communist
Party and allowed power to shift to Russia and the other constituent republics of
the Soviet Union. In late 1991 the Soviet Union collapsed and 15 newly
independent nations were born from its corpse, including a Russia with a
democratically elected, anticommunist leader. The Cold War had come to an
end.
6) Cold War in Europe
I. The October Revolution of 1917 had sowed the seeds of Communism in Europe.
The Soviet Union‟s ambitions were checked by the rise of fascism in Italy and
Germany.
II. The Soviets agreed to join France, Britain and the US to check the power of the
fascists during WWII. At the end of WWII however, tensions grew between the
former Allies over dividing the spoils of war. The Soviets were reluctant to grant
Poland independence and did not want to vacate their troops from eastern
Germany.
Communism spread to Poland and led to East Germany.
III. The Cold War intensified in the next few years and the Soviets managed to
install Communist regimes in Bulgaria, Hungary and in Romania. Thereafter,
Albania, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia also came under the influence of the
Soviets and Finland‟s coalition government was also dominated by the
Communists.
 124

IV. Europe was thus divided into two blocks: the Eastern block controlled by the
Soviets and the Western block backed by the US. The post-WWII outbreak of
conflict in Greece between the government and the Communist guerillas was a
turning point in US foreign policy, when President Truman vowed to check the
Soviet influence and to actively protect its foreign interests abroad.
7) Truman Doctrine: The Truman Doctrine was meant to fill the vacuum in power politics
created by the weakening of Britain so as to prevent the global domination of
Communism. The Truman Doctrine offered direct assistance to Greece and to Turkey to
check Communist influence and bypassed even the UN mechanism (a trend which was
to reoccur in later years).
8) Marshal Plan: The Marshal Plan (named after the US Secretary of Defense) was an
extension of the Truman Doctrine to protect (western) Europe from economic collapse
and communist domination. Aid under the Marshal Plan was used to reconstruct war
ravaged Europe and it became the basis for lending for development to newly
independent countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
9) Expansion of the Cold War Arena
I. Communism also spread to China with the initial backing of Soviets. The
disposed Chiang Kai Sek government was exiled to Formosa, which is now
Taiwan. The spread of Communism to China also lent support to North Korea,
where the US backed the South Koreans. Soviet support to the North
Vietnamese led to more serious US engagement in the conflict, due to the fear
that Cambodia, Laos, Burma and Thailand could also become Communist.
Despite sending up to 600,000 troops to Vietnam by 1965, the North
Vietnamese won the battle with support of China and the Soviets.
II. In the M.E, the US provided active support to the Israelis but the Soviets were
not able to influence the ME conflict to its advantage. In Latin America, the
Soviet influence in Cuban and Nicaragua made the US very nervous and it
supported brutal regimes like that of Pinochet in Chile to prevent its fall to
communist influence.
III. The Congo, Ghana and Gold Coast got military and financial aid from the Soviets,
which also led the US to take counter measures in Africa. In South Asia, besides
Indian leaning towards the Soviet and the Pakistani inclination towards the US,
the invasion of Afghanistan became a major Cold War arena for a proxy war
between the Superpowers.
10) Reconciliation (Détente)
I. Even at the height of the Cold War, there were efforts to prevent an outbreak of
all out conflict as that could have brought an end to human civilization as a
 125

whole. Khrushchev and Eisenhower yet at Camp David and commenced the
trend towards disarmament.
II. A Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT) was signed in 1962, a hotline was established
between the heads of states in 1963 and the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was
signed in 1968.
III. From 1969 to 1978, a period of détente remained, where both sides accepted
the status quo in view of the mutually assured destruction (MAD) capacity of the
superpowers and as the realization concerning costs of nuclear arsenals was
becoming apparent.
IV. Nixon visited USSR and signed a Limitation on Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM)
Systems and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, indicating adoption of a
defensive rather than offensive posture by both superpowers.
V. Strategic Arms Limitation Talks continued from 1969 to 1979. The US proposed
ban on using mobile land sites and the superpowers also reached an agreement
on a Seabed Treaty, banning use of sea-beds as nuclear launch sites
11) Resurgence of tensions
I. The invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 fanned the embers of the Cold War again.
The USSR‟s interference in Angola was also another irritant and the new US
administration was also less tolerant and it wanted to begin building bridges
with China, which Soviets were now opposed to, these moves simultaneously
ended the period of détente.
II. Jimmy Carter used the human rights agenda to criticize Soviet backed regimes,
the US discovered a Soviet brigade in Cuba and withdrew from SALT II, it
boycotted the Olympic games in Moscow in 1980 and imposed a grain embargo
on the USSR.
III. The Soviets in turn banned the LA Olympics in 1984 and shot down a South
Korean air liner and by 1983 they pulled out completely from bilateral arms talks
with the US after the Cruise and Pershing 2 missiles were found deployed by
three west European countries.
IV. The overthrow of the Shah of Iran in 1979 also impelled the US to secure bases
in Oman, Kenya and Somalia to obtain a strategic stronghold and protects its
interests around the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean.
V. On the other hand, the Soviets, Cubans, Nicaraguans and even the Ethiopians
were accused by the US of supplying arms to insurgents El Salvador in Central
America.
 126

VI. While the Cold War ended practically with dismantling of the 35 km Berlin Wall
in 1989, it wasn‟t until the London Summit a few years later that the Cold War
was formally announced to be over London Summit.
The London Summit emphasized the need for the US to reduce the number of
nuclear weapons it had deployed in Europe. It obtained a pledge to withdraw
the 1470 nuclear tipped artillery shells from West Germany and for the Soviets
to withdraw troops from Central and Eastern Europe. It redefined NATO‟s new
role from strength seeking alliance to a peace keeping mission.

12) End of the Cold War

I. The process that brought the Cold War to an end began in the second half of the
1980s. It led to the Malta Summit between President Bush and Mikhail
Gorbachev in 1989.
II. The Washington Summit in 1990 between the same leaders resulted in signing
of number of nuclear, chemical and conventional arms reduction agreements.
Enormous defense spending by America (the implications of which were first
hinted at by President Eisenhower's speech on the Military-industrial complex)
under President
Ronald Reagan is often seen as a major factor in the end of the war. According to this
theory, the robust Western economies could absorb the expenses of programs
such as the Star Wars missile defense but the Eastern bloc countries crippled
themselves trying to match them. However, Reagan's policy towards the Soviet
Union defined Eastern bloc governments as "totalitarian", under a doctrine
which denied that such regimes could ever undergo internal transformation
towards democracy. Thus Reagan's foreign policy was never intended to bring
about the changes which actually occurred in Eastern Europe and the Soviet
Union.
III. Corrupt governments and citizens' desire for greater personal freedom and
greater individual wealth were also major factors in the collapse of the Soviet
Union and its satellite countries.
IV. Others argue that the Soviet Union's collapse was already inevitable. There is
certainly evidence that the CIA played up Soviet military power through the
1980s.
13) The World after the Cold War
I. The balance of power shifted drastically after the Cold War and its effects were
felt the world over (Consider the case of Pakistan for e.g. which felt abandoned
by the US after the fall of the Soviets).
 127

II. The collapse of the Soviet Union led to the emergence of new states and the
change of governments in several countries (Breakup of Yugoslavia for e.g.).
Unresolved conflicts, in Korea, Vietnam and Germany, complicated by the
interference of the superpowers came to a quick end.
III. A new world order emerged at the end of the Cold War, which was influenced
by multilateralism and a unilateral superpower. The end of the Cold War called
for a new focus in IR which could better analyze and anticipate the realties of a
new world order. The end of communism also had economic implications which
boosted the legitimacy of the market mechanism.
14) The Capitalist Ideology: Capitalism is based on the notion of individual liberty and the
right to own private property. At the political level, capitalism emphasized the need for
democratic government, multiparty politics, independence of the judiciary, and
freedom of press. In practice capitalism has caused problems for minorities,
growing inequalities and arguments concerning the role of the state in managing the
economy.
15) The Effects of the Cold War:
I. The United States believed that the Soviet Union's expansion threatened the
developing nations of the world. So, in 1949 President Truman and Congress
approved nearly $400 million for technical development programs in Latin
America, Asia, and Africa. The goal of this Point Four Program was to modernize
and strengthen developing nations and discourage the growth of communism.
II. Gorbachev's policy of Glasnost eliminated the strict censorship practiced for
hundreds of years. Glasnost stands for openness, and Soviet citizens were now
allowed to speak openly about their country's problems. Perestroika, or
"restructuring," was Gorbachev's attempt to end the inefficiency and corruption
in government.
III. The United States and other Western nations decided to form alliances against
possible Soviet attempts to extend their sphere of influence. In April 1949 the
United States
signed the North Atlantic Treaty. Members agreed that an attack on one of them
would be considered an attack on all of them. The Soviets later formed an
opposing alliance known as The Warsaw Pact. Because of the arms race many
countries in the world now own nuclear weapons.
16) Timeline of the Cold War:
1940s

1945: February 4-11-- Yalta Conference Cold War Begins

1945: August 6 -- United States first used atomic bomb in war (A bomb was dropped on
 128

Hiroshima + Nagasaki)
1945: August 8 -- Russia enters war against Japan
1945: August 14 -- Japanese surrender End of World War II
1946: March -- Winston Churchill delivers "Iron Curtain" Speech
1947: March -- Truman declares active role in Greek Civil War
1947: June -- Marshall Plan is announced
1948: February -- Communist takeover in Czechoslovakia
1948: June 24 -- Berlin Blockade begins
1949: July -- NATO ratified
1949: May 12 -- Berlin Blockade ends
1949: September -- Mao Zedong, a Communist, takes control of China
1949: September -- Soviets explode first atomic bomb

1950s

1950: February -- Joe McCarthy begins Communist witch hunt

1950: June -- Korean War begins
1951: January 12 -- Federal Civil Defense Administration established
1953: June 19 -- Rosenberg executions
1953: July -- Korean War ends
1954: March -- KGB established
1954 -- CIA helps overthrow unfriendly regimes in Iran and Guatemala
1954: July -- Vietnam split at 17th parallel
1955: May -- Warsaw Pact formed
1956: October - November -- Rebellion put down in Communist Hungary. Egypt took
control of Suez Canal; U.S. refused to help take it back.
1957: October 4 -- Sputnik launched into orbit
1958: November -- Khrushchev demands withdrawal of troops from Berlin
1959: January -- Cuba taken over by Fidel Castro
1959: September -- Khrushchev visits United States; denied access to Disneyland

1960s

1960: May -- Soviet Union reveals that U.S. spy plane was shot down over Soviet
territory
1960: November -- John F. Kennedy elected President
1961: April -- Bay of Pigs invasion
1961: July -- Kennedy requests 25% spending increase for military
 129

1961: August 13 -- Berlin border closed

1961: August 17 -- Construction of Berlin Wall begins
1962: -- U.S. involvement in Vietnam increased
1962: October -- Cuban Missile Crisis
1963: July -- Nuclear Test Ban Treaty ratified
1963: November -- President Kennedy assassinated in Dallas, Texas
1964: August -- Gulf of Tonkin incident
1965: April -- U.S. Marines sent to Dominican Republic to fight Communism
1965: July -- Announcement of dispatching of 150,000 U.S. troops to Vietnam
1968: January -- North Korea captured U.S.S. Pueblo
1968: August -- Soviet troops crush Czechoslovakian revolt
1969: July 20 -- Apollo 11 lands on the moon

1970s

1970: April -- President Nixon extends Vietnam War to Cambodia

1972: July -- SALT I signed
1973: January -- Cease fire in Vietnam between North Vietnam and United States
1973: September -- United States helps overthrow Chile government
1973: October -- Egypt and Syria attack Israel; Egypt requests Soviet aid
1974: August -- President Nixon resigns
1975: April 17 -- North Vietnam defeats South Vietnam
1979: July -- SALT II signed
1979: November -- Shah of Iran overthrown; Iranian Hostage Crisis

1980s

1983: -- President Reagan proposes Strategic Defense Initiative

1983: October -- U.S. troops overthrow regime in Grenada
1985: -- Iran-Contra Affair (arms sold to Iran, profits used to support contras in
Nicaragua)
1985: -- Mikhail Gorbachev ascends to power in Soviet Union
1986: -- Gorbachev ends economic aid to Soviet satellites
1986: October -- Reagan and Gorbachev resolve to remove all intermediate nuclear
missiles from Europe
1986: November -- Iran-Contra Affair revealed to public
 130

1987: October -- Reagan and Gorbachev agree to remove all medium and short-range
nuclear missiles by signing treaty
1989: January -- Soviet troops withdraw from Afghanistan
1989: June -- China puts down protests for democracy; Poland becomes independent
1989: September -- Hungary becomes independent
1989: November -- Berlin Wall fall
1989: December -- Communist governments fall in Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, and
Rumania; Soviet empire ends

1990s

1990: March -- Lithuania becomes independent

1990: May 29 -- Boris Yeltsin elected to presidency of Russia
1990: October 3 -- Germany reunited
1991: April -- Warsaw Pact ends
1991: August -- End of Soviet Union, Cold War Ends
Unipolarity (New World Order) and Revival of Multi-Polarity

1) From The Cold War to the War On Terror

I. The cold war was a complex relationship that assumed competition but
remained cold in large part because of the existence of nuclear weapons.
II. Most experts assumed the cold war would continue and were surprised when
it came to a peaceful conclusion.There is no academic consensus as to why the
cold war came to an end when it did or why it did.
III. The end of the cold war divided—and still divides—International Relations
scholars into mainstream realists and ideas-oriented constructivists.
IV. The term 'globalization' was rarely used before 1989 but became one of the
most popular ways of defining international politics after the cold war. Though
globalization is a much disputed term, analysts agree that it describes a one-
world system where all actors have to play by the same economic rules.
Globalization has become the master discourse of governments around the
world. Globalization has produced many winners and a large number of losers,
but there would appear to be no escaping its competitive logic. Most experts
did not anticipate—and some did not look forward to—the new American
hegemony following the end of the cold war. In spite of the spread of
democracy and globalization, most US policy-makers still viewed the world as
a threatening and dangerous place during the 1990s.
 131

V. The United States after the cold war is best described as a 'superpower
without a mission'. After the fiasco in Somalia the majority of Americans were
reluctant to use US forces abroad.In spite of the break-up of former
Yugoslavia, Europe benefited as much from the end of the cold war as the
United States.
VI. Europeans after the cold war were divided over a series of key issues, most
notably the degree of European integration, economic strategy, and the
foreign policy aspirations of the European Union. The European Security
Strategy of 2003 was one of the first serious efforts by the EU to think about
its international role under conditions of globalization.
VII. Many issues face Europe, including Turkish membership of the EU, the
position of Europe's Muslims, and China's economic challenge.
VIII. The first Russian President, Boris Yeltsin, sought a new partnership with the
West but was often accused by his domestic enemies of not defending the
Russian national interest. Vladimir Putin, his successor, has pursued more
authoritarian policies at home, brought Russia's economic assets back under
state control, and pursued a more nationalist foreign policy abroad.
IX. A new cold war between the West and Russia is unlikely because of the
important economic and political changes that have occurred in Russia since
the collapse of the USSR in 1991.
X. Compared to Europe after 1945, the international relations of East Asia during
the cold war were highly volatile, marked by revolutions, wars, and
insurgencies.
XI. The end of the cold war left many issues in its wake and led Aaron Friedberg
(1993) to conclude that Asia was primed for further rivalry. Friedberg's thesis
has been challenged as being too pessimistic: economic growth, regional
integration, America's presence, and Japan's peaceful foreign policy continue
to make the region less dangerous than he suggested.
XII. One of the big questions now facing the region and the United States is 'rising
China'. Realists insist it will challenge the status quo. Others believe it can rise
peacefully.
XIII. One of the defining areas of instability during the cold war was the Third
World. With the end of the cold war the term 'Third World' has been
challenged by many analysts.
XIV. China and India are prime examples of countries where globalization has
produced high levels of development.
 132

XV. Inequality creates security challenges in the form of migration, refugees, and
in certain instances, political violence directed against the more powerful
West.
XVI. September 11 effectively brought the post-cold war era to an end and in the
process transformed US foreign policy.
XVII. The war to remove Saddam Hussein was sold as part of the war on terror; very
few analysts, however, saw a connection between Iraq and 9/11.The reasons
for going to war have been much disputed, though most people now believe it
was a strategic error.
XVIII. The longer-term impact of the Bush doctrine could very easily weaken
America's global position over the long term.
2) Introduction
I. “The post-Cold War era saw optimism, and the balance of power shifted solely
to the United States”
II. With the breakup of the Soviet Union into separate nations, and the re-
emergence of the nation of Russia, the world of pro-U.S. and pro-Soviet alliances
broke down. Different challenges presented themselves, such as climate change
and the threat of nuclear terrorism. Regional powerbrokers in Iraq and Saddam
Hussein challenged the peace with a surprise attack on the small nation of
Kuwait in 1991.
III. President George H.W. Bush organized a coalition of allied and Middle Eastern
powers that successfully pushed back the invading forces, but stopped short of
invading Iraq and capturing Hussein. As a result, the dictator was free to cause
mischief for another twelve years.
IV. After the Gulf War, many scholars like Zbigniew Brzezinski claimed that the lack
of a new strategic vision for U.S. foreign policy resulted in many missed
opportunities for its foreign policy. The United States mostly scaled back its
foreign policy budget as well as its cold war defense budget during the 1990s,
which amounted to 6.5% of GDP while focusing on domestic economic
prosperity under President Clinton, who succeeded in achieving a budget
surplus for 1999 and 2000.
3) The aftermath of the Cold War
I. It continues to influence world affairs. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union,
the post–Cold War world was widely considered as unipolar, with the United
States the sole remaining superpower. The Cold War defined the political role of
the United States in the post–World War II world: by 1989 the U.S. held military
alliances with 50 countries, and had 526,000 troops posted abroad in dozens of
 133

countries, with 326,000 in Europe (two-thirds of which in west Germany) and

about 130,000 in Asia (mainly Japan and South Korea).
II. The Cold War also marked the apex of peacetime military-industrial complexes,
especially in the United States, and large-scale military funding of science. These
complexes, though their origins may be found as early as the 19 th century, have
grown considerably during the Cold War. The military-industrial complexes have
great impact on their countries and help shape their society, policy and foreign
relations.
4) New World Order
I.A concept that defined the world power after the Cold-War was known as the new
world order. The most widely discussed application of the phrase of recent times
came at the end of the Cold War. Presidents Mikhail Gorbachev and George
H.W. Bush used the term to try to define the nature of the post Cold War era,
and the spirit of a great power cooperation they hoped might materialize .
Historians will look back and say this was no ordinary time but a defining
moment: an unprecedented period of global change, and a time when one
chapter ended and another began.
5) War on Terrorism
I. A concept that defined the world power after the Cold-War was known as the
new world order. The most widely discussed application of the phrase of recent
times came
at the end of the Cold War. Presidents Mikhail Gorbachev and George H.W. Bush
used the term to try to define the nature of the post Cold War era, and the spirit
of a great power cooperation they hoped might materialize . Historians will look
back and say this was no ordinary time but a defining moment: an
unprecedented period of global change, and a time when one chapter ended
and another began.
II. Furthermore, when no weapons of mass destruction were found after a military
conquest of Iraq, there was worldwide skepticism that the war had been fought
to prevent terrorism, and the continuing war in Iraq has had serious negative
public relations consequences for the image of the United States.
6) Multipolar World
I. The big change during these years was a transition from a bipolar world to a
multipolar world. While the United States remains a strong power economically
and militarily, rising nations such as China, Pakistan, India, Brazil, and Russia as
well as a united Europe have challenged its dominance. Foreign policy analysts
such as Nina Harchigian suggest that the six emerging big powers share common
 134

concerns: free trade, economic growth, prevention of terrorism, and efforts to

stymie nuclear proliferation.
II. And if they can avoid war, the coming decades can be peaceful and productive
provided there are no misunderstandings or dangerous rivalries.
7) General Overview
I. An era ended when the Soviet Union collapsed on Dec. 31, 1991. The
confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union defined the Cold
War period. The collapse of Europe framed that confrontation. After World War
II, the Soviet and American armies occupied Europe. Both towered over the
remnants of Europe's forces. The collapse of the European imperial system, the
emergence of new states and a struggle between the Soviets and Americans for
domination and influence also defined the confrontation. There were, of course,
many other aspects and phases of the confrontation, but in the end, the Cold
War was a struggle built on Europe's decline.
II. Many shifts in the international system accompanied the end of the Cold War. In
fact, 1991 was an extraordinary and defining year. The Japanese economic
miracle ended. China after Tiananmen Square inherited Japan's place as a
rapidly growing, exportbased economy, one defined by the continued pre-
eminence of the Chinese Communist Party. The Maastricht Treaty was
formulated, creating the structure of the subsequent European Union. A vast
coalition dominated by the United States reversed the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.
III. Three things defined the post-Cold War world. The first was U.S. power. The
second was the rise of China as the center of global industrial growth based on
low wages. The third was the re-emergence of Europe as a massive, integrated
economic power. Meanwhile, Russia, the main remnant of the Soviet Union,
reeled while Japan shifted to a dramatically different economic mode.
IV. The post-Cold War world had two phases. The first lasted from Dec. 31, 1991,
until Sept.
11, 2001. The second lasted from 9/11 until now.
V. The initial phase of the post-Cold War world was built on two
assumptions. The first assumption was that the United States was the dominant
political and military power but that such power was less significant than before,
since economics was the new focus. The second phase still revolved around the
three Great Powers — the United States, China and Europe — but involved a
major shift in the worldview of the United States, which then assumed that pre-
eminence included the power to reshape the Islamic world through military
action while China and Europe single-mindedly focused on economic matters.
 135

8) The Three Pillars of the International System

I. In this new era, Europe is reeling economically and is divided politically. The
idea of Europe codified in Maastricht no longer defines Europe. Like the
Japanese economic miracle before it, the Chinese economic miracle is drawing
to a close and Beijing is beginning to examine its military options. The United
States is withdrawing from Afghanistan and reconsidering the relationship
between global pre-eminence and global omnipotence. Nothing is as it was in
1991.
II. Europe primarily defined itself as an economic power, with sovereignty largely
retained by its members but shaped by the rule of the European Union.
Europe tried to have it all: economic integration and individual states. But now
this untenable idea has reached its end and Europe is fragmenting. One
region, including Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, has low
unemployment. The other region on the periphery has high or extraordinarily
high unemployment.
III. Germany wants to retain the European Union to protect German trade
interests and because Berlin properly fears the political consequences of a
fragmented Europe. But as the creditor of last resort, Germany also wants to
control the economic behavior of the EU nation-states. Berlin does not want
to let off the European states by simply bailing them out. If it bails them out, it
must control their budgets. But the member states do not want to cede
sovereignty to a German-dominated EU apparatus in exchange for a bailout.
IV. In the indebted peripheral region, Cyprus has been treated with particular
economic savagery as part of the bailout process.
V. China's economy couldn't possibly continue to expand at the same rate.
Leaving aside all the specific arguments, extraordinarily rapid growth in an
export-oriented economy requires economic health among its customers. It is
nice to imagine expanded domestic demand, but in a country as impoverished
as China, increasing demand requires revolutionizing life in the interior.
VI. It is interesting to recall the extravagant claims about the future of Japan in
the 1980s. Awestruck by growth rates, Westerners did not see the hollowing
out of the financial system as growth rates were sustained by cutting prices
and profits. Japan's miracle seemed to be eternal. It wasn't, and neither is
China's. And China has a problem that Japan didn't: a billion impoverished
people. Japan exists, but behaves differently than it did before; the same is
happening to China.
VII. Both Europe and China thought about the world in the post-Cold War period
similarly. Each believed that geopolitical questions and even questions of
 136

domestic politics could be suppressed and sometimes even ignored. They

believed this because they both thought they had entered a period of
permanent prosperity. 1991-2008 was in fact a period of extraordinary
prosperity, one that both Europe and China simply assumed would never end
and one whose prosperity would moot geopolitics and politics.
VIII. Periods of prosperity, of course, always alternate with periods of austerity,
and now history has caught up with Europe and China. Europe, which had
wanted union and sovereignty, is confronting the political realities of EU
unwillingness to make the fundamental and difficult decisions on what union
really meant. For its part, China wanted to have a free market and a
communist regime in a region it would dominate economically. Its economic
climax has left it with the question of whether the regime can survive in an
uncontrolled economy, and what its regional power would look like if it
weren't prosperous.
IX. And the United States has emerged from the post-Cold War period with one
towering lesson: However attractive military intervention is, it always looks
easier at the beginning than at the end. The greatest military power in the
world has the ability to defeat armies. But it is far more difficult to reshape
societies in America's image. A Great Power manages the routine matters of
the world not through military intervention, but through manipulating the
balance of power. The issue is not that America is in decline. Rather, it is that
even with the power the United States had in 2001, it could not impose its
political will — even though it had the power to disrupt and destroy regimes
— unless it was prepared to commit all of its power and treasure to
transforming a country like Afghanistan. And that is a high price to pay for
Afghan democracy.
X. The United States has emerged into the new period with what is still the
largest economy in the world with the fewest economic problems of the three
pillars of the post-Cold War world. It has also emerged with the greatest
military power. But it has emerged far more mature and cautious than it
entered the period. There are new phases in history, but not new world
orders. Economies rise and fall, there are limits to the greatest military power
and a Great Power needs prudence in both lending and invading.
9) A New Era Begins
I. Eras unfold in strange ways until you suddenly realize they are over. For
example, the Cold War era meandered for decades, during which U.S.-Soviet
detentes or the end of the Vietnam War could have seemed to signal the end of
 137

the era itself. Now, we are at a point where the post-Cold War model no longer
explains the behavior of the world. We are thus entering a new era.
II. First, the United States remains the world's dominant power in all dimensions. It
will act with caution, however, recognizing the crucial difference between pre-
eminence and omnipotence.
III. Second, Europe is returning to its normal condition of multiple competing
nation-states. While Germany will dream of a Europe in which it can write the
budgets of lesser states, the EU nation-states will look at Cyprus and choose
default before losing sovereignty.
IV. Third, Russia is re-emerging. As the European Peninsula fragments, the Russians
will do what they always do: fish in muddy waters. Russia is giving preferential
terms for natural gas imports to some countries, buying metallurgical facilities in
Hungary and Poland, and buying rail terminals in Slovakia. Russia has always
been economically dysfunctional yet wielded outsized influence — recall the
Cold War. The deals they are making, of which this is a small sample, are not in
their economic interests, but they increase Moscow's political influence
substantially.
V. Fourth, China is becoming self-absorbed in trying to manage its new economic
realities. Aligning the Communist Party with lower growth rates is not easy. The
Party's reason for being is prosperity. Without prosperity, it has little to offer
beyond a much more authoritarian state.
VI. And fifth, a host of new countries will emerge to supplement China as the
world's lowwage, high-growth epicenter. Latin America, Africa and less-
developed parts of Southeast Asia are all emerging as contenders.
10) Relativity in the Balance of Power
I. There is a paradox in all of this. While the United States has committed many
errors, the fragmentation of Europe and the weakening of China mean the
United States emerges more powerful, since power is relative. It was said that
the post-Cold War world was America's time of dominance. I would argue that it
was the preface of U.S. dominance. Its two great counterbalances are losing
their ability to counter U.S. power because they mistakenly believed that real
power was economic power. The United States had combined power —
economic, political and military — and that allowed it to maintain its overall
power when economic power faltered.
II. A fragmented Europe has no chance at balancing the United States. And while
China is reaching for military power, it will take many years to produce the kind
of power that is global, and it can do so only if its economy allows it to. The
 138

United States defeated the Soviet Union in the Cold War because of its balanced
power. Europe and China defeated themselves because they placed all their
chips on economics. And now we enter the new era.

Post Cold War: Terrorism

1) Introduction
I. The War on Terror is a term commonly applied to an international military
campaign begun by the United States and United Kingdom with support from
other countries after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks . The campaign's
official purpose was to eliminate al-Qaeda and other militant organizations. The
two main military operations associated with the War on Terror were Operation
Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq.
II. The phrase "War on Terror" was first used by U.S. President George W. Bush on
20 September 2001. The Bush administration and the Western media have since
used the term to denote a global military, political, legal, and ideological
struggle targeting organizations designated as terrorist and regimes accused of
supporting them. It was typically used with a particular focus on Al-Qaeda and
other militant Islamists. Although the term is not officially used by the
administration of U.S. President Barack Obama, it is still commonly used by
politicians, in the media, and officially by some aspects of government, such as
the United States' Global War on Terrorism Service Medal.
2) Precursor to 9/11 Attacks
I. The origins of al-Qaeda as a network inspiring terrorism around the world and
training operatives can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan (December
1979–February 1989). The United States supported the Islamist mujahadeen
guerillas against the military forces of the Soviet Union and the Democratic
 139

Republic of Afghanistan. In May 1996 the group World Islamic Front for Jihad
Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), sponsored by Osama bin Laden and later
reformed as al-Qaeda, started forming a large base of operations in Afghanistan,
where the Islamist extremist regime of the Taliban had seized power that same
year. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden, as the head of alQaeda, signed a
fatwā declaring war on the West and Israel, and later in May of that same year
al-Qaeda released a video declaring war on the U.S. and the West.

3) U.S. Military Responses (Afghanistan)

I. On 20 September 2001, in the wake of the 11 September attacks, George W.
Bush delivered an ultimatum to the Taliban government of Afghanistan to turn
over Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda leaders operating in the country or face
attack. The Taliban demanded evidence of bin Laden's link to the 11 September
attacks and, if such evidence warranted a trial, they offered to handle such a
trial in an Islamic Court. The US refused to provide any evidence.
II. Subsequently, in October 2001, US forces invaded Afghanistan to oust the
Taliban regime. On 7 October 2001, the official invasion began with British and
U.S. forces conducting airstrike campaigns over enemy targets. Kabul, the
capital city of Afghanistan, fell by mid-November. The remaining al-Qaeda and
Taliban remnants fell back to the rugged mountains of eastern Afghanistan,
mainly Tora Bora. In December, Coalition forces (the U.S. and its allies) fought
within that region. It is believed that Osama bin Laden escaped into Pakistan
during the battle.
4) U.S. Military Responses (Iraq)
I. Iraq had been listed as a State Sponsor of Terrorism by the U.S. since 1990,
when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. Iraq was also on the list from 1979 to
1982; it had been removed so that the U.S. could provide material support to
Iraq in its war with Iran. Hussein's regime proved a continuing problem for the
U.N. and Iraq's neighbors due to its use of chemical weapons against Iranians
and Kurds.
II. In October 2002, a large bipartisan majority in the United States Congress
authorized the president to use force if necessary to disarm Iraq in order to
"prosecute the war on terrorism. " After failing to overcome opposition from
France, Russia, and China against a UNSC resolution that would sanction the use
of force against Iraq, and before the U.N. weapons inspectors had completed
their inspections, the U.S. assembled a "Coalition of the Willing" composed of
nations who pledged support for its policy of regime change in Iraq.
 140

III. The Iraq War began in March 2003 with an air campaign, which was immediately
followed by a U.S.-led ground invasion . The Bush administration stated that the
invasion was the "serious consequences" spoken of in the UNSC Resolution
1441. The Bush administration also stated that the Iraq War was part of the War
on Terror, a claim that was later questioned.
IV. Baghdad, Iraq's capital city, fell in April 2003 and Saddam Hussein's government
quickly dissolved. On 1 May 2003, Bush announced that major combat
operations in Iraq had ended. However, an insurgency arose against the U.S.-led
coalition and the newly developing Iraqi military and post-Saddam government.
The insurgency, which included al-Qaeda affiliated groups, led to far more
coalition casualties than the invasion. Iraq's former president, Saddam Hussein,
was captured by U.S. forces in December 2003. He was executed in 2006.
5) Conclusion

End of History, Clash of Civilizations

12) End of History:

I. One was Francis Fukuyama’s “end of history” thesis, first outlined in an article in
the National Interest in 1989 then elaborated in a book published in 1992. It
pronounced total victory for Western capitalism and liberal democracy over all
other competing ideologies and even predicted a boring future of peace and
tranquility.
II. This article was written in 1989, in a period of unpredictable changes in the
history. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, socialism, Which is the main
threat and alternative to liberalism was defeated. In this newly occurring
situation, he wrote his article, without examining this process in detail and with
its multi-dimensional aspects.
III. At the beginning of this article, he briefly summarizes his main argument as
follows; victory of economic and political liberalism occurred at the end of the
20th century. The victory of the West and Western idea is evident firstly with
the collapse o f systematic alternatives to Western liberalism. He states that, in
the past decade, there have been important changes in the intellectual climate
of the world's two largest communist countries(Russia, China) and reform
movements have begun in both. Also it can be seen in the spread of consumerist
Western culture. As a result of these indications, he reaches to his main idea:
"What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War or the passing
of a particular period of post-war history; that is the end point of mankind's
ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy
 141

as the final formof human government." But as we see from the beginning, he
states his arguments without a strong basis and with a lack of evidence.
IV. After expressing his main arguement, he makes some references to Marx, Hegel
and Kojeve. He says that his main concept 'the end of history', is not an original
concept. This concept was firstly used by Hegel. According to Hegel, history is a
dialectical process, with a beginning, a middle and an end. On the other hand,
Marx, believes that, the direction of historical development was a purposeful
one and would come to an end with the achievement of a communist Utopia
that would finally resolve all prior contradictions.
V. He was affected especially by Hegel's historicism. According to this perspective,
mankind has progressed through a series of primitive stages of consciousness,
on his path to the present. Hegel believes that, at the end, rational form of
society and state became victorious. According to Hegel, history came to an end
in 1806 with Napoleon's defeat of the Prussian monarchy at the Battle of Jena
which symbolised the victory of the ideals of the French Revolution. At that
point, the vanguard o f humanity actualized the principles of the French
Revolution. But particular regimes in the real world might not implement these
ideas fully. After stating these references, Fukuyama explains his own opinions.
According to him, the state that emerges at the end of history is liberal,
democratic, recognizes and protects man's universal right to freedom through a
system of law. Fukuyama, also makes references to Kojeve, who is a modern
French interpreter of Hegel. For Kojeve, this so-called 'universal homogenous
state' is realized in the countries of post-war Western Europe
VI. Fukuyama explains the evolution process of human history as follows; human
history was based on the existence of contradictions; as it can be seen in the
primitive man's search for mutual recognition, contradiction between master
and slave. But in the universal homogeneous state, all prior contradictions are
resolved and all human needs are satisfied. There is no conflict over large issues
and no need for generals or statesmen, what remains is primarily economic
activity. So he states that, main contradictions of human history will come to
end with the end of history. Fukuyama, also tries to improve the inefficiency of
materialist theories and support Hegel's idealist perspective. He gives examples
about Far Eastern societies; he emphasizes their cultural heritage, the etrnc of
work, family and other moral qualities which are important in explaining their
economic performance.
13) Clash of Civilizations:
I. The Samuel Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” thesis was first presented in a
Foreign Affairs article in 1993 and then in a book published in 1996.
 142

II. He was decidedly pessimistic, predicting that the end of the U.S.-Soviet rivalry
would be followed by a new wave of conflict fueled by civilizational competition
and animosity.
III. Samuel Huntington’s article ‘The clash of civilizations?’ was published in the
journal Foreign Affairs in 1993 and resulted in a heated academic and public
debate. Three years later the book with the same title, now without the
question mark, appeared. The appeal of Huntington’s theory is his attempt to
develop an all-encompassing construct
that explains not only the conflicts of the present and future, but also the key
features of the international political system. Since it also touches upon
intrastate conflicts, its implications reach beyond international relations.
IV. There have been a number of ‘world images’ of international politics predicted
for the twenty-first century. On the one hand, some of the more optimistic
students of globalization and the alleged spread of democracy see the world’s
peoples coming closer together in economic, political, and cultural terms. On
the other hand, more pessimistic analyses have focused on the gap between
‘zones of peace and war’ and clashes between emerging great powers in a
multipolar era.
V. Huntington’s diagnosis belongs in the pessimistic camp, although it is distinctive
in its focus on civilizations as the main unit of analysis. Huntington argues that
the world is divided into a number of such civilizations. They are Western, Latin
American, African, Islamic, Sinic, Hindu, Christian Orthodox, Buddhist, and
Japanese. Within some of these civilizations, there is a core state, often
possessing nuclear weapons. Sinic civilization has China as its core; Japan has its
own civilization.
VI. Western civilization has linked cores in the United States, France, Germany, and
the United Kingdom. Russia is the core state of Orthodox Christianity. In
contrast, Islam lacks a core state, as does Latin America and Africa. In the
future, we can expect conflicts to emerge along the major fault-lines between
civilisations: Orthodox versus Western Christianity and Islam; Muslim versus
Hindu; Sinic versus Hindu.
Africa and Latin America will remain on the sidelines.
VII. Huntington defines a civilization as the broadest grouping of people beyond
the level distinguishing humans from other species. A civilization is defined by
common objective elements – language, history, religion, customs, and
institutions – as well as by people’s self-identification.
VIII. Huntington is particularly concerned about the challenge that Islam poses to
the West, both because its birthrate is higher than that of other civilisations
 143

and because of the resurgence of its popularity at the end of the twentieth
century.

IX. Moreover, its rejection of Western values and American influence means that
these two civilizations are bound to clash at some point. If China allies with
Islamic states against the United States, the danger of war will be very high.
Huntington offers some guidelines or rules of conduct to avoid such a fate. The
core states should abstain from intervening in the internal affairs of other
civilizations; they must mediate disputes that could turn into wars on fault-lines
between civilizations; and all civilizations should work to identify shared values.
X. As for the West, Huntington urges the United States to strengthen its alliances
with others in the Western bloc, and avoid weakening its distinctive cultural
values. Huntington is no supporter of multiculturalism and the politics of
respect among different minorities.
XI. Criticism
i. First, it has been pointed out that to reduce the number of civilizations to
eight or nine does not seem serious. The mention of a possible African
civilization is dubious. Africa is a rich mosaic of cultures; so is Europe. And
Europe is not the same as North America. What Huntington lumps
together as Western civilization has considerable internal fractures.
Civilizations are not monolithic blocs. Some, for example Islam, are
defined primarily by their religious inspiration; in others, such as the
Confucian civilization, the relationship between the religion inspiring
them and the political force they exert is less clear.
ii. In Western civilization, Catholic or Protestant versions of Christianity
form part of the cultural landscape, although citizens of Western states
are deeply divided with regard to religious beliefs. In each of
Huntington’s civilizations there are trends of thought that follow
confessional lines, and others that follow secular lines – a subject of lively
debate today in countries such as Turkey and Italy.
iii. Besides religion, cultural splits make it difficult to look at civilizations as
politically compact blocs. Huntington talks of Latin American culture but
ignores, for example, the division between the Spanish and Indian
cultures.
iv. There are also considerable splits between social groups that benefit
from the international economic system and those it discriminates
against. On the African continent, oligarchies share Western values and
cultural preferences while other groups make do with socially devalued
 144

lifestyles far removed from modernity. Who represents African

civilization, the English- or French-speaking communities, or the masses
that speak only local languages and lack access to Western technologies?
v. The second major criticism levelled at Huntington’s argument is that the
relationship between states and civilizations remains unclear. If
civilization is the true independent variable, why did it give way to power
relationships between states during the cold war? Furthermore,
Huntington’s own analysis of alignments between, say, China and Islam
explicitly crosses civilizational boundaries and reflects the interests of
powerful states. One might then argue that military power and the
balance of power among states could overwhelm the influence of culture
and religion.
vi. Finally, critics have argued that Huntington underestimates the enduring
strength of Western civilization, global capitalism, and interdependence.
Whilst his vision does alert us to the ways in which cultural values can
exacerbate particular conflicts (e.g. between the former Soviet Union and
Afghanistan, and during the wars in the Gulf in 1991 and in Yugoslavia
over the past decade), it remains flawed in some important respects.
14) How the two big ideas of the post cold war era failed?
I. Two major prophecies about international order emerged as the Cold War
ended. Both Fukuyama and Huntington might claim vindication in the recent
turn of events. Many have interpreted the emergence of the Islamic State as
evidence of the truth of Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” thesis. On the other
hand, in an article last year in the Wall Street Journal and in his book, “Political
Order and Political Decay” Fukuyama who foresaw the end of great power
rivalry but continued strife in the Third World, claims that his “end of history”
thesis remains “essentially correct” even as he acknowledges that liberal
democracies and civil liberties might suffer from “decay,” as may be happening
in the United States. In a 2002 op-ed for the International Herald Tribune, now
the Global New York Times, I challenged the Fukuyama thesis by arguing that
liberal democracy in the United States and the West could be in “retreat” due
to the attack on civil liberties in the name of the war on terror.
II. Despite my respect for the intellect of their protagonists, I argue that the two
big ideas of the post-Cold War era have been proven to be not only mostly
wrong, but also wrong-headed. Islam and the Islamic world have played a
significant role in disproving and discrediting these ideas and not necessarily in
the most predictable ways.
 145

III. The original end of history article pointed to the “unabashed victory of
economic and political liberalism,” and claimed that the “triumph of the West,
of the Western idea is evident in the total exhaustion of viable systematic
alternatives to Western liberalism.” This was an ironic claim, since the defeated
alternatives to Western liberalism, namely fascism and communism, were still
Western ideas. So the end of history was really the victory by one set of
Western ideas over another.
IV. Fukuyama also predicted greater geopolitical stability in the world. For him,
only “large states still caught in the grip of history” can produce and sustain big
ideologies to challenge Western liberalism and thereby cause “large-scale
conflict” in the international system. The only candidates for offering such a
challenge after the end of the Cold War would be Russia and China, but both
were embracing Western-style markets and even, to some degree, political
openness, thus moving out of said grips of history.
V. Yet Russia and China might signal the “return of geopolitics” in the international
system. What about the Islamic world? Fukuyama dismissed the potential of
Islam to offer a political alternative to either liberalism or communism.
Certainly Islam, without a large or great power in its ranks, could pose no
traditional Realpolitik challenge to liberalism. Yet history does not begin or end
with the big ideas of big powers. The Islamic world is a massive demographic
entity.
VI. There are 49 Muslim majority countries in the world, about one fourth of the
total U.N.
membership. The world’s Muslim population, at 1.6 billion, constitutes 23
percent of the total world population, with significant growth among its youth.
Indeed, these demographic facts feature prominently in Huntington’s list of
reasons for the clash of civilizations between Islam and the West. Adding China’s
1.35 billion to the equation means that about a third of the world’s population
theoretically remain outside of the West’s triumphant ideology.
VII. Even an ardent believer in democracy, such as this author, finds Fukuyama’s
claims that there are no “real alternatives” (what constitutes real?) to Western
style liberal democracy and that “we should have no doubt as to what kind of
society lies at the end of History” too sweeping, arrogant and deterministic.
VIII. Did the Arab Spring vindicate the Fukuyama thesis promoted by the neo-con
ideologues of the George W. Bush administration, whose invasion of Iraq was
legitimized as a means to promote democracy in the Arab world? No. The
impetus for the Arab Spring came mainly from within Arab societies and had
little to do with Western help. There is no direct link between the downfall of
 146

Saddam Hussein and the Arab Spring. By now, it is also clear that the Arab
uprisings were more of a protest against corrupt and repressive regimes than a
call for the establishment of Western style liberal democratic institutions. If
they were, they have certainly failed in most places except Tunisia.
IX. While it would be wrong to say that a single or consistent Islamic world view
runs through Muslim states and societies, it is equally wrong to assume that
they simply identify with or adopt Western liberalism. This should not be
confused with an acceptance of the Hungtingtonian clash of civilizations. The
vast majority of Muslims and Muslim nations who do not accept Western
liberalism similarly have no sympathy for al-Qaeda or the Islamic State or other
form of Islamic extremism. In fact, several are themselves targets of the
terrorist groups.
X. Huntington’s clash of civilizations has gained support in recent years as the new
paradigm of global conflict replacing the Cold War and identifying the threat
against which the US and the West could focus and mobilize its strategic
response. It reinforced the fear of Islam and might have offered an implicit
justification for the United States invasion of Iraq. However, like Fukuyama’s,
Huntington’s thesis has flunked its test in the Islamic world and elsewhere.
Much of the Islamic world rallied to the United States after 9/11. Islamic states
were far more critical and uncooperative when the United States under the
George W.
XI. Bush presidency invaded Iraq in 2003, but this was because the invasion flouted
international norms and disdained the UN Security Council. Now, some of the
most prominent Islamic countries have joined hands with the United State to
fight the Islamic
State and other terrorist groups in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.
While some point to the conflicts in Middle East and Ukraine as proof of
Huntington’s pessimism—and bearing in mind that Fukuyama too believed that
conflicts other than those among the great powers would persist—recent and
long-term trends in violence may come as a surprise. The 2013 Human Security
Report finds that between the early
1990s (when both ideas emerged) until now, “overall conflict numbers have
dropped by some 40 percent, while the deadliest conflicts, those that kill at
least 1,000 people a year, have declined by more than half.”
XII. The Armed Conflict Survey conducted by the International Institute for Strategic
Studies (IISS) paints a more negative picture, estimating a rise in the number of
fatalities from major conflicts from 56,000 in 2008 to 180,000 in 2014.
Interestingly enough, only two countries, Iraq and Syria, take up about half of
 147

deaths: approximately 88,000 of 180,000 in 2014. Even if one assumes that

these two conflicts are civilizational in nature—rather than social, economic or
political causes like repression—the evidence of a world on fire
caused by a clash of civilizations is still limited at best. The IISS survey also
confirmed that the overall conflict numbers in the world is still going down, from
63 in 2008 to 42 today.
XIII. More damning for the Huntington thesis is the fact that the overwhelming
majority of the targets and victims of violence perpetrated by Islamic extremist
groups are Muslims. According to the University of Maryland’s Global Terrorism
Database, between 2004 and 2013, about half of all terrorist attacks and 60
percent of fatalities caused by terrorist attacks took place in just three
countries: Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, all with Muslim-majority populations
and epicenters of the War on Terror.
XIV. A 2011 report from the U.S. government’s National Counter-Terrorism Center
(NCTC) estimates that “in cases where the religious affiliation of terrorism
casualties could be determined, Muslims suffered between 82 and 97 percent
of terrorism related fatalities over the past five years.” Contrary to Huntington’s
thesis, the violence that occurs in the Islamic world is mainly a clash within a
civilization. The above also applies to Ukraine. Here is a striking example.
Huntington had predicted in his 1996 book, “If civilization is what counts,
violence between Ukrainians and Russians is unlikely.” Obviously it does not.
XV. Some of the long-term causes of international stability, according to the Human
Security Report, include the end of colonialism and the Cold War, international
norms against the use of military force except in self-defense or authorized by
the UN, peacekeeping, peacebuilding and “peacemaking” operations to prevent
and stop wars, enhanced state capacity in securing resources to promote
economic development and address grievances in the Third World, and growing
economic interdependence among nations. One other factor identified by the
Report is “inclusive democratization” in previously authoritarian countries that
contributes to non-violent conflict resolution and hence internal stability within
these states.
XVI. It is clear that many of these factors, which are unlikely to disappear, cut across
civilizational fault lines. They are not uniquely the result of Western ideologies
and leadership but are actively supported by both Western and non-Western
states and societies. For example, China and other authoritarian nations of East
Asia led the way in building state capacity and economic growth and fostering
economic interdependence.
 148

XVII. Countries such as India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia are among the
world’s largest contributors to UN peacekeeping. Peace in today’s world is
possible because civilizations can and do learn from each other and cooperate.
This is a lesson of history that will never end. The only history that is rapidly
ending is that of the relatively short period of Western dominance in the long
march of civilization. 15)Conclusion

Post Cold War: Globalization

1) The principal characteristics of the contemporary order that give it its distinctive quality
are difficult to discern.
2) As we live in its midst, it is hard to get any sense of historical perspective.
3) Our understanding of, say, the inter-war period (1919–39) is informed by how it ended,
but we do not yet know how our present period will 'end'.
4) The international order now delivers a range of international 'goods', but also a wide
range of 'bads'.
5) When we speak of order, we need to specify order for whom—states, peoples, groups,
or individuals.
6) International order focuses on stable and peaceful relations between states, often
related to the balance of power. It is primarily about military security.
7) World order is concerned with other values, such as justice, development, rights, and
emancipation.
8) A pattern of order may advance some values at the expense of others. There is often a
tension, for example, between state-centred concepts of order and those that promote
individual values. For instance, policies based on the balance of power might lead to
support for regimes with bad human rights' records.
9) A key question about globalization is whether it supercedes other ideas of international
order, or whether it can be incorporated into more traditional ideas.
10) Order is shaped by the changed nature of states and of the tasks they perform.
11) There are complex questions about whether the end of the cold war has released a new
agenda of nationalism and national identity, or whether these issues have been present
all along.
12) Security is increasingly dealt with on a multilateral basis even when this does not
conform to classical 'collective security' models.
13) The global economy is primarily shaped by relations between the three key groupings
(North America, Western Europe, and East Asia) and is managed by a panoply of
Western-dominated institutions.
 149

14) There are dense patterns of international institutions in all functional areas.
15) There are strong trends towards regionalism, but they take different forms in various
regions.
16) Human rights have a much higher profile than in earlier historical periods Are there two
separate orders in the North and South, or a more complex diversity of orders?
17) Globalization is often portrayed as an effect of the end of the cold war because this led
to its further geographical spread.
18) At the same time, globalization needs to be understood as one of the factors that
contributed to the end of the cold war. It was the Soviet Union's marginalization from
processes of globalization that revealed, and intensified, its weaknesses.
19) Accordingly, globalization should be regarded as an element of continuity between the
cold war and post-cold war orders, and the latter should not be regarded as wholly
distinct.
20) There is reason for scepticism that globalization is the exclusive hallmark of
contemporary order.
21) One of the reasons is that, as a long-term historical trend, globalization is not specific to
the late twentieth or the early twenty-first century.
22) Globalization is often associated with a 'borderless world' in which the old Westphalian
order no longer applies.
23) Globalization embodies a range of often competing values.
24) Globalization is too much outside our control to form an order on its own. We are its
objects rather than its subjects.
25) There is evidence of resistance to globalization. Some of this is generated by the feeling
that traditional democracy does not offer effective representation in the global order.
26) National elections may not make politicians accountable if they cannot control wider
global forces.
27) There is a heated debate about whether global civil society can help democratize
international institutions, or whether they themselves are largely undemocratic.
28) Some governments in the South remain suspicious of social movements that may be
better organized in developed countries.
29) Globalization is often thought of as an extreme form of interdependence. This sees it
exclusively as an outside-in development.
30) The implication of such analyses is that states are now much weaker as actors.
Consequently, they are in retreat or becoming obsolete. If this were the case, ideas of
international order would be much less relevant to our concept of order.
 150

31) But if globalization is considered as a transformation in the nature of states themselves,

it suggests that states are still central to the discussion of order: they are different but
not obsolete. This leads to the idea of a globalized state as a state form, and introduces
an insideout element. In this case, there is no contradiction between the norms and
rules of a state system operating alongside globalized states.
32) This international order will nonetheless have different norms and rules in recognition
of the new nature of states and their transformed functions. Rules of sovereignty and
non-intervention are undergoing change as symptoms of this adaptation.
 151

Foreign Policies

Foreign policy of Russia

1) The Post–Cold War Dilemma

I. The Russian Federation, the largest country in the contemporary world,
emerged after the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991.
II. It is one of the fifteen independent countries created from the former Soviet
Union. Today’s Russian Federation (henceforth, only Russia) is twice as big as
the US and China, and six times bigger than India.
III. Russia has retained permanent seat in the UN Security Council, and inherited a
large portion of nuclear arsenals from the Soviet Union. Russia is now an
emergent economy, a multiparty democracy, and very rich in energy resources.
So it is believed to have all the capabilities of emerging as an important power in
world politics.
IV. The present foreign policy of Russia is geared to take up the ‘big power’ role in
international politics. After the end of the Cold War, with the disintegration of
the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia entered the Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS) along with eleven other former Soviet republics. However,
immediately after the Cold War, it was struggling to find its proper role in world
politics. During this period (1991– 99), it concentrated more on domestic
political and economic reconstruction, and pursued a modest, not-too-ambitious
foreign policy, unlike the former Soviet Union.
2) The Yeltsin Period
I. An Incoherent Beginning Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin was the first post–Cold War
President of Russia. The Yeltsin administration had to give more time to build
the ‘new look’Russian Federation, which was passing through a transitional
phase after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Yeltsin tried to give a new
dimension to Russian foreign policy as he made major departures from the
preceding Gorbachev era. In early 1992, Russian Foreign Minister Andrey
Kozyrev announced that Russian foreign policy would differ from foreign policy
under Gorbachev’s ‘New Thinking’because now democratic principles would
drive it instead of the earlier ‘socialist’ principles. These new democratic
principles would give Russia the opportunity to engage itself in the global peace
process in a new international order after the Cold War.
 152

II. Kozyrev also emphasized that the basis for the new foreign policy would be
Russia’s national interests rather than the so-called class interests of the
workers of the world that theoretically dominated Soviet foreign policy for a
long time. For two years (1992– 93), Russian foreign policy was generally low
key and conciliatory towards the West with endorsement of many Western
positions in world politics. Pressing domestic problems faced by the Yeltsin
government were determining factors behind this ‘low key’foreign policy. But
this departure from the traditional socialist policies, and conciliatory attitude of
the Yeltsin government towards the West, raised severe public debates.
Ultranationalists and communists criticized the new foreign policy as
detrimental to Russian national interests. Some of them argued that Russia
should not follow a low- key foreign policy with a ‘soft’attitude towards the
West. Foreign policy issues, along with other pressing domestic problems, were
troubling the Yeltsin government immediately after the end of the Cold War. In
response, the Yeltsin government came up with a comprehensive foreign policy
document in 1993 to allay criticisms that the government’s initial foreign policy
measures were sketchy and lacked imagination. This document, approved by
the Russian Parliament in April 1993 and named as the ‘Foreign Policy Concept’,
was the first major official foreign policy document of the Russian Federation.
III. The 1993 Foreign Policy Concept (FPC) declared Russia as a great power with
several foreign policy priorities. These priorities were: (1) protecting the
sovereignty and unity of the state, with special emphasis on border stability; (2)
ensuring national security through diplomacy; (3) providing favourable external
conditions for democratic reforms in Russia; (4) mobilizing international
assistance for the establishment of a Russian market economy and assisting
Russian exporters; (5) protecting the rights of Russians abroad; (6) furthering
integration of the CIS and pursuing friendly relations with other neighbouring
and nearby states, including those in Central Europe; (7) continuing to build
friendly relations with all other countries; and (8) ensuring Russia an active role
as a great power. The FPC also called for enhanced ties with Asia-Pacific
countries to balance relations with the West. Through the FPC, the Yeltsin
government placed greater emphasis on the protection of Russia’s vital
interests.
IV. The FPC of 1993 was Yeltsin’s answer to his critics and an attempt to place
Russia as a great power in the new international order. It also refrained from
pursuing open proWestern policies. Yeltsin was President of Russia for two
terms: the first from 1991 to 1996; and the second from 1996 to 1999. During
his first term in office, Yeltsin was rather unsure about the role Russia would
 153

take in international politics. He began in 1991 with a conciliatory foreign policy

that manifested a soft attitude towards the US and the West; but soon changed
his position—as the FPC of 1993 makes evident—under increasing criticism from
his rivals in Russian politics. From 1993–94, he started to espouse Russian
nationalism and began to talk in terms of Russia as a great power. In his first
State of the Federation Address to the Russian Parliament in February 1994,
Yeltsin noted that as a great country, Russia was capable of preventing any
global war, cold or hot, and Russia would also prevent the proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction. What is worth notable here is Yeltsin’s emphasis
on Russia as the single main actor to prevent future global wars.
V. Through his reference to the possibility of global war, Yeltsin tried to appease
the Russian military and other conservatives within Russia that the US and the
West still remained a threat. He also opposed the expansion of the NATO to
include Central European states leaving out Russia. He put emphasis on making
the CIS an economic union with a common market and a common security
system with guarantees on human rights. He warned that Russia would not
tolerate any harm to its national interests. The nationalist rhetoric of 1993–94
mellowed down in favour of conciliatory policies again in 1995–96. In his State
of the Federation Address of February 1995, Yeltsin highlighted a cooperative
and conciliatory foreign policy for Russia. He outlined Russia’s cooperation with
the Group of Seven (G-7) industrialized states, the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the UN, and the NATO. He announced Russia’s
sincere intention to adhere to arms control agreements and hinted at possible
reductions in Russian armed forces. Yeltsin, however, continued with Russia’s
objection to the enlargement of the NATO and called it a threat to European
security. He also announced that in 1995–96 Russian foreign policy would be
peaceful and committed to the principle of ‘real partnership in all
directions’with the US, Europe, China, India, Japan and Latin America. Russian
foreign policy, Yeltsin declared in his address, would be guided by a ‘balance of
interests’with respect to the CIS and the Western world including the United
States. During his second term in office, Yeltsin was troubled by recurring health
problems, domestic political turmoil, more intense separatist movements in
Chechnya, and a weak economy.
VI. As a result, he had to continue with conciliatory policies towards the West with
occasional outbursts of Russian nationalism. For instance, during the 1999
Kosovo war, he strongly opposed NATO military operations and warned of
possible Russian intervention and a resumption of the Cold War, if NATO
deployed ground troops to Kosovo. He also had differences of opinion with the
 154

American President Bill Clinton over Moscow’s military intervention in Chechnya

which, according to the American President, resulted in huge civilian casualties.
Clinton requested him to stop military operations in Chechnya, which he
refused. But at the same time Yeltsin relied heavily on the Americans and US-
supported financial organizations for the reconstruction of the Russian
economy. He sought help from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the
World Bank, and from the US Treasury Department for Russia’s economic
revival. During his presidency, Russia received more than US $40 billion from
international financial organizations. His government was also accused of
embezzling these funds, and other financial corruptions.
VII. Yeltsin’s foreign policy, like his domestic policies, was marked by inconsistency
and incoherence. Russia was searching for its proper identity and place in world
politics during the Yeltsin presidency. Although it inherited the legacy of the
former Soviet Union, Russia was unsure of its status in the new international
order. It wished to bask in the superpower glory, and wanted to play a bigpower
role in international politics. However, the world at large, and Russia itself, was
sceptic about its big-power status in international politics. With a struggling
economy, a nascent and weak democracy, pressing domestic problems, and an
ailing but obstinate President, Russia’s transition from a socialist political system
to a liberal democracy was arduous. It had to take conciliatory policies towards
the West, yet wanted to pursue big-power ambitions. These incoherent policies
did not help Russia to assume the leading role that it wished to follow in
international politics during the Yeltsin period.
3) The Putin Presidency
I. A Resurgent Russia Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin assumed Russian Presidency in
2000, and served two tenures; first during 2000–04, and second, during 2004–
08, lasting till May 2008. Putin was a more assertive leader than Yeltsin. This
observation could be substantiated by the progress of the Russian economy,
considerable domestic political stability, and a more focused and assertive
foreign policy. During Putin’s eight years as the President, Russian economy
grew at an average 7 per cent, making Russia the seventh largest economy in
the world in terms of purchasing power. The country’s GDP (Gross Domestic
Product) increased six-fold between 2000 and 2008, and the poverty level
(people living below the poverty line) decreased from 30 per cent in 2000 to 14
per cent in 2008. Putin enjoyed a very high approval rating from the Russians,
an average of 65 per cent during his presidency, the highest enjoyed by any
leader in the world (as per public opinion surveys), because he was credited
with bringing political stability to the country and restoring rule of law. In
 155

international affairs, Putin firmly placed Russia as a leading state and earned
respect for it; a dream that his predecessor Yeltsin nurtured, but failed to
achieve. This was possible through an assertive foreign policy backed by a
resurgent economy. During his presidency, Russia emerged as an able
competitor to the US and Europe. The theoretical foundation of Putin’s foreign
policy was laid in the ‘Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation’(FPCRF),
approved and issued by the President on 28 June 2000. This sixteen-page
document clearly stated the foreign policy objectives of the Putin government,
and Russia’s priorities in the new international order in the twenty-first century.
Section 2 of the FPCRF, entitled ‘The Modern World and the Foreign Policy of
the Russian Federation’, stated:
II. There is a growing trend towards the establishment of a unipolar structure of
the world with the economic and power domination of the United States. In
solving principal questions of international security, the stakes are being placed
on western institutions and forums of limited composition, and on weakening
the role of the U.N. Security Council. The strategy of unilateral actions can
destabilize the international situation, provoke tensions and the arms race,
aggravate interstate contradictions, national and religious strife. . . . Russia shall
seek to achieve a multi-polar system of international relations that really
reflects the diversity of the modem world with its great variety of interests.
Clearly, the pronouncements are assertive. By naming the US as the power
wishing to perpetuate its dominance in international affairs, Putin’s FPCRF
denounced such tendencies and said that Russia was in favour of a multipolar
world. These pronouncements sounded like resumption of the Cold War by the
Putin administration, although it was proved later on that Putin was not
interested in another Cold War; rather he wanted Russia to be strong and
resilient, both in economic and security terms.
III. Putin’s foreign policy was forthright, yet moderate. Russia conveyed its
opinions clearly without antagonizing other important powers. For instance,
Putin condemned American attacks on Iraq in 2003 and called for removing
economic sanctions from Iraq. But his views did not affect US–Russia relations.
The Russian President had very good personal equations with George W. Bush
(Jr). In fact, Bush waived economic sanctions on Iraq after the war was over in
2003. Before the Iraq war, Putin allowed coalition military bases in Central Asia
during the US-led military operations in Afghanistan in 2001, despite objections
from the ultranationalists in Russia. This instance showed that Putin’s
opposition to the US was issue-based, and not chronic. He signed the very
important ‘Strategic Offensive Reduction Treaty’(SORT; also known as the
 156

‘Moscow Treaty’) with Bush in Moscow on 26 May 2002. According to the

treaty, both the US and Russia would reduce 1,700 to 2,200 operationally
deployed nuclear warheads each. The SORT, a significant step towards
nonproliferation, would expire on 31 December 2012. The moderate but
assertive foreign policy pursued by the Putin government earned respect for
Russia from the international community.
IV. Putin objected to Kosovo’s plan for separation from Serbia, and warned the US
and European powers not to encourage Kosovo’s cessation. At the same time,
he was credited with improving Russia’s relations with the European Union
(EU). He opposed NATO’s expansion programme, but also formed the NATO–
Russia Council. These instances revealed stark pragmatism in Putin’s foreign
policy. He understood correctly that Russia would require economic help from
the US and other European powers.
Therefore, he did not blindly oppose these nations to appease Russian
nationalists. Yet he never missed any chance to condemn American
‘dominance’in international politics, and projected the image of a constructive
critique of the US in international relations. This moderate foreign policy yielded
tremendous results for Russia. During his eight years as the President of Russia,
Putin’s foreign policy achievements were significant. Russia regained its status as
a leading global power during the presidency of Putin. Sustained economic
growth, coupled with assertive domestic and foreign policies, led to Russia’s
enhanced international prestige and acceptance. It had emerged as the world’s
biggest energy base, producing more oil than Saudi Arabia. Almost the whole of
Europe is dependent on the export of natural gas from Russia.
V. The growing arms and commodity items exports have made Russia the third
largest reserve of foreign exchange in the world. Russia is now included in the
group of the most rapidly developing emerging economies, the BRIC. Russia
under Putin formed several multilateral forums like the Sanghai Cooperation
Organization (SCO), NATO– Russia Council, Collective Security Treaty
Organization (CSTO), Quartet on the Middle East (QME) and the EU–Russia
Common Spaces, to increase its presence and importance in international
politics. It also continued with its strong presence in other important
international forums like the UNO, CIS, WTO, G-8, OSCE, and the APEC (Asia
Pacific Economic Cooperation). Russia’s active involvement in all these forums
indicated Putin’s desire to achieve a big-power role for his country. Vladimir
Putin faced foreign policy challenges as well.
VI. Anti-Russian regimes in neighbouring states like Kyrgyzstan, Georgia and
Ukraine emerged for some time to threaten Russia’s security and its foreign
 157

policy initiatives in neighbouring countries. But Putin successfully met these

challenges and made Russian position secure in Central Asia and East Europe. A
failed ‘tulip revolution’ initiated by anti-Russian groups in Kyrgyzstan in 2005
turned into a nightmare for the local population. The failure, accompanied by
killings and chaos in the capital and other cities, frightened the local elites and
population; but at the same time it strengthened Russia’s position in Central
Asia. Earlier, the much publicized ‘rose revolution’in Georgia in 2003, and the
‘orange revolution’ in Ukraine in 2004–05 (these were also known as ‘colour
revolutions’) that destabilized Russia-friendly governments in these countries,
lost their sheen and gradually the political elite close to Russia came to power
in Georgia and Ukraine. These failed revolutions in effect ensured the success of
Putin’s foreign policy in neighbouring states. Putin warned the US and West
European powers not to meddle in Georgia and Ukraine, and the situation
never went out of Russia’s control.
VII. The Americans, with limited strategic interests in Georgia and Ukraine, also
restrained themselves because they did not wish to antagonize Putin due to
increased American political and business interests in Russia. Putin and his
Russia commanded more respect from the international community compared
to Yeltsin and his Russia of the 1990s. The foreign policy of Putin had its
shortcomings as well. Russia, despite strong economic growth, failed to emerge
as a major trade partner for many of its important neighbours
like China, Japan, and Kazakhstan. With industrial nations like Germany, Italy,
England, and Canada, Russian trade remained insignificant during the Putin
period.
VIII. Further, Russia’s trade volume with important regional organizations like the
EU and the ASEAN did not assume significant proportions during the Putin
presidency. Russia in 2009-10—when Putin was the Prime Minister and a main
figure in the Medvedev government—seemed to have lost its earlier political
influence in many neighbouring states, especially in Georgia and Ukraine, with
the proliferation of antiRussian forces in these states. However, negative points
in Putin’s foreign policy are outweighed by the positive points. Without reviving
the Cold War and significantly antagonizing the West, Putin was very successful
in establishing Russia as an important actor in international politics.
4) The Medvedev Presidency
I. Dimtry Anatolyevich Medvedev took over as the Russian President on 7 May
2008, after Putin finished his two terms in presidency, the maximum allowed at
a stretch by the Russian Constitution. He was appointed as the Prime Minister in
the new government. Medvedev was widely known as the person groomed by
 158

Putin to take over the mantle after him. He continued with Putin’s policies in
domestic and foreign affairs, although he often showed sparkles of his
individuality in dealing with internal and external issues. Unlike Putin, Medvedev
was not known in Russian politics as a person comfortable with foreign policy;
he was more a ‘domestic’ politician. He was largely dependent on Putin and the
Russian foreign ministry for external affairs. But he gradually attained control in
foreign policy matters as well.
II. Like his predecessors, Medvedev also issued a Foreign Policy Concept (FPC) on
31 July 2008, that outlined foreign policy priorities of his government. It
contained six priority areas that Russia wished to follow in international
relations. These were: (1) the emergence of a new world order where Russia
would work for a multipolar world instead of a unipolar world; (2) the primacy
of law in international relations; (3) strengthening international security; (4)
international economic and environmental cooperation; (5) international
humanitarian cooperation and protection of human rights; and (6) information
support for foreign policy activities, by which Russia would demand correct and
accurate information on foreign policy activities pursued by different states in
the world. The FPC of 2008 contained nothing unique as compared to the FPCRF
issued by the Putin government in 2000. The former also opposed the expansion
of the NATO and called for equitable relationship between Russia and the NATO
in the Russia–NATO Council.
III. It objected to the inclusion of Georgia and Ukraine in the NATO and the
projected expansion till the borders of Russia. The FPC stated that ‘Russia calls
for building a truly unified Europe without divisive lines through equal
interaction between Russia, the European Union and the United States. This
would strengthen the positions of the EuroAtlantic States in global competition’.
It also stressed on increasing cooperation with the CIS, the EU, Japan, China, the
two Koreas, the ASEAN, and several West European, African and Latin American
states. Medvedev met US President Barack Obama in April
2009 during the Group of 20 (G-20) Leaders’ Summit in London. The two
presidents issued a joint statement after their bilateral meeting which was
cordial and positive. Medvedev and Obama agreed to pursue verifiable
reductions in their huge nuclear arsenals. By agreeing to verifiable reductions,
Medvedev made a departure from the earlier Putin administration, which did
not go for the verifiable reduction clause after the SORT, signed in 2002.
IV. Both Medvedev and Obama reiterated their commitment to a nuclear-weapon-
free world, and vowed to work together to achieve the goal. They underscored
the need for enhanced cooperation between their nations to meet the demands
 159

of the new international order. The statement noted: ‘We, the leaders of Russia
and the United States, are ready to move beyond Cold War mentalities and chart
a fresh start in relations between our two countries. . . Now it is time to get
down to business and translate our warm words into actual
achievements. . . .’The tone of the statement was very positive and underlined
the desire of the Medvedev government to improve relations with the US.
Medvedev, like Putin, continued the policy of economic diplomacy for Russia. He
also used the resurgent Russian economy and strong energy resources to
establish Russia’s position in international politics. Russia under Medvedev
continued as the largest arms and energy exporter in the world. But Medvedev
gradually came out of the shadow of Putin in foreign and domestic policy
matters, and put the stamp of his own personality in these areas. For instance,
Medvedev wanted the dismantling of a moribund OSCE in favour of more active
security and cooperation mechanisms for Europe, and proposed a European
Security Treaty. He established a Customs Union with Belarus, and proposed
similar unions with other CIS-countries. Medvedev is no longer another Putin in a
different garb; he is a different mind as well. Time is not yet ripe to scrutinize the
success or failure of Medvedev’s foreign policy, because he has been in office for
nearly two years (as of March 2010). But Russia under Medvedev is doing well in
economic development and international affairs, although the process of
building a democratic Russia is far from over.
5) War with Georgia
I. Putin ally Dmitry Medvedev wins presidential elections as Mr Putin cannot serve
a third consecutive term. 2008 May - President Medvedev appoints Vladimir
Putin prime minister.
II. Russia and Georgia went to war over South Ossetia
III. 2008 August - Tensions with Georgia escalate into war after Georgian troops
attack separatist forces in South Ossetia. Russia drives Georgian forces from
South Ossetia and Abkhazia, then recognizes both as independent states.
IV. 2008 October - The Russian parliament approves a $68bn package of measures
to help banks hit by the global credit crunch.
V. 2008 November - Parliament votes overwhelmingly in favour of a bill that would
extend the next president's term of office from four to six years.
VI. 2009 January - Russia stops gas supplies to Ukraine after the collapse of talks to
resolve a row over unpaid bills. Supplies to southeastern Europe are disrupted
for several weeks as a result of the dispute.
VII. 2009 April - Russia formally ends operations against rebels in Chechnya,
although sporadic violence continues.
 160

6) Thaw with US
I. 2009 July - President Medvedev and Barack Obama, on his first official visit to
Moscow, reach an outline agreement to reduce nuclear weapons stockpiles in
move aimed at replacing 1991 Start 1 treaty.
II. 2009 September - Russia welcomes the US decision to shelve missile defence
bases in Poland and the Czech Republic.
III. 2009 October - Opposition parties accuse the authorities of rigging local
elections, as the governing United Russia party wins every poll by a wide
margin.
IV. 2010 April - President Medvedev signs a new strategic arms agreement with US
committing both sides to cut arsenals of deployed nuclear warheads by about
30 percent.
V. 2010 June - Presidents Medvedev and Obama mark warming in ties on the
Russian leader's first visit to the White House. Obama says the US will back
Russia's World Trade Organisation accession, and Russia will allow the US to
resume poultry exports.
VI. 2010 July - A customs union between Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan comes
into force despite Belarusian complaints about Russia retaining duties on oil
and gas exports to its neighbours.
VII. 2010 October - President Medvedev sacks the powerful mayor of Moscow, Yuri
Luzhkov, after weeks of criticism from the Kremlin. Mr Luzhkov had been in
office since 1992.
VIII. 2011 November - Georgia and Russia sign a Swiss-brokered trade deal which
allows Russia to join the World Trade Organization (WTO), ending Georgia's
blockade of Russian membership since the 2008 war.
IX. 2011 December - United Russia suffers drop in share of the vote at
parliamentary elections, but keeps a simple majority in the State Duma. Tens of
thousands turn out in opposition protests alleging fraud, in first major anti-
government protests since the early 1990s.
7) Putin's second presidency
I. 2012 March - Vladimir Putin wins presidential elections. Opponents take to the
streets of several major cities to protest at the conduct of the election, and the
police arrest hundreds.
II. 2012 July - Law goes into force requiring non-governmental organisations
receiving funds from abroad to be classed as "foreign agents", in what critics say
is part of a wider crackdown on dissent.
 161

III. 2012 August - US, EU and human rights groups condemn jail sentences imposed
on three members of punk band Pussy Riot over an anti-Putin protest in a
Moscow cathedral. The women were sentenced to two years for hooliganism.
IV. Russia formally joins the World Trade Organization (WTO) after 18 years of
negotiations.
V. 2012 December - Angered by a US bill blacklisting Russian officials in connection
with the death in custody of lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, Moscow bans Americans
from adopting Russian children and stops US-funded non-governmental
organisations from working in Russia.
8) Crackdown continues
I. 2013 July - Anti-corruption blogger and leading opposition activist Alexei
Navalny is sentenced to five years in prison after being found guilty of
embezzlement in a trial he rejects as politically motivated.
II. 2013 September - Mr Navalny comes second in the Moscow mayoral election
after being released pending appeal, coming close to forcing the Kremlin's
candidate into a run-off.
III. 2013 October - Appeals court upholds Alexei Navalny's conviction but suspends
his jail sentence, allowing him to go free while barring him from standing for
elected office.
IV. 2013 December - The Kremlin announces that the state-owned news agency RIA
Novosti and the Voice of Russia radio station are to be restructured and placed
under the control of a pro-Kremlin figure known for his extreme anti-Western
views.
9) Ukraine crisis
I. 2014 February-May - After flight from Ukraine of pro-Moscow president Viktor
Yanukovych, Russian forces take over Crimea, which then votes to join Russia in
a referendum. This sparks biggest East-West showdown since Cold War, with
the US and its European allies imposing sanctions and accusing Russia of stoking
separatism in eastern Ukraine.
II. 2014 May - Russia's Gazprom sign 30-year deal to supply the China National
Petroleum Corp with gas, estimated to be worth over $400bn.
III. 2014 June - US President Barack Obama condemns Russian "aggression" in
Ukraine while speaking in Warsaw to mark 25 years since the fall of
communism in Poland.
IV. 2014 July - Following the downing of a Malaysian Airlines passenger plane over
eastern Ukraine in a suspected missile strike, Russia comes in for international
 162

criticism amid claims - denied by Moscow - that it supplied rebels with heavy
weaponry.
V. The EU and US announce new sanctions against Russia. The IMF says Russian
growth is slowing down to zero.
VI. 2014 October - Russia agrees to resume gas supplies to Ukraine over the winter
in a deal brokered by the EU.
VII. 2014 November - Separatists in eastern Ukraine elect new leaders in polls
backed by Russia and denounced by Kiev and the West.
VIII. Ukraine accuses Russia of sending a big column of tanks, artillery and troops
into eastern Ukraine.
IX. 2014 December - The Russian rouble begins to drop rapidly against the US
dollar, losing about half its value in the next two months.
X. A Moscow court finds leading opposition figure Alexei Navalny guilty of fraud
charges and imposes a suspended prison sentence.
XI. 2015 January - A public inquiry opens in Britain into the 2006 murder in London
of former Russian intelligence officer and Putin critic Alexander Litvinenko.
XII. 2015 February - Opposition activist and former first deputy prime minister Boris
Nemtsov, a leading figure in the democratic movement since the 1990s, is shot
dead in Moscow within sight of the Kremlin.
XIII. Police charge two Chechens with murder. They deny the charges, one after
alleging he was coerced into confessing. There is widespread domestic and
international scepticism about the official account.
XIV. 2015 September - Russia carries out first air strikes in Syria, saying it targets the
Islamic State group. But West and Syrian opposition say it overwhelmingly
targets anti-Assad rebels instead.
10) Conclusion

Foreign Policy of China

1) Origin and Evolution

I. Today’s People’s Republic of China (PRC) has a rich political history. One of the
most ancient civilizations, China’s political history is nearly seven thousand years
old. During this long political history, China was under various rulers and political
systems. It had dynastic rulers who ruled the land for long periods. Notable
among them were the Shang, the Chou and the Manchu dynasties. The Manchu
rulers governed China for a very long period, from 1661 to 1911. They were able
to create a large territory that included Tibet, Mongolia and Sinkiang. But at a
 163

later stage, the Manchu rulers were unable to govern and protect this large
empire. Inefficiency, corruption and extravagance of the later Manchu rulers led
to the downfall of the Manchu dynasty. This unstable situation was exploited by
different foreign powers to proclaim their dominance in different parts of China.
The Russian, German, British and Japanese forces occupied these parts. But it
should be remembered at this point that entire China never came under any
particular foreign rule; parts of the land were occupied by different foreign
rulers at different times. To protest against the presence of foreign rulers, and
the corruption in Manchu rule, the Boxur Revolt was led by Sun Yat Sen during
1895– 1900. Although this revolution was not totally successful, it nevertheless
inspired people to unite against foreign rule and the Manchu dynasty.

After the end of Manchu rule, Sun Yat Sen became the leader of China in 1912.
Since then, China experienced a republican system instead of the earlier
monarchical system. Before the First World War, Sun Yat Sen relinquished power
in favour of Yuan Shi Kai, although Sen and his Kuomintang Party were very
influential in China during this period. During the First World War, Yuan Shi Kai
declared himself as the Emperor of China reviving possibilities of returning to a
monarchical system again. However, after the death of Shi Kai in 1916, the
Kuomintang appointed Li Yuan Hang as the President of China, and declared
China as a Republic. The tremors of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917
were also felt in China, and the Chinese Communist Party was set up in Shanghai,
the largest Chinese city, in 1920. Several members of the Kuomintang joined the
Communist Party under the influence of the Bolshevik revolution, and socialism.
After the death of Sun Yat Sen in 1925, Chiang Kai Shek assumed leadership of
the Kuomintang party and China. Kuomintang preferred to call itself a nationalist
party with the aim to create a unified China, and Chiang Kai Shek became, as the
undisputed leader of his party, the harbinger of this aim. But Chiang had
problems to realize the dream of a unified China. Among these problems,
Japanese aggression, internal political and administrative corruption, and the
increasing popularity of the Communist Party under the leadership of Mao Zhe
Dong were prominent. Since 1935, Mao was pressurizing the Kuomintang
government for rapid land reforms programme in favour of the peasants. Mao
and his Communist Party started to concentrate on rural areas working on the
welfare of the rural people, mainly peasants. This focus on rural areas yielded
tremendous results as the popularity of Mao and his party soared in a
largelyrural, agrobased China.
II. Before the Second World War, the communists gave issue-based support to the
Kuomintang to fight Japanese aggression; but their ideological differences
 164

continued. Gradually the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) emerged as an

organized, popular, and respectable political outfit, and during the Second World
War they became a formidable political force in China. There were several
reasons behind the phenomenal growth of the CCP: (1) Mao’s very able
leadership; (2) call for land reforms and establishment of rights of the peasants;
(3) support from the ‘socialist’ Soviet Union; and (4) a corrupt Kuomintang rule.
Mao was trying to topple the Kuomintang regime, and training the communists
to fight the Kuomintang. In 1946, a civil war started in China between the
communists and the Kuomintangs. The US supported the Kuomintang regime
through military and economic assistance. But the communists who were more
organized and efficient (in guerilla warfare) won the civil war, and created the
modern Peoples’Republic of China on 1 October 1949. Chiang Kai Shek fled to
Formosa (now Taiwan). The modern Chinese state (PRC) was born in 1949 and
Mao Zhe Dong became its supreme leader. From 1949 till his death in 1976, Mao
Zhe Dong was the undisputed leader of the PRC, and the chief architect of
China’s foreign policy.
2) Foreign Policy of China
I. Under Mao Zhe Dong (1949–76) Mao’s revolutionary background and faith in
socialism influenced his foreign policy agenda. America’s assistance to the
Kuomintang regime during the civil war in China, and later in Taiwan, led him to
locate the US as an adversary. He believed that after the Second World War,
when European imperialism had taken a backseat, the Americans had assumed
the role of a neo-imperialist and a neocolonialist. Mao’s PRC was very critical of
the American role in Taiwan and in other parts of the world, where the US was
allegedly trying to interfere in the domestic affairs of states through economic
and security assistance. American interference in the Korean War in 1950
angered Mao, and China’s relations with the US plunged to an abysmal low after
the Korean War. At various times in his leadership, Mao openly labelled the US
as an imperial and neocolonial power.
II. Understandably, China’s relations with the US were much strained from the
beginning. Mao was also sceptical about other Western European powers like
Britain, France, West Germany and Italy for their perceived anti-communist
ideological positions. As a committed person to socialist ideologies, Mao was
deeply resentful of the West Bloc, and almost turned China away from the
Western world. China thus had very little relationship with the West European
states, which were viewed as harbingers of capitalism and agents of the US by
Mao and his PRC. So China’s relations with the US and other Western powers
were very cold and distant during the Mao era. Mao’s PRC went on a bonhomie
 165

with the Soviet Union, the first socialist state in the world, a superpower and a
supporter of the Chinese communists during China’s civil war and thereafter.
Ideological proximity and material support brought the Soviet Union closer to
China. Moscow gave huge economic and technological assistance to China after
1949, when the state-building process was going on in full swing. China was
creating its industrial and transport infrastructure with Soviet assistance during
this time. But the Soviet–China proximity did not last long, as differences
emerged from the mid-1950s, overtly on the issue of transfer of poor Soviet
technology to China, but covertly over the broader issue of leadership of the
Socialist bloc.
III. The Sino-Soviet rift became very pronounced by the early 1960s as both China
and the Soviet Union accused each other to be a ‘social imperialist’. China
strongly condemned the Soviet role in the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. The
same year, the two countries levelled charges of illegal occupation of territories
around their borders against each other. China also severely criticized the
presence of Soviet troops in Czechoslovakia in 1968 to curb a popular movement
against the communist government. From the mid1960s, China tried to be close
to the East Bloc countries, only to arouse further Soviet suspicion. The Soviet
Union viewed this Chinese zeal as designs to curb the Soviet influence in the East
Bloc countries. However, China was able to develop close relationship with
Albania by the mid-1960s. An angry Soviet Union stopped economic and
technological assistance to Albania as a retaliatory measure. The Sino-Soviet rift
continued throughout the 1970s and the 1980s, as both the socialist countries
tried to provide leadership to other socialist states during this period, and
viewed the other with suspicion and mistrust. US President Richard Nixon’s visit
to China in 1972 further fuelled the suspicion. Soviet leaders alleged that China
was trying to build an unholy nexus with the US to marginalize the Soviet Union
in international politics. China’s relations with the socialist superpower were
thus mostly adversarial in Mao’s time.
IV. Mao’s China provided support to the anti-colonial struggle in the developing
states with the desire to become the leader in those states. For this purpose,
China supported the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and participated in the
Bandung Conference in 1955 that formally created the NAM. China also became
friendly with India, and the two big countries of Asia went along well for some
time. But from the late 1950s, border disputes and the issue of Tibet created
serious differences between the two countries
which ultimately led to the 1962 Indo-China war. During the initial years after the
formation of the NAM in 1955, China was keen on becoming a leading nation in
 166

the NAM. But differences with India—and later with Indonesia—and the broader
issue of leadership of the Socialist bloc refrained Mao from taking very active
interest in the NAM. Instead, China concentrated on building good relations with
some other Asian states like Burma (now Myanmar), Nepal, and Pakistan.
Foreign policy analysts in India viewed this Chinese move with suspicion, a latent
design to isolate India and strengthen anti-India sentiments in these countries.
However, China’s efforts to become a leader of the third world failed, as it could
not take leadership in the NAM, and as it developed acrimonious relations with
many thirdworld countries.

After 1965, China’s relations with Indonesia and many other countries in Africa
and Latin America deteriorated. Indonesian President Suharto alleged that China
was instigating the communists in Indonesia with a view to create internal
disturbances in the country. Suharto severed diplomatic relations with China.
Three African states, Burundi, Ghana, and Central African Republic, cut off
diplomatic relations with China in 1965–66. Kenya also condemned the
aggressive ‘socialist imperialism’of China during this time. Mao’s China also
failed to develop close connections with the developing countries of Latin
America.
V. It tried to woo Cuba to come out of Soviet influence by condemning Soviet role
in the Cuban Missile Crisis; but Fidel Castro, the supreme leader of Cuba,
remained committed to the Soviet Union during and after the crisis. China’s aim
to lead the third world against the ‘imperialistic’ policies of the two superpowers
was not realized, as Mao’s China got estranged from several third world
countries. Viewed from an objective standpoint, Mao’s foreign policy was not
very successful. He isolated both the superpowers and developed adversarial
relations with them. With important states of the third world like India,
Indonesia and Yugoslavia (all leaders of the NAM), Mao’s China developed very
antagonistic relations. China also remained isolated from the industrially
developed Western European countries due to Mao’s apathy for these
‘capitalist’, formerly colonial powers. Mao, who was supposed to develop cordial
relations with the poor states for his support to the anticolonial freedom
struggle in poor countries, also isolated poor countries in Africa, Asia and Latin
America. The Soviet influence over East Europe was a deterrent for Mao to make
any significant impact in East Europe, although he tried and succeeded to
establish close links with one or two smaller states in the region. But he failed to
bring them out of the Soviet ring.
 167

VI. The ideological underpinning of Mao’s foreign policy, to avoid the ‘colonial’and
‘imperial’powers, did not help China economically or politically, as China got
estranged from the industrially developed US and the West. The confusion in
Mao’s foreign policy was manifested further when China got entangled in bitter
rivalries with a ‘socialist’Soviet Union, and ‘nonaligned’India and Indonesia, and
other developing countries of the third world with whom Mao’s ideology should
have gone well. Instead, Mao’s China was soon termed as politically ambitious,
with an eye to leadership in the socialist bloc, and the third world. This China
aroused suspicion in the world, and as a consequence, failed to win friends.
During Mao’s tenure, China remained largely estranged in international
relations.
3)China’s Foreign Policy After Mao (1977–91)
I. China’s foreign policy during the Cold War years could be classified mainly into
two parts: first, the Mao era (1949–76); and second, the Deng era (1978–97).
This proposition clearly refers to the fact that after the death of Mao Zhe Dong,
China’s domestic and foreign policies were controlled by another supreme
leader, Deng Xiao Ping. Although Deng officially assumed leadership in 1978,
succeeding Hua Guo Feng, who took over leadership for a very short period
(1976–78) after Mao’s death, Deng’s rise in Chinese politics could be noticed
from 1977. From 1977 till his death in 1997, Deng Xiao Ping remained the most
prominent figure in Chinese politics. Consequently, Chinese foreign policy was
also controlled by Deng during this period. He made significant departures from
Mao’s policies, both in domestic and international spheres. Mao’s foreign policy
was loaded with ideological issues like distance from the ‘capitalist’ and
‘imperialist’states, spreading the message of socialism, supporting
‘revolutionary’communist and nationalist movements around the world. Deng’s
foreign and domestic policies were considered more pragmatic than ideological.
Deng was the architect of economic reforms in China which opened hitherto
closed Chinese doors to the industrially developed Western world. Chinese
economic reforms helped Deng to pursue a more realistic and internationally
acceptable foreign policy.
II. Deng realized that it would not help China much to isolate both the US and the
Soviet Union simultaneously. For China’s economic development, the US,
Western European states and an industrially developed Japan were crucial and
more welcome than the socialist rival, the Soviet Union. China could no longer
afford to ignore the Western states as ‘capitalist’and ‘imperialist’ powers. In
1979, Deng’s China established diplomatic relations with the US. Apart from
economic interests, a common adversary (the Soviet Union) also brought China
 168

and the US closer. American President Richard Nixon tried to break the ice in
Sino-American relations by visiting China in 1972.
III. But differences between the two nations persisted over Taiwan—which China
claimed as its territory but the US considered as a sovereign independent
country—and Mao’s label on the US as an ‘imperialist’ power. Therefore, Sino-
American relations continued to be indifferent during the Mao period. It was
Deng who broke real grounds to establish closer links with the US and other
developed states of the West. Deng used economic diplomacy to attract these
states towards China. In 1979, China opened up its economy, allowing private
business to proliferate and foreign investment to come. Deng made a very new
experiment for China. He retained Communist Party’s control over Chinese
politics and the state, but transformed Chinese economy into a liberal market
economy.
IV. A new Chinese Constitution was introduced in 1982 to facilitate liberal
economic developments in China. Deng’s China created Special Economic Zones
(SEZ), mainly in the coastal areas, to give special privileges to foreign investors.
Now, the industrially advanced states, apathetic to China for long for its ‘closed
door’ policies, felt encouraged and got attracted to China. The socialist market
economy (SME) that Deng introduced in China was a new model in international
politics and economy. It retained one-party control in Chinese politics and
society, but allowed deregulation of the economy.
V. Although there were initial schisms about the SME, it gradually proved to be a
huge success and made Deng, the conservative pragmatist, the undisputed
leader of modern China. Deng’s foreign policy, must, therefore, be analysed in
the context of the SME and his conservative pragmatism. The success of the
state-controlled liberal economy in China, manifested through its economic
growth rate, made China a very attractive destination for foreign investments.
American, Japanese and west European private business started to enter China
in a big way from the early 1980s, paving ways for the relegation of political
differences to the background. China’s annual average economic growth rate for
the decade 1960–70 was 5.2, and for 1970–80 it was 5.5. During the next
decade (1980–90), when SME was operating, China’s annual growth rate rose to
a staggering 10.3, almost double the average growth rate of the earlier two
decades (source: International Monetary Fund). Therefore, Deng’s China was
economically stronger than Mao’s China, and it was easier for an economically
open and strong China to conduct international relations with more
determination, zeal and success
 169

VI. As China shed its ideological bias to invite foreign investments from the
‘capitalist’ and ‘imperialist’ states of the West, these industrially developed
nations also changed their views about a ‘rigid’ and ‘closed’ socialist state in
Asia. Gradually China’s relations with the Western world improved, as China
began to play, from the early 1980s, a significant role in mainstream
international economics and politics. Mao’s China also wanted to play a major
role in world politics, but could not fulfill its desires due to China’s closed
economy and adverse international relations; but Deng’s China, economically
open and strong, could play this desired role more easily, as China became more
acceptable to the rest of the world. China’s relations with the Soviet Union also
improved after Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in the USSR in 1985. Border
trade between the two socialist giants went up and got strengthened by the late
1980s. Gorbachev paid an official visit to China in May 1989. Before his visit, the
Soviet Union announced the withdrawal of 5,00,000 Soviet troops from its
borders with China. Chinese leaders welcomed this Soviet gesture. In 1990, Li
Peng, Prime Minister of China, visited the Soviet Union.
VII. A ten-year vision on close cooperation in trade, economic and technological
areas between the two countries was announced during Peng’s visit. With
‘glasnost’ and ‘perestroika’ taking shape, the Soviet Union also opened up and
shed its earlier hostility towards China. As a consequence, Sino-Soviet relations
began to improve. Deng also reached out to third world countries, including
India, to assess possibilities of improved trade and commerce. By the early
1990s, when Cold War was nearing its end, China secured its place in the
international order as a rapidly growing economy, a strong military, and a more
open state with a realistic view of the world. China’s journey towards a major
power status continued after the end of the Cold War.
4)China’s Foreign Policy
I. After the Cold War China maintained its spectacular economic growth after the
Cold War and continued to use economic diplomacy as its major thrust in
international relations. Although an ageing Deng Xiao Ping resigned from all
official posts in 1991, he remained as the central figure in Chinese politics, and
virtually controlled the party and the state in China till his death in 1997. The
SME brought economic gains for China, which subsequently helped China in
conducting international diplomacy more effectively. After the Cold War, the US
remained the only superpower in an altered international order. Deng’s
pragmatic China wanted to be close to the world’s only remaining superpower.
The US also wanted to forge strong economic relations with China because of
 170

its emerging market. Mutual interests brought these two countries close after
the Cold War.
II. In 1994, the US granted the ‘Most Favoured Nation (MFN) in Trade ‘status to
China. Despite persistent criticism in the US Congress about human rights
violations in China, the US did not hesitate to grant MFN status to China for
trade and economic interests. By 1998–99, China became the fourth largest
trading partner of the US with bilateral trade reaching US $94.9 billion at the
end of 1999. Sino-US two-way trade was only US $2.4 billion in 1979. In 2001,
China entered the World Trade Organization (WTO), backed heavily by the US.
Since then, it has become a major player in the WTO, supporting interests of
the developing states. Sino-US trade continued to escalate in the new century
as well. Two-way trade reached a substantial US $409.2 billion in 2008.
III. The US emerged as the top trading partner of China in 2008 and 2009, with
Japan emerging as the second largest trading partner in 2009. These data
revealed how China had used its economic diplomacy after the Cold War to
bring former adversaries close towards China. Despite occasional American
concern for an authoritarian political system, and violation of democratic and
human rights in China, the US–China economic relations remained very strong
after the Cold War, and these would continue to remain strong in the future for
mutualtrade and business interests. Strengthened economic relations also
helped Sino-American political relations to improve after the Cold War. Top-
level mutual visits by the leaders of the two nations continued after the war.
American President Barack Obama visited China in November 2009. The US–
China joint statement issued during Obama’s visit acknowledged China’s
leading role in world politics, and particularly in Asia.
IV. The statement, which raised eyebrows in India, clearly indicated that
China occupied a dominant role in Asia. It appeared to highlight the new
Democratic Administration’s preference for China. This preference may also
strengthen US–China political relations in future. With Gorbachev becoming the
President of the Soviet Union, Sino-Soviet relations began to improve. China’s
relations with the new Russian Federation continued to grow after the Cold
War. In 1991, the Sino-Russian Border Agreement was signed apportioning
territory that became controversial during the Sino-Soviet border conflict
during the Cold War period. In 1992, Russian President Boris Yeltsin visited
China, and signed economic and defence agreements with China. After
Gorbachev’s visit to China in 1989, leaders of the two states continued to pay
mutual visits. These toplevel visits helped to normalize relations between the
two countries.
 171

V. Russian President Vladimir Putin visited China in 2000, and signed three
important economic and trade agreements with China. In 2001, Russia emerged
as the top supplier of defence equipments to China. Also in 2001, the close
relations between the two countries were formalized with the ‘Treaty of Good
Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation’, a twenty-year strategic, economic,
and arguably, an implicit military, treaty. Before this treaty was signed, the two
countries joined Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan to form the
Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a multilateral forum for economic
and strategic cooperation. The Russian government also agreed to transfer
Tarabarov Island as well as one half of Bolshoy Ussuriysky Island to China in
2004, ending a long-standing border dispute between the two countries. The
transfer had been ratified by both the Chinese and the Russian parliaments. The
official transfer ceremony was held on 14 October 2008.
VI. This event was a big leap forward in bilateral relationship between China and
Russia, and could act as a confidence-building measure in the future. Two-way
trade between the two countries also registered significant growth in recent
times. Sino-Russian trade volume was US $33.4 billion in 2006. It reached a
healthy US $56.8 billion in 2008. During his visit to Russia in 2007, Chinese
President Hu Jin Tao told Russian journalists that he was very optimistic about
bilateral trade reaching US $80 billion by 2010.12 Russian President Dimitry
Medvedev also expressed similar hopes during his state visit to China in
2008.13 Although the total volume of present China–Russia trade is not as large
as the volume of Sino-American trade, it is encouraging to note that China–
Russia two-way trade has gained momentum after the Cold War. It appears
from the analyses made here that both countries are now eager to forge strong
economic and political relations in a changed international order after the Cold
War. China also improved its relations with Japan, a close neighbour and an
economic giant, after the Cold War. Under the SME, China allowed Japanese
companies to do business in the country. This Chinese gesture helped to ease
tensions between the two Asian neighbours. In 1992, Japanese Emperor Akihito
visited China. This was the first visit to China by any Japanese Emperor after the
Second World War.
VII. Naturally, this visit aroused great interests in the two countries and
helped to improve relations. In 1993, Japan’s erstwhile Prime Minister
Hosokawa expressed regrets on behalf of his people for Japan’s aggression over
China during the Second World War. His regrets softened Chinese sentiments
towards Japan. The two states are now politically and economically very close.
Top-level mutual visits by the leaders of the two states are taking place
 172

regularly. In 2006, Shinzo Abe, Prime Minister of Japan, visited China. During his
talks with the Chinese leaders, Abe stressed on cooperation in bilateral trade
and investment. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited Japan in 2007 and held
talks on various areas of cooperation between the two states. Chinese Foreign
Minister Yang Jiechi visited Japan in November 2009 and met Japanese leaders.
Japan’s Foreign Minister Okada welcomed Yang on his official visit to Japan, and
stated that Japan and
China had engaged in dialogues on a variety of issues between their
counterparts and that he would like to further promote active cooperation not
only in bilateral relationship but also in regional and global issues.
VIII. As mentioned earlier, Japan had emerged as the second largest trade partner of
China in 2008 with a total trade volume of US $266.8 billion.14 Clearly, mutual
economic interests had paid dividends in Sino-Japanese bilateral relations
which improved significantly after the Cold War. China also endeavoured to
improve its relations with the ASEAN, the regional organization with strong
economic credentials. China is an important part of the ASEAN + 3 mechanism
that also includes Japan and South Korea as non-members of the ASEAN. China
and the ASEAN now hold regular summits, also known as the 10 + 1
mechanism. On 24 October 2009, the Twelfth China–ASEAN Summit (10 + 1)
was held in Hua Hin, Thailand.
IX. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and the leaders of ASEAN-countries attended the
summit. The two sides reviewed the joint efforts to tackle the international
financial crisis and other challenges faced by the two sides over the past one
year, expressed their will to forge cooperation and seek common development,
and reached broad consensus on deepening comprehensive cooperation. The
China–ASEAN Free Trade Area (FTA), to be completed by 2010, would become
another important milestone in the history of relations between the two sides.
The current relationship between China and the ASEAN is featured by stronger
mutual trust, closer ties in different areas, and the will to work for peace and
security in the Asia Pacific region.
X. China has also enhanced its cooperation with the European Union. China’s
relations with EU were established in 1975, and are currently guided by the
1985 EU–China Trade and Cooperation Agreement. At present, apart from
regular political, trade and economic dialogue meetings between China and the
EU, there are over twenty-four sectoral dialogues and agreements, ranging
from environmental protection to industrial policy, to education and culture.
The Twelfth EU–China Summit took place in Nanjing, China, on 30 November
2009. The joint statement issued after the summit acknowledged the role
 173

played by EU and China in fostering peace and harmony in the world, and called
for increasing cooperation between the EU and China in the areas of trade,
security, environment, education and culture.
XI. As a group, the EU emerged as the largest trade partner of China in 2008.
China’s relations with the developing nations of Asia, Africa and Latin America
also improved after the Cold War in an atmosphere of free market economy
and changed political calculations. China is helping many developing states to
improve their industrial and social infrastructure through economic and
technological assistance. On the whole, an economically resurgent China is now
playing the role of an important actor in world politics after the Cold War.
5)Conclusion

FOREIGN POLICY OF UK

1) England enjoyed great-power status in international politics for a long time, from the
early sixteenth century to the end of the Second World War. After the war, England’s
powers were diminished because its economy was hit hard due to the war; and its
colonies all over the world became free of British control, depriving it of essential
resources to sustain its economy. In comparison, the United States and the Soviet Union
emerged as strong economic and military superpowers after the Second World War,
relegating England to a lesser-power status in international politics. British economy and
foreign policy became largely dependent on the US, its ally before and after the war.
This dependence continued during the Cold War and also thereafter. All the important
bases of British power for centuries actually started eroding before the Second World
War, leaving Britain to remain satisfied with a medium-power status today. Britain rose
to great-power status from the early sixteenth century due to its five strengths:
geography, sea power, trade, imperial interests, and balance of power.
2) For a long time, British diplomacy depended heavily on these factors to establish
Britain’s supremacy in world politics. Of these five ‘strengths’, imperial interests and
balance of power ended with the Second World War. The vast British empire, in the
form of colonies in almost every part of the world, went out of British control after the
war. For almost three and a half centuries Britain did not allow any other power to
dominate in Europe, and maintained a balance of power in the continent through its
command as holder of the balance. But the system of balance of power also came to an
end after the Second World War with the rise of two superpowers possessing nuclear
weapons.
3) The end of the balance of power system also marked the end of British political
command in the world. With unprecedented development in the field of science and
technology from the early twentieth century, several European states—such as Italy,
 174

Germany, France, Portugal and Spain—started competing with England as important sea
powers and trading states. So Britain’s dominance as a sea power and a trading state
faced challenges before the Second World War.
4) The advantage of the British geography—its ‘insularity’ from the rest of the European
continent— remains valid till today; although in an age of spectacular progress in
military technology, such insularity is not enough to gurantee total security for Britain.
British economy, traditionally dependent on sea power and trade, found many
competitors after the Second World War—such as Japan, the US, Italy and the USSR—
and lost grounds. All these factors led to Britain’s ‘fall from grace’as a great power in
world politics. During the Cold War, Britain wished to play the role of an important actor
in international politics, and succeeded to some extent, with the help of the United
States. With common bonds of heritage, language and culture, Britain and the US
remained strong allies before and after the Second World War. Like the US, Britain’s
post-war foreign policy was preoccupied with the task of thwarting the ‘advancement’
of communism and the Soviet Union in the world.
5) Britain was an active member of the West Bloc and the NATO, and formed an anti-Soviet
group with the US and other West European countries during the Cold War. For this
reason, Britain’s relations with the socialist countries of East Europe, Africa, Asia and
Latin America were distant, and sometimes antagonistic. But it must be pointed out at
this point that Britain did not always support the US blindly during the Cold War. It
expressed its reservations about the American policy on China, and put forward the
view, as early as in 1950, that trade with China must be augmented. With impressive
and increasing volumes of Sino-American and Sino-British trade today, Britain’s views
proved right in the long run. Britain also opposed American policies during the Suez
Canal Crisis and the Vietnam War. Moreover, Britain tried to expand its sphere of
influence in the world, independent of the US, through the Commonwealth. Britain was
able to establish close political, economic, and cultural links with more than a hundred
states in the world through the commonwealth system. Although the commonwealth is
a much heterogeneous movement now, with lesser British control, it nevertheless helps
British foreign policy to cultivate closer ties with many states, and has proved to be
beneficial for British diplomacy for a long time.
6) As a permanent member of the Security Council, Britain played a very important role in
international affairs during the Cold War. In 1979, during the premiership of Margaret
Thatcher, Britain successfully resolved the Rhodesian crisis leading to the establishment
of Zimbabwe. Thatcher, the last Prime Minister of Britain (1979–90) during the Cold
War, also won the Falklands War against Argentina in 1982 to re-establish British control
over the Falkland islands that Argentina had captured for a brief period. British victory in
the Falklands War reminded the world that Britain was not a spent force and could
 175

preserve its national interests effectively. John Major of the Conservative Party was the
first post–Cold War Prime Minister (1990–97) of England.
7) The Major government pursued a moderate foreign policy for Britain, perhaps
appropriate with the changing international order. Major and his team did not seek a
very proactive role for Britain in the new world order immediately after the Cold War.
However, the first Gulf War in 1991 and the Masstricht Treaty for a revamped European
Union were tough foreign policy challenges for the Major government. The Major
administration attempted to ratify the treaty with stiff opposition from the Labour Party,
and a section of his own Conservative Party.
8) A nationalistic Major ultimately showed his disinterest in the policy of a single European
currency, opting to retian the ‘pound sterling’for Britain. But the Masstricht Treaty and
the issue of a united Europe raised political storms in Britain, bringing out the shaky
position of the Major government on foreign policy matters. However, Major showed
some determination during the first Gulf War by sending British troops to defend
Kuwait, and by persuading the American President Geoge Bush (Sr) to support ‘no-fly
zones’in Northern Iraq with a view to prevent Iraqi aircrafts from flying over the area to
attack rival aircrafts. This policy proved very effective during the first Gulf War.
9) Major also initiated the Northern Ireland peace process by opening talks with the
provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) in 1993. He paved the way for the Belfast
Agreement, also known as the ‘Good Friday Agreement’, between Britain and Northern
Ireland which sought to end London’s direct control over Northern Ireland. The
agreement was finally signed in 1998 after John Major left office. Anthony Charles
Lynton Blair, popularly known as Tony Blair, of the Labour Party served as British Prime
Minister from 1997 to 2007. Unlike John Major, Blair was more assertive in foreign
policy matters. Under him, Britain preferred an ‘interventionist’ role in international
politics. During his two terms in office (1997–2002 and 2002–07), Blair mainly pursued a
three-pronged foreign policy: assertive interventionism; close ties with the US; and
placing of Britain at the helm of European affairs. The Blair government’s interventionist
preferences could be ascertained from Britain’s active involvement in NATO attacks on
Kosovo and Serbia in 1999 in the wake of ethnic conflicts in these regions.
10) Blair persuaded the US government of Bill Clinton to attack Kosovo and Serbia with a
view to contain Slobodan Milosevic and his Serbian forces. The Blair administration also
made England an active player in the ‘humanitarian intervention’ in Afghanistan in 2001
and in Iraq in 2003. The British military joined hands, mainly with its American
counterparts, to launch massive attacks on disruptive forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. In
all these operations—Kosovo, Serbia, Afghanistan and Iraq—the Blair government
cooperated closely with the US to achieve its foreign policy goals of making Britain a
principal actor in international politics again. Blair was an ardent advocate of US–UK
 176

partnership to secure and promote Britain’s national interests. Immediately after taking
over as Prime Minister, Blair declared in a ‘Foreign Policy Speech’in November 1997:
‘our aim should be to deepen our relationship with the U.S. at all levels. We are the
bridge between the US and Europe. Let us use it.’20 After the 9/11 terrorist attacks on
the US, the Blair government began to work in close partnership with the US in
counterterrorism activities. This cooperation became stronger after suicide bombers
attacked civilians in London in 2005.
11) During his two terms in office, Blair used the policy of maintaining close rapport with the
Americans, the sole superpower in the world, and engaging them in all major areas of
bilateral diplomacy. The Blair government, with a view to securing a prominent role for
Britain in European affairs, took active interest in matters related to the European
Union. Britain worked hard towards achieving a European Monetary Union, and the
Blair government asked the British Treasury to assess the possibility of adopting the
Euro. After careful assessment, the government decided to defer the adoption of euro
for Britain when the single currency was introduced in many countries of Europe in
2002. But it hoped that the currency would be introduced in Britain in future. The
Labour government also endorsed the Nice Treaty in 2002 which sought to strengthen
the European Union by revamping its internal structure. Further, it signed the Brussels
Reform Treaty in 2007 that wanted to extend the powers of the union. The Belfast
Agreement was initiated by the former John Major government to bring peace to
Northern Ireland.
12) After assuming office, the Blair government signed this treaty in 1998. This agreement
formed a part of Blair’s policy to brighten England’s image in Europe. In deference to the
Belfast agreement, the Tony Blair government helped to restore the ‘Stormont’, the
Northern Ireland Parliament, in 2007. During his two tenures, Blair visited almost every
part of Europe—including several areas in East and Central Europe—to restore Britain’s
close ties with these countries which were affected in many cases by Cold War politics.
Blair’s euro-centric policies helped in many ways to reestablish Britain at the helm of
European politics after the Cold War. James Gordon Brown of the Labour Party assumed
charge as the Prime Minister of England in June 2007, after Tony Blair resigned from
office. Brown continued with the foreign policy priorities of the Blair government,
seeking closer ties with the US and an active role in European and international politics.
Although Brown was committed to the Iraq War, he ordered withdrawal of British
combat troops from Iraq in 2008. Wanting to improve relations with China, he paid an
official visit to the country in July 2008.
13) There he expressed hope that England–China economic relations would continue to be
strong, and the volume of bilateral trade would touch US $60 billion by the end of 2010.
 177

Although British sympathisers of the Tibetan unrest in 2008 wanted Brown to send a
strong message to
China, he could not satisfy them fully as he attended the closing ceremony of the summer
Olympics of 2008 in Beijing on 24 August 2008. Brown was in favour of building closer
ties with China, a booming economy and an important power in today’s world politics.
British relations with Russia suffered a setback when the Brown government expressed
support to the people of Georgia during the South Ossetia War of 2008 between Russia
and Georgia. The British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, visited the Georgian capital
Tbilisi to meet the Georgian President and said that the British government and people
stood in solidarity with the Georgian people. The opposition party in Britain accused the
Brown government in October 2009, during a Westminster Hall debate on a ‘frozen
relationship’with Russia that was reminiscent of the Cold War disengagement between
the two countries. Although Brown met with his Russian counterpart Medvedev twice in
2009, the relationship appeared far from cordial. With Japan, the Brown government
nurtured a traditionally close relationship, and further strengthened it. It signed the
Lisbon Treaty in December 2007, which sought to reform the EU by amending the
earlier Masstricht Treaty.
14) The Lisbon Treaty aroused severe political controversies in Britain, and the opposition
Conservative Party was against signing it. However, the treaty was ratified by the British
Parliament in July 2008, signalling an important foreign policy victory for the Brown
government. However, in the May 2010 General Elections, the Labour Party did not fare
well and Brown resigned. Davis William Donald Cameron, the leader of the Conservative
Party, became the new Prime Minister of Britain on the basis of a new coalition between
the Conservatives and the Liberal Democratic Party. The Cameron government became
the first coalition government in the UK since the Second World War. The Cameron
Ministry is new in Britain and it will take time to evaluate its performance. British
foreign policy in the post–Cold War period suffered from a major dilemma, caused by its
close links with the US. Criticism arose within and outside England that British foreign
policy was nothing but another face of American foreign policy. To remove this
‘American’tag, policy planners in Britain had been searching for a ‘British’identity in
their foreign policy since the end of the Second World War. But due to several reasons,
their policy could not come out of the American sphere of influence.
15) Demands of ‘realpolitik’, alliance sentiments, advantages of partnership, and Britain’s
incapacity to carry on its international ambitions alone are some of the reasons for
Britain’s dependence on the US in foreign policy matters. The reliance of three
successive Labour governments (Blair and Brown periods) on the US bears testimony to
such observations. The Blair government faced intense domestic criticism for its role in
Afghanistan and Iraq, for its failure to check human massacre in Rwanda, Bosnia and
 178

Serbia. The opposition Conservative Party and the media accused it of earning a bad
name for Britain by aligning with the US in military operations across the world. This
criticism forced the Brown government to withdraw combat troops from Iraq; but due
to Britain’s economic and strategic interests, it also remained heavily dependent on the
US. British foreign policy thus often suffers from an identity crisis, and it would continue
to haunt policy makers in Britain in future.

Foreign Policy: India

1) Origin and Philosophical Base

I. The foreign policy of any nation is the reflection of its tradition, cultural
heritage, and sociopolitical and economic conditions. Indian foreign policy is no
exception. It draws inspiration from the age-old tradition of the land, its rich
cultural heritage, as well as from the comparatively recent socio-political and
economic experiences. India’s foreign policy is imbibed with ideas of peace,
universal brotherhood, non-interference and nonviolence. The philosophical
basis of India’s foreign policy is rooted in its rich cultural heritage that rests on
Buddha’s tolerance, Emperor Ashoka’s non-violence, Sri Chaitanya’s love for
humanity and Kabir’s religious harmony.
II. There are three main determinants of foreign policy: people, history and
geography: People- identity, values, aspirations and skills, History-
circumstances, opportunities and constraints of the past, Geography- location,
resources and neighbourhood
III. India was an old civilization with great cultural resources which, however, was
stratified socially, economically and politically. Three major developments
changed the character of India:
IV. The direct involvement of the masses in the freedom movement in the first
half of the 20th century with independence in 1947 and, in spite of the
Partition, an identity as a secular nation.
V. The ambition reflected in the Preamble of the1950 Constitution to form an
egalitarian, secular, socialistic-type just society focused on the social and
economic development of the people and politically united into a democratic
republican nation.
VI. The economic reforms of 1991, liberating the trading and entrepreneurial spirit
of the people
VII. The near coincidence in time of Indian independence and Partition, the
beginning of the Cold War in the aftermath of the World War II and the
Communist victory in China created a difficult situation for India. It led to a
 179

foreign policy of non-alignment as a means of retaining strategic autonomy

combined with an effort to create solidarity of Asian/ developing countries as a
political support base.
VIII. In the wake of the Cold War, India’s pro-Soviet–tilt and Pakistan’s total support
for the West as well as China’s occupation of Tibet, helped to exacerbate the
neighbourhood tensions. In spite of trying to settle peacefully through the UN
the Kashmir issue created by Pakistan’s aggression, the issue got converted
there into an Indo-Pakistan dispute. Two wars, one in 1965 and the other in
1971, the latter changing the political geography of the sub-continent, and the
respective peace agreements signed in Tashkent and Simla failed to resolve the
problem. Subsequently, Pakistan started using terror as a state policy to try to
force India to submit as part of its proxy war strategy.
IX. The foreign policy of a state mainly has two sides to it—the first is the ‘policy
side’, the second the ‘application side’. The policy side consists of the
philosophical or theoretical
base of foreign policy. Generally, this part remains unaltered. The philosophical
or theoretical base of foreign policy is built upon the tradition, culture, social and
political history, and political ideas of great personalities of the state. The
application side, on the other hand, is developed on the basis of the changing
contours of national and international politics. As such, it is more pragmatic and
dynamic as it has to constantly adjust itself with the changing demands of the
times and politics. The application side of a state’s foreign policy may not always
reflect the ideologies contained in the policy side. For instance, one aspect of the
theoretical base of India’s foreign policy is the policy of nonalignment. But in its
application, India’s nonaligned policies were not beyond doubt during the Cold
War period. Further, one theoretical premise of the US foreign policy is
noninterference in the internal matters of sovereign independent states. But in
the application of US foreign policy, one might also question if the Americans
were true to this idea of non-interference during and after the Cold War.
Actually, the theoretical side of a foreign policy relates to the ‘idealistic plane’,
whereas the application side relates to the ‘realistic plane’. Keeping these
distinctions in mind, we proceed to discuss the basic principles of India’s foreign
policy.
2) Introduction: While local politics in India mandate an internal focus, recent Indian
administrations have understood that achieving their domestic objectives will require
the engagement of the international community. In recent years, India's military,
diplomatic and economic energies have expanded far beyond Nehru's Non-Aligned
position. But what does that mean for India, its region, and the United States?
 180

3) CURRENT SITUATION: India's foreign policy is driven by five principal factors, through
which are interwoven its relationships with two countries: the United States and China.
I.Conventional Security:
i. Pakistan is historically perceived to be India's main conventional threat,
as evidenced by the military stand-off in late 2001 and early 2002.
ii. At the same time, India lost a war to China in 1962. China is also India's
closest military equal, a fact made most clear when India pronounced
that its 1998 nuclear tests were in response to the China risk.
iii. India's military is rooting out internal militancy prevalent (in the
northeast, in the east (among the Naxelite groups), and in Jammu and
Kashmir.) Notably, however, there are no known Indian al Qaida or
Taliban members (excepting the 2006 Heathrow plot).
iv. India is also located in a volatile neighborhood, with ongoing wars,
insurgencies and unrest taking place in Sri Lanka, Nepal, Pakistan, and
Afghanistan, and a coup in Bangladesh.
II. Economic Growth:
i. For decades, India maintained what economists termed a "Hindu" rate of
GDP growth between 1.5 and 3%. Following the 1991 economic reforms,
growth tripled and has stabilized since 2006 at 8-9.5%. However, if India
hopes to continue to lift up the 60% of its population in the rural sector
and build infrastructure, it must increase its foreign financing
significantly.
ii. Exchange with its neighbors has supported India's growth, from the
"Look East" policy of the early 1990's to today's increasing engagement
with ASEAN, BIMSTEC, and the new SAFTA agreement. At the same time
as it pursues regional agreements, India also engages bilaterally (with
free trade agreements with Singapore and a possible bilateral
investment treaty with the U.S.) and globally, taking a leadership
position in the WTO Doha negotiations.
iii. India's growth has been bolstered by China, which has achieved annual
growth of over 10% since 2000. However, the two countries will
compete increasingly, as India engages in China's traditional stronghold
of manufacturing, and China focuses on the services market.
III. Energy Security:
 India currently imports 70% of its oil and 50% of its gas; it is projected to
import 80% of its energy needs by 2025.
 181

 While India holds that it should be allowed to expand energy

consumption and emissions until its per capita levels correspond with
those of Western countries, increasingly polls indicate that the Indian
public is recognizing the importance of more attention to environmental
concerns.
 India is increasingly exploring nuclear power as an alternative energy
source (presuming the U.S.-India July 2005 civil nuclear agreement is
completed); it is also one of the leading R&D venues for solar and wind
power. However, currently only 6% of potential non-conventional energy
resources have been tapped.
 In an effort to ensure access to energy resources, India will continue to
focus on the Middle East, particularly Iran (including the Iran-Pakistan-
India oil pipeline). At the same time, India is expanding its search for
energy resources into Africa and Latin America (though India typically
loses bids to China).
IV. Nuclear Capability and Nonproliferation:
 India's nuclear policy is shaped by its unstable relations with Pakistan
and China, as well as the recent escalation of nuclear proliferation in the
wider region. Its goal is to build a "credible minimum deterrent" through
land-, air-, and seabased capabilities.
 Since 2002, the India-Pakistan Composite Dialogue has significantly
lowered tensions and resulted in several agreements to mitigate the
chance of a mistaken nuclear attack.
 If the U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement is completed (see India-Iran
Relations briefing memo), India will be able to take a more active role in
promoting nonproliferation directly, a goal that has long been touted as
vital to India's national interest.
V. Strategic Stature and Leadership:
 India has the second largest population in the world, and one of the
youngest. Its economy, by purchasing power parity, is 4th in the world.
India's soft power remains strong, and its military, economic and
diplomatic reach is increasingly significant. India is a multi-ethnic and
multi-religious democracy. While already a leader of the developing
world, India now wants status in the developed world.
 Given South Asia's instability, there are ample opportunities for India to
focus on helping to alleviate the conflicts in neighboring Nepal, Sri Lanka
and Bangladesh. In so doing, India often confronts China's similar desire
 182

for regional leadership and seniority (such as China's desire to exclude

India in 2005 from the newly formed East Asia Summit (EAS)).
 In addition to focusing on bilateral relationships, India engages in
regional and ad hoc groups such as the 2004 Asian Tsunami Core
Response Group, and enhancing its status in global groups (such as its
bid to become a permanent member of the UN Security Council and
interest in the G8).
4) POLICY IMPLICATIONS: These five broad drivers of India's foreign policy have major
implications for its relations with the two principal regional (and global) powers: China
and the United States.
I. China
 Given their mutual desire for stability leading to economic growth, China
and India have worked hard in recent years to improve their relationship
with senior diplomatic visits — Chinese President Hu Jintao visited in
2006 and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh reciprocated in
January 2008 — along with numerous ministerial level visits and, starting
in December 2007, joint military exercises.
 At the same time, the two nations are hedging their bets, with China
developing a "string of pearls" policy to encircle India by building
relationships with its neighbors, from its long-standing strong links to
Pakistan, to improving engagement with Burma and Bangladesh. India is
countering this by building its own avenues of leverage in the region.
 Increasingly the environment is going to conspire to complicate this
relationship, building on inherent areas of conflict in the economic,
energy, nuclear, strategic and security realms. These pressures are likely
to increase as both India and China pursue leadership roles in Asia.
II. United States
 Since 2000, India's relations with the United States have undergone a
"transformation," reaching a level of primacy today. After advocating for
nonalignment (while tilting towards the Soviet Union during the Cold
War), India began to move towards a more self-determining policy in the
1990s. In 2000, then-President Clinton led a path-breaking visit to India
that transformed Indian views of the U.S. and launched the new
relationship. The foundations for this new interaction were put in place
by U.S. Ambassador Robert Blackwill from 2001 to 2003.
 America's principal challenges today lie in such areas as terrorism,
extremism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, economic
 183

growth, energy, environment, narcotics, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, North

Korea and potentially China. These are very similar to the principal
foreign policy challenges facing India today. And, in many cases they can
only be addressed through long-term engagement and cooperation by
the U.S., India, and many of their other allies. iii.However, this bilateral
relationship is held back by a number of constraints, most notably
bureaucratic inertia and lack of trust, and the political considerations that
accompany democratic polities.
RECOMMENDATIONS
i. As India advances its position in the world and lives up to the potential that its
character and natural assets imply, it could become a powerful force for
transformation in key areas such as energy, nonproliferation, environment,
economic development and terrorism. However, if the United States does not
engage seriously on an equal basis with India, the vacuum will be filled with other
players, and America will have lost an opportunity to build a strong and vital
alliance with a growing Asian power.
ii. Given this, the United States should pursue the following principles with India:
1. Build a truly strategic relationship with India that transcends the
civil nuclear deal. This requires committing time, energy and
resources to other significant elements of the relationship.
2. Continue to treat India as a principal world player, including
supporting India's bid for permanent membership in the United
Nations Security Council and the G8.
3. Support India's involvement in global energy groups, including the
International Energy Agency (IEA) and serious bilateral
engagement on post-Kyoto protocols. The United States will need
to find ways through R&D and financial incentives to help India
build "green."
4. Push India to start to carry the burdens of leadership in areas of
its direct interest, such as nonproliferation and terrorism.
5)Conclusion

Foreign Policy of USA

1) Introduction
i. The United States, the only remaining superpower after the Cold War, has a long
political history. The territory, known as the US today, was discovered in the
 184

early sixteenth century by John Cabot, an Englishman by birth. Cabot reached

the East coast of America and established a settlement in Maryland, Virginia.
Before Cabot, another sailor, Christopher Columbus, reached the nearby islands
of West Indies in 1492. So it was Cabot and not Columbus who discovered
America. As Cabot was a British, he ultimately handed over the power to rule
Virginia to the British monarch Henry VII, and a British colony, the first foreign
colony in America, was set up in Virginia.
ii. Gradually other foreign powers reached different parts of America and set up
their colonies. In the Southwest, near the present Florida, Spain established its
rule. The French people occupied Novo-Scotia, the Dutch-captured areas around
the Hudson Valley, while the Swedish set up their colony in Delaware. The first
official colony in America was set up in 1607 at James Town.
iii. By 1732, the number of formal official colonies rose to thirteen, all ruled by
European powers. In 1664, the British defeated the Dutch and captured the
Dutch-ruled areas. Similarly, they also captured the Spanish colonies and
established British rule over a vast area of America. Finally, the Englishmen
defeated the French in the Anglo-French war of 1763, and established their
sovereignty over the whole of America. Anger and frustration over British rule
began to be noticed in all thirteen colonies, and protest movements started all
over America. The dissident leaders in all colonies gradually established close
links among themselves bypassing political differences. They also set up a
combined armed force to fight the British rulers. On 4 July 1776, leaders of the
thirteen colonies signed a declaration proclaiming independence from British
rule. iv. This day (July 4) is now treated as Independence Day in the US. Although
America got freedom from British rule in 1776, it took eleven more years to start
the constitutional process in the territory. In 1787, the constitution was adopted
and the United States of America, consisting of thirteen former colonies, was
officially formed. The constitution became effective from 4 March 1789. The two
Houses of the American Parliament (Congress), the House of Representatives
and the Senate met separately for the first time in April 1789. On 30 April 1789,
George Washington took charge as the first President of the US, and John Adams
assumed office as the first Vice President of the country. Gradually, states were
reorganized in the US and today, the US Federation consists of fifty states. An
abundance of natural resources, spectacular development of agriculture and
industry, science and technology, and above all, human endeavour, have made
the US the only economic, political, military and technical superpower in the
world. The political history of the US is, therefore, more than 230 years old (from
1776), and its constitutional history is more than 220 years old (from 1787). But
 185

in its long constitutional history, the US foreign policy mainly followed a policy of
isolationism— willful abstinence from the main currents of international politics.
From 1789 to 1940, the US never involved itself actively in international politics,
although it maintained diplomatic ties with several countries.
2) Foreign Policy Goals
i. To investigate the nature of current United States foreign policy, the logical
source is the State Department, whose job it is to define and direct it. Foreign
policy goals include the following:
ii. Preserving the national security of the United States iii.Promoting world peace
and a secure global environment iv.Maintaining a balance of power among
nations
v.Working with allies to solve international problems vi.Promoting democratic values
and human rights vii.Furthering cooperative foreign trade and global involvement in
international trade organizations
viii.Examining these goals closely reveals that they are based on cooperation with
other nations, although "preserving the national security of the United States"
implies possible competition and conflict.
3) Major Points
i. Foreign relations to be conducted so as to give the fullest diplomatic support to
the United States armed forces. ii.Effective steps to prevent Germany and Japan,
after the United Nation's victory, from again waging an aggressive war.
iii. Establishment at the earliest possible moment of a United Nations security
organization to maintain peace, by force if necessary, for generations to come.
iv. Agreement on measures to expand world trade so that the United States can
maintain full employment and enter with other nations into an era of expanding
production and rising standards of living.
v. Encouragement of all conditions of international life favorable to the
development by men and women everywhere of institutions of a free and
democratic way of life in accordance with their own customs and desires.
4) Who is in charge of foreign policy: Presidents have more power and responsibility in
foreign and defense policy than in domestic affairs. They are the commanders in chief of
the armed forces; they decide how and when to wage war. As America' chief diplomat,
the president has the power to make treaties to be approved by the Senate.
5) Foreign Policy and Isolationism
i. The Republican party had an isolationist wing led by Senator Robert A. Taft.
During World War II, the internationalist wing of the GOP gained strength, as
former isolationist Arthur Vandenberg switched sides.
 186

ii. The leaders of the anti-isolationist or "internationalist" wing were Dwight D.

Eisenhower (president 1952-60), and Richard Nixon (president 1968-74).
iii. Conservative leader Barry Goldwater in 1964 rejected isolationism and called for
an aggressive Rollback strategy to defeat Communism, a policy followed by
Ronald Reagan (president 1980-88).
iv. Meanwhile isolationist sentiment grew in the Democratic party, largely in
reaction to the failure of the Vietnam War. the chief spokesman was Senator
George McGovern, whose 1972 presidential campaign had the isolationist
slogan, "Come Home America".
6) Historical Background
i. 1933-39: Isolation: The rejection of the League of Nations treaty in 1919 marked
the dominance of isolationism from world organizations in American foreign
policy. Despite Roosevelt's Wilsonian background, he and Secretary of State
Cordell Hull acted with great care not to provoke isolationist sentiment.
Roosevelt's "bombshell" message to the world monetary conference in 1933
effectively ended any major efforts by the world powers to collaborate on ending
the worldwide depression, and allowed Roosevelt a free hand in economic
policy. The main foreign policy initiative of Roosevelt's first term was the Good
Neighbor Policy, which was a re-evaluation of U.S. policy towards Latin America.
ii. World War 2: By 1940, it was in high gear, with bipartisan support, partly to
expand and re-equip the Army and Navy and partly to become the "Arsenal of
Democracy" supporting Britain, France, China and (after June 1941), the Soviet
Union. As Roosevelt took a firmer stance against the Axis Powers, American
isolationists—including Charles Lindbergh and America First—attacked the
President as an irresponsible warmonger. Unfazed by these criticisms and
confident in the wisdom of his foreign policy initiatives, FDR continued his twin
policies of preparedness and aid to the Allied coalition.
iii. Truman: 1945-53 Truman shifted from FDR's détente to containment as soon as
Dean Acheson convinced him the Soviet Union was a long-term threat to
American interests. They viewed communism as a secular, millennial religion
that informed the Kremlin's worldview and actions and made it the chief threat
to American security, liberty, and world peace. Truman in 1947 announced the
Truman Doctrine of containing Communist expansion by furnishing military and
economic American aid to Europe and Asia, and particularly to Greece and
Turkey. He followed up with the Marshall Plan, which was enacted into law as
the European Recovery Program (ERP) and pumped $12.4 into the European
economy, forcing the breakdown of old barriers and encouraging modernization
along American lines.
 187

iv. Containment: In 1947 Truman, a Democrat, convinced the Republican-controlled

Congress to support the Truman Doctrine by sending massive aid to the small
country of Greece, threatened by a Communist takeover. The rest of Europe was
still in economic ruin, which Washington feared would help the spread of
Communism, so the Marshall Plan was proposed to help restore the European
economies. The strategy of friendship (or détente) with Communism had failed
in 1948. Washington decided on a strategy of containment, as embodied in the
NATO military alliance set up in 1949. The plan was to prevent further
Communist expansion, hoping that the internal weaknesses of the Soviet system
would soon lead to its collapse. The problem with containment was that it meant
fighting wars against Communist expansion, especially in Korea in 1950-53, and
in Vietnam 1963-73. Containment had the basic flaw that the enemy could
choose the time and place of movement, while America and its allies had to
defend everywhere at all times. In 1949 Mao ZeDong and his Communists won
the civil war in China showing the failure of containment in Asia.
v. Korean War: 1950-1953: The Korean War began at the end of June 1950 when
North Korea, a Communist country, invaded South Korea, which was not under
explicit American protection. Without consulting Congress Truman ordered
General Douglas MacArthur to use all American forces to resist the invasion. In
late 1950 China intervened unexpectedly, drove the UN forces all the way back
to South Korea.
7) Cold War Policy: In 1950 Truman approved NSC-68, a top-secret[13] policy paper that
formed the grounds for escalating the Cold War, especially in terms of tripling spending
on rearmament and building the hydrogen bomb. The integration of European defense
was given new impetus by continued U.S. support of NATO, under the command of
General Eisenhower. A vast foreign aid program supplemented a network of military
alliances stretching around the globe. The services contained about 3 million soldiers,
sailors, airmen and marines at all times. The military stressed mechanization and
electronics, with elaborate support mechanisms and a huge training program in
technical skills; fewer than 20% of the servicemen were in combat roles. The necessary
hardware was supplied by the “military-industrial complex” of big corporations and
labor unions. A peaceful race to the moon, won by the Americans in 1969, was played
out against rapid advances in size and accuracy of rockets by both sides.
8) Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson: 1953-1968: President John F. Kennedy called for
youth, dynamism, vigor and an intellectual approach to aggressive new policies in
foreign affairs. The downside was his inexperience in foreign affairs, standing in stark
contrast to the vast experience of the president he replaced, Republican Dwight D.
Eisenhower. Kennedy's rashness and inexperience caused a national humiliation in 1961
 188

as he sent CIA-trained Cuban exiles into an ill-prepared attack on Castro's Cuba. At the
Bay of Pigs, all Kennedy's invaders were killed or captured, and he was forced to ransom
them for cash. Kennedy's supporters blamed the fiasco on Eisenhower. Kennedy and
Khrushchev reached a compromise whereby the Soviets removed their missiles from
Cuba publicly (giving Kennedy a public relations triumph), while Kennedy secretly
removed American missiles from Turkey aimed at the Soviets, and also promised that
America would never invade Cuba—a promise still in effect in 2009. Vietnam proved a
trap for Kennedy as he sent in 16,000 military advisors to prop up an ineffective regime
in South Vietnam.
9) Nixon and Kissinger: 1969-77: Kissinger's first priority in office was the achievement of
détente with the Soviet Union and China, and playing them off against each other.
Recognizing and accepting the Soviet Union as a superpower, Nixon and Kissinger
sought both to maintain U.S. military strength and to inaugurate peaceful economic,
cultural, and scientific exchanges to engage the Soviet Union in the international
system. This policy flourished under Kissinger's direction and led in 1972 to the signing
of the first Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT I). At the same time they successfully
engineered a rapprochement with Communist China, leading to the astonishing news in
1971 that Nixon would visit China, which he and Kissinger did in 1972.
i. Vietnam: Nixon and Kissinger worked to achieve a disengagement of U.S. forces
fighting in Vietnam.
ii. Middle East: One challenge to détente came with the outbreak of the October
1973 Arab-Israeli War. Faced with a threat of Soviet intervention, Nixon put U.S.
military forces be placed on worldwide alert. He then employed shuttle
diplomacy to secure cease-fires between Israel and the Arab states and to
restore U.S. Egyptian diplomatic ties, broken since 1967.
iii. Latin America: The Nixon administration sought to protect the economic and
commercial interests of the United States during a period of heightened Latin
American nationalism and expropriations, 1969-74. Though the administration
initially adopted a flexible policy toward Latin American governments that
nationalized American corporations' assets, the influence of Nixon's economic
ideology, domestic political pressures, and the advice of his close adviser,
Secretary of the Treasury John Connally, led to a more confrontational stance
toward Latin American countries.
iv. South Asia: During the South Asian crisis in 1971, the White House, stood firmly
behind
Pakistani president Yahya Khan and demonstrated a disdain for India and particularly its
leader, Indira Gandhi because of India's tilt toward the Soviet Union. Many
analysts believed that Pakistan's role as a conduit of rapprochement with China
 189

and Kissinger's focus on geopolitical concerns greatly influenced the American

policy decision in 1971.
10) Ford years: Nixon resigned in 1974 under the threat of impeachment and was
succeeded by Gerald R. Ford, who kept Nixon's policies. The US was not involved in 1975
when North Vietnam invaded and defeated South Vietnam, except to rescue Americans
and some Vietnamese supporters.
11) Jimmy Carter 1977-81:
i. In his inaugural speech Carter stated that "our commitment to human rights
must be absolute." He singled out the Soviet Union as a violator of human rights
and strongly condemned the country for arresting its citizens for political
protests.
ii. Carter also tried to remove the U.S. image of interventionism by giving
Panamanians control of the Panama Canal. He was strongly opposed by
conservatives but won, and gave back the Canal. The result was disaster and the
US invaded Panama in 1989 to overthrow a nasty dictator named Noriega.
iii. Détente with China continued successfully.
iv. Détente with the Soviet Union collapsed in 1979 when the Soviet Union invaded
Afghanistan, setting off a long war that the Soviets lost. President Carter
responded by giving military aid to the rebels, imposing an embargo on the sale
of grain to the Soviet Union and boycotting the 1980 Summer Olympic Games in
Moscow. The policy of détente that was established by President Nixon had
ended.
v. Carter's only triumph while in office was a historic peace treaty known as the
Camp David Peace Accords, between Israel and Egypt, two nations that had been
bitter enemies for decades. The treaty was formally signed in 1979, with most
middle eastern countries opposed to it, bit it remains in effect in 2009.
12) Iran Hostage Crisis: In 1979, a new radical Islamic regime lead by Ayatollah Khomeini in
Iran overthrew America's close ally Shah. Thousands of modernizers were arrested,
expelled or executed. In November 1979 student revolutionaries stormed into the
American embassy in Tehran and captured 52 United States diplomats as hostages. They
refused to negotiate and the government refused to intervene. The US seized all Iranian
assets and tried to bargain, a process that dragged on for 444 days. Carter tried to use
the US military action to rescue the hostages, but it was a total failure. Fearful of what
President Reagan might do, the Iranians released the hostages were released minutes
before Reagan was inaugurated on January 20, 1981.The result was a major humiliation
for the United States, and a consensus that the country was now an underdog and
needed new leadership to claw its way back.
 190

13) Ronald Reagan 1981-93: Reagan restructured American politics in a manner reminiscent
of Franklin Roosevelt' New Deal Coalition. Reagan built entirely new electoral coalitions
using fresh issues, such as opposition to taxes, opposition to economic regulation, and
support for moral issues (like right-to-life) promoted by Catholics and especially
evangelical Protestants. In foreign policy the Cold War resumed with renewed intensity.
The defeatism of the late 1970s sparked a new determination among the Reaganites. In
the 1970s the Soviets had rejected détente, expanded Cold War operations into Africa,
Asia and Latin America, enlarged their long-range missile forces, and invaded neutral
Afghanistan. The fall of the Berlin Wall in November, 1989, marked the end of the Cold
War with a stunning American victory. Gorbachev’s reforms, meanwhile, made the
Soviet economy worse
14) Relations with Britain: Relations with Britain had been strained since the Suez crisis of
1956. Now both countries were led by like-minded leaders who collaborated closely,
Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and Reagan. Their collaboration was based on a
striking convergence of ideologically driven conservatives who shared similar domestic
agendas and a common foreign policy. Both led domestic political revolutions--supply-
side economics, increased defense spending, privatization, deregulation, and an overall
conservative agenda. Reagan was the "Great Communicator", Thatcher the "Iron Lady".
The two became personal friends. Reagan and Thatcher's mutual trust strengthened
Reagan's hand against the Soviet Union.
15) Post Cold War Policy
i. The immediate post–Cold War world order was mainly based on the following
conditions:
 the emergence of the US as the only superpower;
 end of bipolarity and bloc politics;
 end of American and Western fear about the spread of socialism; iv.an
apparent end to military rivalry with the decline of bipolarity and bloc
politics. US foreign policy was new to such conditions and it had the
responsibility to adjust itself and protect American interests in this new
international order.
ii. Foreign policy planners in the US were ready to take up the challenges posed by
the post–Cold War international order.
iii. In a new altered scenario, American foreign policy placed emphasis on the
following issues:
i. Nonproliferation Of The Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) In The
World; The Bush administration zealously pursued nonproliferation
policies. The US Foreign Policy Department worked hard to contain the
 191

spread of the WMD. After Bush (Sr), Bill Clinton took office as the US
President. Clinton served two terms in office, from 1993 to 2000. His
administration was the first significant American foreign policy planner
after the Cold War. During his presidency, nonproliferation of WMD
became an important element of American foreign policy. The Clinton
administration declared different countries of the world as nuclear
‘rogues’and ‘threshold’states. For instance, North Korea and Iraq were
declared as nuclear rogue states. India, Pakistan, Israel, South Africa,
Brazil and Argentina were termed as nuclear ‘threshold’states. The US
also identified South Asia as a ‘nuclear hot spot’, along with North Korea
and Iraq, and engaged in diplomatic talks with India and Pakistan—North
Korea and Iraq did not respond to such talks—to encourage
nonproliferation in these countries.
ii. Protection of Human Rights; American diplomatic relations suffer with
countries accused of human rights violations by the AHRR. Normally, the
US tries to avoid relations of economic, political or security-related
significance with countries alleged by the AHRR of violation of human
rights. But there are exceptions in case of important powers.
iii. Economic Diplomacy; Economic diplomacy places importance on trade
and business, keeping aside political considerations. After the Cold War,
the US worked hard to pursue policies of economic diplomacy with
different states. Enhancing trade and commercial relations with other
countries, providing investment opportunities to American capital in
different parts of the world, increasing American financial assistance for
industrialization and developmental activities in other states, all these
constitute integral elements of American economic diplomacy.
iv. Counter-Terrorism; Bush’s ‘war on terrorism’contained four major
policies: (1) no compromise with terrorism and terrorists, and no
exchange or settlement with terrorists (like release of detained terrorists
or economic exchanges); (2) judicial trial of terrorists for crime against
humanity; (3) isolation of countries providing help to terrorists from the
international community, and pressurizing these countries to abandon
their harmful activities; and (4) provision of all kinds of assistance to
states engaged in the fight against terrorism. The Bush (Jr)
administration also declared an ‘anti-terrorism assistance programme’
that contained, among other things, military training, exchange of
information and security assistance to countries involved in the war on
terrorism. Further, a ‘rewards for justice’ programme announced by the
 192

Bush Administration sought to exchange information about international

terrorists with friendly states, and give rewards of upto US $25 million
for information on international terrorists, and assistance to capture
them. The Obama administration also stepped up American efforts on
counter-terrorism. For instance, Obama’s ‘Af-Pak Policy’, announced in
March 2009, sought to eliminate terrorist groups like the Al Qaeda and
the Talibans from Afghanistan and Pakistan and provide massive
economic and security assistance to these countries to eliminate
terrorist activities from their soil.
v. Security Assistance Programme: Security Assistance Programme (SAP)
became an integral part of US foreign policy after the Second World War.
Almost 50 per cent of American assistance to different countries during
the Cold War period came under this programme, which was considered
crucial for American strategic interests to counter Soviet influence.
However, after the end of the Cold War, the future of the programme
was hotly debated in the US. In the absence of the Soviet Union, whether
it would be wise for the US to spend huge amounts on the SAP became a
controversial issue. But all American Presidents after the Cold War
preferred to continue with the programme, and the US Congress
approved the budget on the SAP from time to time. The continuance of
the programme by all American administrations during the post Cold
War period proved the importance of the SAP as an element of American
foreign policy in recent years. The SAP contains several programmes like
Foreign Military Financing (FMF), Economic Support Fund (ESF),
International Military Education and Training (IMET) and Cooperative
Threat Reduction (CTR). About 95 per cent of the SAP-money is spent on
FMF and ESF. President George W. Bush (Sr), the first US President after
the Cold War, lobbied hard to retain the SAP after the Cold War. Bush
considered SAP as a very significant part of US defence strategy. He
identified three areas in the American Defence Strategy which could be
bolstered by the SAP. They were: (1) meeting crisis situations; (2)
reorganization; and (3) presence of US military in other countries as per
requirements. He believed that the SAP would be very useful to protect
vital American interests, mainly in these areas. After Bush (Sr), all post–
Cold War American Presidents lent their support for the SAP and
continued to consider it as an integral part of American security policy.
After the Cold War, the SAP was used to strengthen democratic
processes in East Europe, help counter-terrorism and anti-narcotic
activities around the world, strengthen the maintenance of international
 193

peace and security, and above all, protect American national interests.
The US Congress also allocated enough money to keep the SAP going
during the post–Cold War period.
16) 1989-present:
i. Clinton 1993-2001 The years since 1991 comprise a new era. Fears of
cataclysmic wars faded, to be replaced by new threats, especially those arising in
the Middle East. When Iraq under Saddam Hussein invaded its neighbor Kuwait
in 1991, the United Nations demanded that Iraq withdraw. When it refused the
United States led a broad coalition that pushed Iraq out, but which left Hussein
in power under UN supervision. In 2001 Al Qaeda terrorists attacked the United
States, leading America into a war on terrorism. America was the world’s only
superpower, with military strength much greater than everyone else combined,
and economic muscle and high technology to back it up. The overwhelming
strength of the United States, and the absence of any countervailing force like
Communism, meant that fears and hatreds came to focus on America, widely
seen as a new empire. Americans meanwhile and to adjust to heightened levels
of security at home, and were ill-disposed to listen to foreign critics. The ways to
which society and culture of the American homefront would adjust to the new
Age of Terror became a central issue of the new century.
ii. Bush: 2001-2008: President George W. Bush leveraged his public support to
eliminate the long-term threat posed by Iraq, with an invasion in spring 2003. He
moved in close cooperation with Britain and other allies, but without the
endorsement of the United Nations. The warfare was short and decisive, but the
occupation was met with violence and the goal of creating a democratic nation
in Iraq proved much more difficult than expected. Public opinion worldwide
turned hostile to America—the superpower-as-bully syndrome brought out the
old clichés about the “Ugly American” that had been in circulation for decades,
emboldening anti-American forces and causing Americans, in the 2004
presidential campaign, to take a hard look at the nation’s role in the world.
iii. Obama 2009-present:
i. Obama is a much different candidate today from the senator who
distinguished himself by his opposition to the "dumb war" on his way to
the presidency in 2008. Obama has turned out, in many ways, to have
pursued a fairly conventional, at times, hawkish foreign policy. He has
had some notable successes, such as the bin Laden raid and this year’s
withdrawal from Iraq — albeit on a timetable negotiated by his
predecessor — and the successful overthrow of Muammar al-Qaddafi.
All the same, "apology tours" and "leading from behind" — referring to
 194

an unfortunate description of Obama’s diplomatic strategy by a White

House staffer — have already become buzzwords for Republican
candidates. He has also faced heavy criticism on the left for a sometimes
inconsistent approach to international law in counterterrorism
operations.
ii. Afghanistan/Pakistan: "We have put al Qaeda on a path to defeat,"
Obama announced last June, noting that the 33,000 "surge" troops he
sent to Afghanistan in 2009 would be out of the country by the summer
of 2012.
iii. Military spending: Pentagon will lead a "fundamental review" of U.S.
military capabilities in order to cut $400 billion in defense spending over
the next 10 years.
iv. Immigration/borders: Obama insists that enacting comprehensive
immigration reform, which would likely include a path to citizenship for
at least some illegal immigrants already in the United States, is still a
"top priority,"
v. Israel/Palestine: Obama’s engagement in the Israeli-Palestinian peace
process has probably been the most frustrating foreign-policy initiative
of his presidency and the one on which he is most often criticized by his
Republican opponents. Obama continues to support negotiations on a
two-state settlement of the conflict, but his best-remembered
statement on the topic is controversial: his suggestion that Israel’s pre-
1967 war borders be taken as a starting point for negotiations, a
position fiercely opposed by Israel. More recently, the administration
has confirmed that it will veto Palestine’s statehood bid in the U.N.
Security Council.
vi. China: Obama has repeatedly criticized China — most recently at the
APEC summit in Honolulu — for currency policies that he says have a
distorting effect on the global economy.
vii. Foreign aid: In his 2010 address to the U.N. General Assembly, Obama
announced an overhaul of U.S. foreign aid policies, which he vowed will
place them at the center of U.S. foreign policy.
viii. Iran/nukes: Early in his presidency, Obama made several overtures to
Iran in an effort to improve relations.
ix. Trade: In October, Obama signed long-delayed free trade agreements
with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. On his trip to Asia this
November, Obama is working to promote a new trans-Pacific free trade
agreement.
 195

x. War on terror/detainees: Obama signed an executive order closing the

Guantánamo Bay detention center as one of his first actions as
president. The facility remains open, however, largely due to
congressional opposition over where to house the remaining prisoners.
xi. Environment: Despite his stated support for environmental legislation
and green energy, there has been little progress on passing major
climate-change bills under Obama’s watch.
xii. Russia/reset: One of the centerpieces of Obama’s first-term foreign
policy was the effort to "reset" relations with Russia. The president
successfully negotiated the New START nuclear reduction treaty,
xiii. Still, with 200,000 dead in Syria’s civil war, eastern Ukraine engulfed in a
Russian-backed insurgency, and the Islamic State governing large parts
of Syria and Iraq, it can be hard to see what’s “better” about this world.
(Obama did, however, correctly note that “the trajectory of this planet
overall is one toward less violence, more tolerance, less strife, less
poverty.”) On each of these crises, one can criticize Obama for how
badly they have turned out, but that assumes that the United States had
the ability to influence these crises for the better before they spiraled
out of control. 17)Conclusion

Topic 6: Foreign Policy of Pakistan post 9/11

1) Introduction
• The foreign policy of Pakistan is primarily directed to the pursuit of national
goals of seeking peace and stability through international cooperation.
• To project the image of the country as a dynamic and moderate society
iii.Seeks to promote the internationally recognized norms of interstate
relations iv.Generally Pro-West, India-centric and Security-oriented
2) Guiding Principles of Pakistan’s Foreign Policy
• According to Quaid e Azam: “Our foreign policy is one of the friendliness and
goodwill towards all the nation of the world. We do not cherish aggressive
designs against any country or nation. We believe in the principle of honesty and
fair-play in national and international dealings, and are prepared to make our
contribution to the promotion of peace and prosperity among the nations of the
world. Pakistan will never be found lacking in extending its material and moral
support to the oppressed and suppressed peoples of the world and in upholding
the principles of the United Nations Charter.”
 196

• The Constitution of Pakistan also lays down guidelines in Article 40: “The State
shall endeavour to preserve and strengthen fraternal relations among Muslim
countries based on Islamic unity, support the common interests of the peoples
of Asia, Africa and Latin America, promote international peace and security,
foster goodwill and friendly relations among all nations and encourage the
settlement of international disputes by peaceful means.”
• Objectives
Promotion Pakistan as a dynamic, progressive, moderate, and democratic Islamic
country Safeguarding national security and geo-strategic interests, including
Kashmir
Consolidating our commercial and economic cooperation
Safeguarding the interests of Pakistani Diaspora abroad.
Ensuring optimal utilization of national resources for regional and international
cooperation
3) Determinants of Foreign Policy of Pakistan
i. Ideological Obligation: Islamic ideology; Liaquat Ali Khan once said: “Pakistan
came into being as a result of the urge felt by the Muslims of this subcontinent
to secure a territory, however limited, where the Islamic ideology and way of
life could be practiced and demonstrated to the world.”
ii. Historical Legacy: Pakistan inherited from the British files; fear of Russia.
Pakistan’s foreign policy makers always sought western assistance.
iii. Geographical Location: “the foreign policy of Pakistan largely begins and ends at
her borders, more particularly at the Indian border,” seems to be accurate.
iv. The Indian Threat; Security v.Economic Compulsions vi.National Interests
vii.Diplomacy and Decision making viii.Public Opinion Formulation
4) Foreign Policy of Pakistan
i. Pattern of relationship established with the outside world for the promotion of
national interest of a country.
ii. Foreign policy of any country is a reflection of its domestic situation, particularly
on matters related to politics and economy. Sometimes other factors such as
religion, culture, ethnicity and leadership also influence the foreign policy
making process.
iii. Foreign policy often considered as the first line of defense of any country. This is
truer in case of Pakistan, as it was surround by different security situation.
iv. Foreign policy is based on shear realism and is free of allusions, romanticism and
emotions.
 197

v. Pakistan is, geo-politically, at the cross roads of central Asia, west and South
Asia. Its proximity to the Persian gulf and the middle east is also a source of its
strategic prominence.
vi. Pakistan has been a focal point of international political events due to its
strategic location and due to the interests of the global powers in the region.
vii. Pak foreign policy based on the desire to safeguard the country’s independence
and terrestrial integrity.
viii. Before 1990’s our elites were comfortable with the west, there fore pro-west
policies dominated our foreign policy. . In 1990’s we shifted from bilateralism to
multilateralism, after the end of cold war. Pak established better ties with Beijing
and Moscow and sought option to play a viable role in the 3rd world and in the
Muslim world.
ix. Events in international politics in the 1990’s and early 21st century shaped the
dynamics of our foreign policy.
x. Withdraw of Soviet and rule of Taliban in Afghanistan.
xi. Outbreak of violence in Kashmir. xii.Indo-Pak Nuclear tests in May 1998. Arms
race in South Asia. xiii.Emergence of Terrorism.
xiv.Event of 9/11; attacks on Twin Towers, heavily affected our foreign policy
5) Trends
i. Era of Neutrality; 1947-53 – neutral foreign policy
ii. Era of Allainces; 1953-62 – alignment with the West (SEATO, CENTO, Mutual
Cooperation Pact, US Foreign Assistance Act)Pakistan became US’ “most-allied
ally in
Asia” iii.1963-71 – phase
of transition
iv. Era of Bilateralism: 1971-79 – bilateralism and non-alignment (introduced by
Zulfiqar Ali
Bhutto)
v. Era of Non-alignment: 1980-88 – tilted non-alignment (Pro-US but still normal
with socialists except Soviet Union) 1989-2000 – search for allies (oscillating
relationship with
US; issues-based foreign policy) vi.Era of ‘War against Terror”: 2000 – on wards
frontline state in war on terror; allegations of double game
6) Foreign policy of Pakistan Post 9/11 xv.Introduction
i. 9/11 attacks proved to turn the foreign policy of Pakistan upside down
ii. It was a crucial time that demanded an intelligence filled response.
 198

iii. Musharaf was one of the foreign leaders to receive a call from
Washington (You are either with us or against us)
iv. Two ways were given,
1.To exigently join US in principle and workout the modalities later
on 2.To refuse to submit in clear defiance and be ready for a war.
xvi.Consequences Of Choosing Not To Co-Operate:
i. U.S might have bracketed Pak with Taliban while declaring Pak a terrorist
state.
ii. Our territory would have been subjected to furious onslaughts and
airstrikes to neutralize resistance under the pretext of eliminating
terrorist bases.
iii. India would have given a green signal to attack Kahuta as it had done
previously. iv.Kashmiri freedom struggle might have been labeled as a
terrorist insurgency.
xvii.Pakistan's Choice
i. Taliban refused to hand Osama to America despite Pak's pleadings.
ii. Musharaf on 19th Sept,2001 while addressing to
nation said,
''Pakistan comes first, everything else is
secondary.'' iii.Pakistan joined U.S in strategic interest
of,
1. territorial security
2. protection of its own nuclear and missile programs
3. revival of economy iv.Joining (WOT) was the most
appropriate among the available options and was generally, if not
entirely, in national interest.
v.This shift in foreign policy of Pakistan showed the strategic intelligence of
government towards the oncoming hurricane.
xviii. Demands By U.S After Alliance
i. To stop Al-Qaeda operations at its border.
ii. To give blanket over flight and landing rights for military operations.
iii.To provide intelligence information. iv.To provide territorial access
to allied forces.
 199

v.To continue to publicly condemn the terrorist acts.

vi.To sever ties with the Taliban, if they refuse to
cope.
vii.To cut off all shipments of fuel to Taliban and stop recruits from going to
Afghan.
7) Challenges
i. Improving Pak image in the international community.
ii. Coping with the situation in Afghanistan.
iii. Kashmir issue iv.Arms race in South Asia
v.To take into account the domestic constraints
8) Options with Pakistan
i. Pak must not meddle with Afghan affairs and it must support the reconstruction
process of Afghanistan.
ii. Good relations with India.
iii. Pakistan needs to establish Good relations with China and other countries and
should not only stick only to the U.S.
iv. Strong foreign policy is possible only when Pak’s economy is strong, and there is
political stability and good governance in the country.
v. Pakistan should not go the extreme extent of assisting U.S.
vi. No infiltration into Kashmir from Pakistan side.. Instead Pak should opt
diplomatic and political support of Kashmiris.
9) Effects of Changing Foreign Policy:
i. Pakistan's decision to join world community in the war against terrorism brought
it back into the international mainstream and won it the revived and stronger
support from major countries of the world.
10) New Strategic Vision Of Foreign Policy Of Pakistan
i. The security of its own country and not the security of others.
ii. Peaceful co existence, i.e. further development of regional ties and the
strengthening of their own positions.
iii. The future strategy of Pakistan in its foreign policy must be a “shift from
traditional diplomacy to economic diplomacy as well as cultural diplomacy”
iv. An effective policy requires domestic stability and a national consensus on
issues.
 200

v. Deft diplomacy , using innovative and novel means we must strive to promote
our interests and at the same time keep a triangular balance among the world
giants i.e The U.S, The China ,and the E.U.
201
 202

Peace-making and Peace-Building in South Asia

1) Introduction
a) Peacemaking: using diplomacy in order to affect the outcome of regional
conflicts in a manner which promotes your country's international interests.
b) Peacekeeping: using military force in order to affect the outcome of regional
conflicts in a manner which promotes your country's international interests.
c) Peace-building: establishing a web of NGO's and funds around "peacemaking"
and "peacekeeping", creating a micro-economy of jobs and positions for well-
spoken and generally white people.
d) International armed forces were first used in 1948 to observe cease-fires in
Kashmir and Palestine. Although not specifically mentioned in the UN Charter,
the use of such forces as a buffer between warring parties pending troop
withdrawals and negotiations—a practice known as peacekeeping—was
formalized in 1956 during the Suez Crisis between Egypt, Israel, France, and the
United Kingdom. Peacekeeping missions have taken many forms, though they
have in common the fact that they are designed to be peaceful, that they
involve military troops from several countries, and that the troops serve under
the authority of the UN Security Council. In 1988 the UN Peacekeeping Forces
were awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace.
2) Historical Background
a) For the last sixty years or so, India and Pakistan have been locked into several
conflicts, which have engulfed most of the resources of the region and still have
the capability to absorb the rest. Although several efforts, both at the
governmental and nongovernmental levels, have been made to resolve those
conflicts, the region has so far failed to observe a durable and long-lasting
peace. Although the ‘Cricket Diplomacy’ between the two countries at the time
of the Cricket World Cup, held in India in February-March 2011, has helped melt
the ice, the normalization of relations between the two nuclear-armed
neighboring countries of South Asia are still in the transitional phase and can
only become normal if the long-standing element of mistrust, which developed
after their inception in August 1947, is removed.
b) The current thaw in relations between India and Pakistan needs to be noticed
for several reasons. First, a realization occurred on both sides of the border that
a continued brinksmanship may escalate into a full-fledged war. India and
Pakistan are the only nuclear neighbors, which are involved in active conflict
with each other. The Kashmir issue has become a nuclear flashpoint between
 203

the two states. The world narrowly escaped the nuclear disaster when both the
states had deployed over a million troops on borders during the crisis after the
attack on the Indian Parliament in December 2001.
c) Second, the keen interest of the US in the South Asian affairs has also put
pressure on both India and Pakistan to work for peace-building in the region. It
must be noted that for the success of the Global War on Terror (GWOT), peace
between India and Pakistan is a prerequisite. After the 9/11 incident, Pakistan
became the frontline ally of the US in the GWOT. Washington needed
Islamabad’s active support in counter-terrorism operations both in Afghanistan
as well as in Pakistan. For this, normalization of India Pakistan relations was
necessary so that Islamabad could effectively concentrate on its western
borders.
d) Third, a realization has also occurred in both India and Pakistan that for the
economic growth and development, peace in the region is inevitable. The
militant Jihadi groups, which were previously nurtured by the Pakistani state,
have now become too powerful to control. The blowback of the policy of using
the Salafi/Jihadi groups in Afghanistan and Kashmir could be seen in the form of
sectarian violence in Pakistan. Therefore, crackdown against those militant
groups was the need of the time. This policy also met the Indian demand to
dismantle terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan before the beginning of a
meaningful dialogue between the two countries.
e) A significant change, which has occurred after 9/11, is that the US has now
become an important regional actor in South Asia because of its physical
presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Therefore, it is in no way that the US
would remain uninvolved in case any crisis occurs between India and Pakistan.
Moreover, the US would no more bear Pakistan’s policy of supporting militant
Jihadi groups in Kashmir in order to engage India in a low intensity conflict. It is
argued that the US presence and role will determine the future course of India-
Pakistan relations and so as the solution of disputes, including Kashmir, between
them. Two important factors support this argument. First, the US, today, enjoys
a greater degree of influence on both India and Pakistan simultaneously.
Second, a realization on the part of the US, India and Pakistan has occurred that
the common threat to the regional as well as global peace and security is the
menace of terrorism.
3) The Genesis of India-Pakistan Relations
I. The partition of India in 1947 and as a result the creation of Pakistan on the
basis of religion sowed the seeds of hatred and mistrust in relations between
the two countries from the very beginning. The Indian hawks did not accept the
 204

partition and “posited it as a great betrayal to Mother India.” Even “some

analysts attributed India’s acceptance of Partition to its belief that Pakistan
would not last2 and that “Pakistan would collapse in a short time.” The Indian
Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru himself admitted that “the question of Indo-
Pakistani relationship was difficult to deal with because it was a psychological
thing, resulting from the way the sub-continent was divided between India
and Pakistan.”
II. On the other hand, both the nationalists and conservative Islamists along with
the military in Pakistan saw India as an enemy, which was against their
existence. Therefore, this enemy image on both sides of the border set the
future direction of the relations between the two countries.
III. The unjust and delayed distribution of assets and territory further marked the
increasing mistrust between India and Pakistan.
IV. The principle of ‘communal majority’ was applied to the partition of the Indian
SubContinent. Under this principle, the contiguous Muslim majority areas were
included in Pakistan, whereas the contiguous Hindu majority areas became the
part of India.
V. The last moment change in the Partition Plan deprived Pakistan of the territory
of Kashmir, a Muslim majority princely state ruled by a Hindu Maharaja Hari
Singh. When faced with the tribal invasion, the Maharaja “invited the Indian
army to repel the invaders – but India first demanded his accession, which he
provided. Thus, Kashmir became the only Muslim majority state in India.”Since
then Kashmir has been the bone of contention and the issue of continuous
antagonism between the two countries, which have fought two major wars in
1948 and 1965, and a limited war in Kargil in 1999.
4) India-Pakistan Peace Efforts and their Failures
a) Although several plans to resolve the Kashmir dispute have been discussed
between the two countries under Track-I and Track-II diplomacy, both New
Delhi and Islamabad are very firm on their principled stances: for India, Kashmir
is its integral part, while Pakistan considers it as its lifeline.
b) Moreover, one may also see the difference on the methodology to resolve the
dispute: whereas India emphasizes on the bilateral negotiations between the
two countries and rejects any third party mediation, Pakistan insists on the
resolution of the dispute according to the UN resolutions, which call for the
holding of plebiscite in Kashmir under the right of self-determination rule.
These different and opposite approaches on Kashmir have not only complicated
the situation between India and Pakistan, but have also diminished the
prospects of the resolution of the dispute.
 205

c) Having failed to resolve the Kashmir dispute through bilateral and multilateral
negotiations, Islamabad then resorted to a strategy of engaging New Delhi in a
lowintensity war in Kashmir. For this purpose, Pakistan extended its full support
to the militant Jihadi groups fighting against the Indian troops in Kashmir.
Although Pakistan continuously denied its role in Kashmir, it was disclosed
during the Kargil incident in July 1999, when it was revealed that Pakistan-
based militant groups along with regular forces participated in the operation.
According to Strobe Talbott, “The United States condemned Pakistan’s
infiltration of armed intruders and went public with information that most of
the seven hundred men who had crossed the Line of Control were attached to
the Pakistani Army’s 10th Corps.”
d) Pakistan’s engagement with the militant Jihadi groups and its involvement in
the Kargil war further authenticated when the then Prime Minister of Pakistan,
Nawaz Sharif, rushed to the US in July 1999 and sought American assistance to
avert the crisis as well as to end Pakistan’s isolation. On American facilitation,
the crisis was averted.
e) After achieving nuclear capability in May 1998, Pakistan became confident that
the lowintensity war strategy in Kashmir would bear fruits. It rather backfired.
The Kargil war not only sabotaged the whole peace process, which was started
after the visit of the Indian Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, to Pakistan and
the signing of the Lahore Declaration in February 1999, but also put a dent on
the Pakistan’s credibility. The Declaration was the most prolific document in
which the two governments committed to ‘intensify efforts to resolve all issues,
including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir’, to ‘take immediate steps for
reducing the risks of accidental or unauthorized use of nuclear weapons, and
the ‘condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.’
f) The region missed another opportunity to improve India Pakistan relations
when Pakistan’s then President General Pervez Musharraf visited Agra in July
2001. Although both Musharraf and Vajpayee agreed to the basic fundamentals
of the draft agreement, it had fallen victim to the hard-line mindset of the
Indian hawks, who did not want to see peace between the two neighboring
countries. The man responsible for obstructing the agreement was then Deputy
Prime Minister, L.K. Advani.
g) However, Pakistan’ policy of supporting the militant Jihadis in the Indian Held
Kashmir continued even after the 9/11 incident. Islamabad believed that since
Washington badly needed its assistance in Afghanistan against the Al-Qaeda
and Taliban, it would ignore its policy of engaging New Delhi in a low-intensity
 206

war in Kashmir. Nevertheless, the policy proved to be ineffective and counter-

productive with serious repercussions for Pakistan.
5) India-Pakistan Relations in the aftermath of 9/11 incident: The 9/11 incident changed
the overall international and regional political scenario in terms of renewed alliances to
wage war against international terrorism. With reference to India Pakistan relations, the
immediate impact of the 9/11 incident could not be seen. The element of mistrust,
which was created in Kargil, continued, though the success of the US-led GWOT was
largely depended upon normalization of relations between India and Pakistan. Pakistan,
which became the frontline ally of the US in the war against Taliban and Al-Qaeda in
Afghanistan, continuously faced the Indian pressure to dismantle home-grown terrorist
infrastructure. For this, New Delhi linked the cross border terrorism with international
terrorism. Consequently, India and Pakistan continued to remain at loggerheads and
could not formulate a common strategy to counter the most pressing menace of
terrorism.
6) Attack on the Indian Parliament
a) India-Pakistan relations got further deteriorated when an attack on the Indian
parliament took place on December 13, 2001. India accused Pakistan of its
support to the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), which was involved in that incident. To
escalate pressure on Pakistan, the Vajpayee government took strict measures:
It massed its troops on the borders threatening an invasion across the Line of
i. Control (LoC) in Kashmir or across the international borders;
ii. It demanded to hand over 20 people who were allegedly involved in terrorist
activities in India;
iii. It reduced the diplomatic representation in Pakistan; and iv. It cut off rail,
road and air links.
b) Moreover, India also demanded Pakistan to ban militant Jihadi organizations,
which were involved in that attack. Realizing the tense situation on the borders,
Musharraf in his address to the nation on January 12, 2002, vowed to take
severe action against the Islamic extremist organizations. He not only
condemned the terrorist act, but also vowed to take stern action against any
Pakistani group found involved in terrorism in the name of Kashmir.He
announced a ban on Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), LeT, Sipah-eSahaba Pakistan
(SSP), Tehrik-e-Ja’afria Pakistan (TJP), and Tehrik Nifaz-e-Shariat-eMuhammadi
(TNSM). Their offices were sealed in a nation-wide swoop. Also, their accounts
were frozen and their activities in Afghanistan and Kashmir were halted.
7) Indian Peace offer
a) Although Musharraf’s statement was a radical departure from the past policy of
supporting Islamic militants in Kashmir, the normalization process did not take
 207

place until Vajpayee, during his address in Srinagar in April 2003, offered
negotiations with Pakistan on all issues, including the issue of Jammu and
Kashmir. In a conciliatory tone, Vajpayee said, "As Prime Minister of the country
I wanted to have friendly relations with our neighbors and I went to Lahore, but
it was returned with Kargil. We still continued and invited General Pervez
Musharraf to Agra but again failed…We are again extending a hand of friendship
but hands should be extended from both the sides. Both sides should decide to
live together. We have everything which makes us to have good relations…No
guns but only brotherhood can resolve the problems. However, the Indian Prime
Minister “did not specifically drop India’s condition that Pakistan first to stop
militants crossing into occupied Kashmir before talks could begin.”
b) On the other hand, Pakistan welcomed the Indian offer. The then Prime Minister
of Pakistan, Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali said, “We welcome it, we appreciate it.”
He further stated, “Pakistan has always said talks are the only way to resolve
issues, including the Kashmir dispute… On the main issue (of Kashmir) Pakistan’s
stand remains the same. But once talks start there could be flexibility from both
sides”21 Furthermore, Pakistan also announced a ceasefire on the Line of
Control (LoC) and lifted the ban on the air service. Although both sides had
realized the need of the dialogue process, they could not move forward and
stuck to their old stances on the issue of Kashmir.
8) Composite Dialogue: The Road to Peace?
a) In continuation of conducive environment, which developed with Vajpayee’s
offer of peace, the Composite Dialogue process started between India and
Pakistan in January 2004. The Composite Dialogue consisted of eight baskets,
which included: Kashmir, Peace and Security, Siachen, Wullar barrage, Sir Creek,
Terrorism and Drug Trafficking, Economic Cooperation, and Promotion of
friendly Exchanges.
b) With the coming of Manmohan Singh in power in May 2004, the peace process
continued with full realization that it would ultimately lead to sustained
engagement and understanding between the two countries. Even Musharraf,
despite domestic pressure from religious-political party, the Muttahida Majlis-
iAml (United Action Front – MMA), emphasized upon the outof-box approach. In
an interview to an American TV Channel on April 21, 2005, Musharraf floated an
idea for the resolution of the Kashmir dispute. He said, “The parts of Kashmir
held by Pakistan and India separately can be divided geographically into seven
parts.” He further said, “Either any specific portion of the Kashmir or its entire
area could be declared non-military zone and later changing it statues
afterwards.” After the earthquake in Pakistan on October 8, 2005, Musharraf
 208

also proposed the opening of the LoC at five points. The five crossing points
across the LoC that the two sides agreed to open were: Nauseri-Tithwal;
Chakoti-Uri; Hajipur-Uri; Rawalakot-Poonch and TattapaniMendhar.
c) This was a tectonic shift in Pakistan’s Kashmir policy. These proposals also
enjoyed the consent of the All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC), a
representative organization of the Kashmiris. However, no major breakthrough
on the materialization of those proposals took place because of the severe
opposition from the Indian Army.28 Under the Composite Dialogue process,
four rounds of talks were held between the two foreign secretaries by July
2008.29 Some major agreements, related to the CBMs, signed by the two
countries were: the establishment of hot lines between foreign secretaries; an
advance notification of missile tests; memorandum on not conducting nuclear
tests, except under extra-ordinary circumstances; reducing risks from nuclear
accidents; prenotification of ballistic missile tests; beginning of Amritsar-Lahore,
Lahore-Nankana Saheb and Muzaffarabad-Srinagar bus services;
operationalization of KhokhraparMunabhao rail service; release of prisoners
who had completed their sentences; opening of Sialkot-Jammu route and five
other additional crossing points on the LoC; and agreement on trade between
Pakistan- and Indian-held Kashmir.30 Despite this, the peace process under the
Composite Dialogue continued until it suffered a severe setback when Mumbai
incident took place on November 26, 2008.
9) The Mumbai Incident
a) The Mumbai incident completely changed the regional political scenario and
brought the peace process between India and Pakistan to a standstill. The
carnage, which continued for about three days, caused more than 150 deaths,
both Indians and foreigners. Nine of ten militants had also been killed. Pakistan
strongly condemned the incident and offered India its full support and
cooperation with the investigation. But mutual mistrust overshadowed all the
efforts. The Indian government attributed the attack to the LeT for perpetrating
the terrorist activity. Initially Pakistan denied any connection of the LeT with the
attack. However, later on, it acknowledged the only survived terrorist, Ajmal
Kasab, was the citizen of Pakistan. This was acknowledged by then National
Security Advisor of Pakistan, Major General (Retd.) Mahmud Ali Durrani.
Speaking to an Indian TV channel, Durrani revealed that Ajmal Kasab was a
Pakistani national. Perturbed on this revelation, Yousuf Raza Gilani, then Prime
Minister of Pakistan, sacked Mr. Durrani.
b) The Mumbai incident has had serious consequences for IndiaPakistan relations,
and of course, the regional peace. First, the mistrust between the two countries
 209

reached to its height when in an interview with the CNN in November 2009,
Manmohan Singh raised doubts over Pakistani civilian leadership’s control over
the military, compatibility of Pakistan’s and US’ objectives in Afghanistan, safety
of the nuclear weapons and Pakistan’s seriousness in bringing the perpetrators
of the Mumbai incident to the justice.
c) Second, the major casualty of the Mumbai carnage was the derailment of the
‘Composite Dialogue’ process between India and Pakistan. The talks at the
foreign secretary level were cancelled. Although Pakistan, immediately after the
incident, offered its assistance in joint investigation, India rejected it. The
situation between the two countries got further tensed when the Pakistan
military was put on ‘high alert’, particularly after “President Zardari received a
threatening phone call purportedly made by Indian External Affairs Minister
Mukherjee.”
d) Third, at the diplomatic front Pakistan faced a very awkward situation when the
international community supported the Indian position.
10) Resumption of Dialogue Process
a) A ray of hope of establishing peace between India and Pakistan could be seen
when prime ministers of the two countries agreed to resume talks, during their
meeting in Thimphu, Bhutan, at the sixteenth SAARC Summit conference in
April 2010. They agreed to restore trust and confidence, which was shattered
after the Mumbai incident. Although both the countries did not concede to the
‘Composite Dialogue’ process, they pledged to restore peace process. While
addressing the press conference after the prime ministers’ meeting, the Indian
Foreign Secretary, Nirupama Rao, made it clear that the dialogue process would
not be under the ‘Composite Dialogue’. She said, “We don't have to be stuck
with nomenclatures. This does the relationship no good. Dialogue is the only
way forward to open channels of communications and restore trust and
confidence.'' However, the positive sign of the Thimphu Summit was that it
paved the way for the high-level dialogue process.
b) To advance the peace talks, foreign ministers of the two countries met in
Islamabad in July 2010. However, the dialogue process could not move forward
because of “India's new claim that Pakistan's spy agency orchestrated the 2008
terrorist attack on Mumbai.” India’s this claim came immediately after it was
disclosed during the interrogation of David Coleman Headly, A Pakistani
American, who was arrested in Chicago in 2009. This further underscored the
element of mistrust and diminished the prospects of peace between the two
nuclear-armed countries of South Asia.
 210

c) The dormant peace process between the two countries once again got further
impetus when Manmohan Singh in his address in March 2011 at a university in
Jammu and Kashmir offered peace talks to Pakistan. He said, “We wish to
resolve all outstanding issues between the two countries through friendly
dialogue and constructive and purposeful negotiations. This includes the issue
of Jammu and Kashmir.” As a result, talks at the secretary level started. The
dialogue at the secretary level remained successful and resulted in the signing
of various agreements. For instance, the interior secretaries met in March 2011
in New Delhi. They agreed to the “sharing of real time intelligence to prevent
terrorist attacks.”
d) Similarly, the Commerce Secretaries of both the countries in their meeting on
April 28, 2011, agreed to form various groups of experts to examine the
feasibility of trading electricity and petroleum products, promotion of travel
facilities and reducing customs duties on products of export interest of both
countries. Pakistan also agreed to grant India the Most Favored Nation (MFN)
status.
e) Although the resumption of the dialogue between the two neighboring
countries was a dire need particularly after the Mumbai incident, the element
of mistrust has not yet reduced. India still doubts that Pakistan is not doing
enough to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure, which causes cross-border
terrorism. The militant Jihadi groups are still active in Kashmir. The Indian
argument is that the peace process with Pakistan will not go forward until the
latter ends its support for terrorist groups.
f) In the presence of such a deep element of mistrust and the history of failed
negotiations, it is argued that both India and Pakistan need to seek the help of
the third party mediation in order to ensure a stable peace in the region. It is
also argued that after the 9/11 incident the US has become an active extra
regional actor in South Asia. The American involvement as a third party
mediator between India and Pakistan may help both the neighboring countries
resolve their longstanding disputes, mainly Kashmir. It must be noted that the
American engagement in the region is not a new phenomenon. It has played an
active role not only in averting various crises between India and Pakistan, but
also bringing the two countries on the negotiation table.
g) The US Engagement in the South Asian affairs During the Cold War period, the
American role in the South Asian region could only be seen with reference to its
relations with Pakistan. The major interest of the US was to counter the
expansion of Communism in South and South-East Asia. Because of its unique
strategic location, Pakistan was offered the membership of South East Asian
 211

Treaty Organization (SEATO) and Central Treaty Organization (Cento). Although

one may see several ups and downs in the US’ relations with Pakistan, India saw
the former as an imperialist power and the latter being an agent of it.
Therefore, the US, like Pakistan, could not lure India and its influence in the
region during the Cold War period remained marginal.
h) The disintegration of the Soviet Union and India’s policy of economic
liberalization in 1992 led to the establishment of favorable relations between
Washington and New Delhi. However, it did not pave the way for an active
American engagement in the South Asian affairs till the Kargil crisis took place
in May-July 1999. It was the first armed confrontation between India and
Pakistan after their nuclear tests in May 1998. The US not only condemned
Pakistan, but also urged it “to respect the LoC and withdraw its forces across
the LoC, while at the same time, urging India to restrain itself from crossing the
LoC to open another front in the conflict.” The crisis was averted when Nawaz
Sharif visited the US in July 1999 and sought American assistance. A meeting
between Mr. Sharif and then American President, Billl Clinton, was held on July
4. Quoted by Rahul Chaudhury, “Amidst considerable American pressure, Sharif
finally agreed to take concrete and immediate steps for the restoration of the
LoC, which was accepted by Vajpayee when it was conveyed to him prior to its
publicization.” It is a well- known fact that it was an American facilitation which
led to the formal end of the Kargil crisis.
i) The successful American facilitation during the Kargil crisis could not last long
and the two nuclear states of South Asia once again faced a grim crisis when
Pakistan-based Jihadi groups attacked the Indian Parliament on December 13,
2001.
11) American Mediation and Prospects of Peace
a) The 9/11 incident and as a result the launching of American led military
operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan has made the US a regional actor in the
South Asian affairs. For the success of the GWOT, the US is very keen to see
cordial, friendly and tensionfree relations between the two neighboring states of
South Asia. It is a fact that the rigid mistrust between India and Pakistan has
impeded resolution of political disputes between the two countries. Since
bilateral means to resolve disputes have proven ineffective, both India and
Pakistan, by taking advantage of the US stakes in the region in the post-9/11
scenario, may seek its assistance to play the role of a third party mediator.
b) Although India opposes any third party mediation in the bilateral talks with
Pakistan, it must understand that without involving the third party, Islamabad
would not be satisfied with the outcome of the negotiations. Both India and
Pakistan need to bear in mind that this is high time to seek American assistance
 212

to resolve their political disputes and move forward in the direction of durable
peace in the region. The matter of the fact is that once Afghanistan is politically
stabilized and Al-Qaeda infrastructure is uprooted, the Americans would leave
the region without any responsibility of cleaning the mess as it did in late 1980s
after the Geneva Accords and left the region at the mercy of IndiaPakistan
rivalry. Had the 9/11 incident not taken place, the US would not have taken keen
interest in this region. In other words, the 9/11 incident and as a result the
American compulsion to depend on India and Pakistan for the successful
launching of military operations, is a blessing in disguise.
c) On the part of the US, it is imperative to play the role of a third party mediator
between India and Pakistan. The US must understand that the success of the
GWOT largely depends on the joint cooperation of India and Pakistan. Moreover,
taking advantage of its leading role in the GWOT, and Pakistan being its frontline
ally, Washington needs to keep intense pressure on Islamabad to curtail its
support for the militant Jihadi groups fighting in Kashmir who have their links
with militant groups in Afghanistan. If Pakistan discontinues its support to the
militant Jihadi groups, it will not only ease Indian concerns about Pakistan’s non-
seriousness in dismantling terrorist infrastructure, but also ensure the success of
American strategy to defeat the AlQaeda and associated groups, fighting in
Afghanistan. Similarly, the US, by taking advantage of its nuclear deal with India,
can also pressure the latter to seriously work upon mending the fences with
Pakistan. Moreover, the US must transform its role from an agent of conflict
management to conflict resolution. In this regard, the support of the United
States to the existing peace process between India and Pakistan is also
necessary.
12) Conclusion: Peace making
a) The world has entered the 21st century with lots of hope and expectation of
progress and prosperity. Unfortunately, South Asia continues to remain the least
developed region with the expected ‘destiny’ of rampant corruption,
unemployment, poverty, illiteracy, economic fragility and political instability.
The leadership of the respective countries has even failed to give its people any
hope for a better future. The abysmal economic situation of the South Asian
region can be seen from the fact that it “generates less than 2 per cent of world
income, but it has 22 per cent of world’s population, whereas 44 per cent of
the world’s poor live in this region.”
b) With huge natural and human resources, the South Asian region has a potential
to progress at a rapid speed. The only thing which is lacking is the political will
among the respective countries to take bold decisions to resolve inter-state
 213

disputes, which have hindered the prospects for peace in the region. The most
important challenge for both India and Pakistan is how to continue and sustain
the dialogue process, which could lead to the establishment of perpetual peace
between the two belligerents.
c) Although both India and Pakistan have several times initiated talks on various
contentious issues, including Kashmir, they failed to materialize them because
of the deep element of mistrust. As a result of their failed ventures, the
extremist tendencies on both sides of the border have strengthened. These
extremist tendencies have not only caused the rise of terrorism, but also
marginalized the saner elements on both sides of the border. It is, therefore, a
high time to invite a third party for mediation in order to evolve a workable
strategy for the resolution of the most pressing conflict, i.e., Kashmir, which has
the potential to cause another war between India and Pakistan. In this regard,
the US may be a suitable option because of its interests in the South Asian
region in the wake of the GWOT.
d) However, before such mediation takes place, India, Pakistan and even the US,
need to take few steps for the confidence-building measures. India needs to
believe that a weak Pakistan is not in its interest. Being a big regional power,
India has to play a leadership role and at the same time de-emphasizing upon
being a hegemonic power of the region. If India wants long-lasting peace in the
region, it has to alter its attitude towards its smaller neighbors, particularly
Pakistan. This is a fact that a nuclear Pakistan cannot accept bullying from India,
and New Delhi needs not to outstare Islamabad.
e) On the part of Pakistan, it has to shun the policy of engaging India in a low-
intensity war in Kashmir by disassociating itself from the militant Jihadi groups.
Failing to do so, may not only enrage India, but also disorient the US from
engaging itself in the dialogue process. Being the sole super power and an active
extra-regional actor after the 9/11 incident, the US enjoys a greater leverage in
South Asia than any other country in the world. It is in a position to pressure
both India and Pakistan to make the existing peace process between the two
countries meaningful and result oriented. If this happens, the region will not
only witness the economic prosperity, but also the resolution of political
disputes, including Kashmir.
13) Recommendations: CBMS and Peace in South Asia
a) CBMs are such actions and agreements, which would be helpful in détente.
'Confidence Building Measure' means any action, understanding, or any treaty
that generates trust between adversaries. It covers from any sign of peace
initiative to a treaty. However, to be more specific it can be defined as a bilateral
 214

or multilateral measure that builds confidence or trust, arrests the undesirable

drifts towards open hostilities, reduces tensions and encourages the adversaries
to make contact for negotiations without taxing too much the operative policy
pursuits.
b) It is a fact that both countries are armed with nuclear weapons and therefore,
the threat of intentional, accidental or inadvertent use of nuclear weapons has
increased. Conflict prevention and promoting CBMs is the need of the time.
Successful CBMs need consistent negotiations, which may evolve a proper
mechanism of defusing tension. Secondly, after defining, CBMs should be
implemented in true faith. Thirdly, transparency is very necessary. It helps in
reducing the misunderstandings of the adversary.
c) As for as India and Pakistan are concerned, both have failed to implement
CBMs. Their relations are the product of cold peace and cold war and even hot
war. Misperceptions, misunderstandings and incompatibilities have plagued
their relations.
14) MILITARY CBMs
a) Military CBMs can be defined as a "type of arms control employing purposely
designed, distinctly cooperative measures intended to help clarify participating
states' military intentions, reduce uncertainties about their potentially
threatening military activities and constrain their opportunities for surprise
attacks or the coercive use of force," i.e. as mechanisms aimed at constraining
conflict.
b) India and Pakistan have signed a number of agreements to establish ground
rules for military exercises with the objective of avoiding the outbreak of an
accidental conflict. An agreement was ratified in August 1992 on Advance Notice
of Military Exercises, Man oeuvres and Troops Movements. The agreement does
not permit military man oeuvres of the Pakistani and Indian land, naval, and air
forces in close proximity to or in the direction of their international border. No
military activity is permitted within 5 km of the international border. The
agreement also provides for prior notification of major military exercises within
a specified timeframe. But both countries have violated the spirit of this
agreement. it was this non-compliance of the agreements that had resulted in
Kargil crisis.
c) A similar agreement was signed in 1991, also ratified in 1992 for the Prevention
of Airspace Violations by Military Aircraft, establishing a no-fly zone along their
international border. According to the agreement, combat aircraft are
prohibited within 10 kilometers of the international border and unarmed
transport and logistics aircraft are permitted up to 1000 meters from each
 215

other's airspace. This agreement has not been honored, and it has failed to de-
escalate tension, especially during the time of military crisis. Pakistan's downing
of two Indian aircraft and India's downing of a Pakistani plane near the
international border, during the Kargil crisis, are the most suitable quotable
examples here.
d) Realizing the nuclear status of each other, both countries have entered into a
nuclear specific CBM-Prohibition of Attack on Nuclear Installations and Facilities.
According to this agreement, on 1st of January of every year, both countries
were to inform each other about the volume and any change in nuclear
installation. Here the accuracy of nuclear facilities lists is also not beyond doubt.
Hence it has undermined the effectiveness of this CBM.
e) The existing CBMs can be studied in the following ways:
i. A direct communication link (DCL) known as "Hotline" between DGMOs
(Director Generals of Military Operations) was established in 1971. In
1990, due to the mounting tension on borders, it was decided to use this
line on weekly basis.
ii. Establishment of hotline between Pakistan Air Force and Indian Air Force
(1993). iii.Communication between the Naval vessels and aircraft of the
two navies when in each other’s vicinity (May 1993).
iv. Establishment of a hotline between Prime Ministers in 1997 after Male
summit.
v. Track-2 diplomacy, people to people contact.
vi. Participation of senior military and civilian officials in various seminars in
each other's country.
vii. Invitation of the Guest Speakers at each other's national defense
colleges.
viii. Despite of such a list of CBMs, both have failed to achieve peace in the
region. They, probably, use them more as instruments to influence the
West then to defuse tension in true sense. Lack of political will has also
marred the mechanism of conflict resolution.
ix. Military CBMs have become even more essential due to the absence of
political reconciliation between the two geographically contiguous,
nuclear-capable states.
x. The following suggested CBMs could improve the deteriorating
atmosphere of peace in South Asia.
 Posting UN observers along the Line of Control.
 Exchange of military instructors at various levels.
 216

 No War Proposal in some acceptable form.

 Withdrawal of troops from border areas and creating a 20 miles
(on both sides) a troops free Security Zone.

15) ECONOMIC CBMs

a) As present century is the century of economics, it has provided us an
opportunity to assess the ECBMs (economic confidence building measures) in
South Asia. It is globalization of the world economy and closer co-operation of
individual economies in the world that has engaged the global entities in
economic diplomacy for peace building.
b) Economic CBMs involve mainly the elimination of tariffs, custom duties, taxes,
and nontariff barriers etc. As far as South Asia is concerned, intra-SAARC trade
has remained at 4.2%, which shows the lack of confidence of South Asians over
each other. According to an estimate, India and Pakistan trade volume is $120
million since 1994, whereas their combined total global trade is $ 72 billion and
has shown practically no substantial increase over the years.
c) There are so many agreements, which have been chalked out for co-operation
in economic field, but it is an irony of fate that all such ventures are lying on the
paper and no concrete steps have so far been taken. The most important of all
these is the intraregional trade co-operation under the 1995 South Asian
Preferential Agreement-SAPTA — which has been a strategic instrument in
bringing about economic development in the region.
d) In the first round of negotiations in 1995, 226 items were resulted to offer tariff
concessions by the member states. In the next round, 2,000 products were
covered by the regional agreement. If it is fruitless, it is because of the non-
serious attitude of the regional members. In a world, where Regionalism is the
slogan of development, South Asian’s individual approach is understandable.
Following measures should be adopted to boost ECBMs here:
 Encouraging Chambers of Trade & Commerce contacts.
 Promoting SAPTA and SAFTA-South Asian Free Trade Area.
 Joint Ventures in different trading items - initially in both countries and
then in the 3rd country.
 Joint Commission on Agriculture.
 Promoting Trade in the region.
e) One may not find more proper time to discuss and eagerly request for CBMs in
South Asia than now, as unfortunately, relations between India and Pakistan
have reached to their lowest ebb since 1971.
 217

f) In May 1998, both countries went nuclear and celebrations on both sides were
watched with fearful eyes. It was followed by Kargil conflict that had caused
intense war jingoism and had shaped South Asia a potential nuclear flashpoint.
Then came political change in Pakistan on Oct 12, 1999. For the first time in
Pakistan, a military regime declared itself as Futurist (looking towards future
with pacific intentions and forgetting the past hostilities) and Chief Executive as
'a man of peace'.
g) But Indian government's response was still endemic. The postponement of the
SAARC summit, due to India's unwillingness to talk to the military rulers of
Pakistan, was serious setback to the normalization. Hijacking of Indian plane
was another event that deepened the thaw in the regional tension. 'During all
this period, as relations between the two countries take a spiraling downward
course, the press and particularly electronic media of India and Pakistan
continue to pour venom against each other, further vitiating the atmosphere'.
h) It is a fact that both governments are entangled by their domestic political
problems. Indigenous turmoil-government and traders row, pressure from
political parties to hold elections, future political set up, and deteriorating law
and order situation in Pakistan at one hand and on the other hand, growing
freedom struggle in Kashmir, insurgency in Assam, attacks on Christians and
holy churches by the fundamentalist Hindus and lawlessness in many parts of
India, have become hard nuts to crack. But both governments are busy to
deflect attention of their people from these real issues to the enemy across the
border. Instead of acting insanely, one must follow long-term policies for
eternal peace here.
i) One of the very important determinants for peace making in South Asia is
political will. It is necessary now, because both countries as a matter of national
policy are trying to harm each other to pursue their ends. 'Each country's press
and electronic media should take the initiative as they can play a crucial role in
lowering the war hysteria on both sides. Public statements coming out of the
leaders of both countries are most harmful. They need to lower their rhetoric
to create an environment of building at least a minimum level of confidence.
Even the conciliatory statements being made by both sides are meant more to
impress the international community rather than motivated by a desire to
reduce tensions and restore stability in the region. The unrelenting harassment
of each other's diplomats has to come to stop as it further increases animosity
and aggravates the crisis.
j) Another very difficult problem, which both the countries are facing, is the
extremist posture adopted by the religious fundamentalist organizations.
Hindu, Muslim, and Christian minorities do exist on both sides of the border.
 218

Lack of tolerance amongst them has further contributed in plaguing the

relations. It would be in the fitness of the things that a direct interaction
between the fundamentalist organizations may be arranged, which will in turn
help in easing tension.
k) Probably the situation is not that worse as has been portrayed by the
respective intelligence agencies. It is their over-efficiency and suspicions that
have made each other's face grimmer. They have formed mirror images of one
another. Gap of communication amongst the agencies has flared up mutual
antagonism. Under such circumstances, it is the need of the moment to initiate
a dialogue between the intelligence agencies of both countries so that
misunderstandings may be addressed.

16)Conclusion: CBMs
a) As a major achievement of international peace and conflict research, there is a
broad consensus that peace is more than just the absence of war. Will to peace
and the capability for peace is more important than deterrence. If South Asia is
observed intently, the state of affairs since 1947 cannot be called Peace. Even
when Pakistan and India did not clash militarily, their regional cold war was
going on. So, discussing imperatives of peace in South Asia, the problem of the
will to peace and the capability for peace is a major factor for answering the
question whether peace is possible in this part of the world. CBMs are the need
of the time. If we want peace in South Asia, a real peace, then at first we have to
bring peace in our minds.
b) We have to convince our people that for our survival and of the world at large,
there is no other choice but to live in peace with neighbors. We have to re-
educate our media who is busy in providing Hot News early in the morning
through creating war, ideological, enemy, and threat hysteria. We cannot secure
our people by securing the boundaries. People can be secured by providing
them food, shelter, and clothing, and this is possible only when both countries
will bring peace, harmony, and economic well being in the region. National
security cannot be ensured by arms race, rather it would destroy the shabby
fabric of our economies as well. In the year 2000, Economic Prosperity means
National Security indeed.
c) CBMs do not mean peace, rather these are the ways to long lasting harmony.
Why shouldn't we be the trendsetters? After every war, the belligerents have
signed the peace treaty. Why shouldn't we sign peace treaty before the war?
War is a reality but not a necessity. Peace loving nations must realize it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 219

South Asia: Afghanistan

Cold war theatre; Soviet Invasion and Mujahedeen; Geneva Accord; Post Cold War situation-
Rise of Taliban, AL-Qeada & 9/11; Operation Enduring Freedom; The Bonn Process
Withdrawal

A chronology of key events:

 1838-42 - British forces invade, install King Shah Shujah. He is assassinated in 1842.
British and Indian troops are massacred during retreat from Kabul.
 1878-80 - Second Anglo-Afghan War. A treaty gives Britain control of Afghan foreign
affairs.
 1919 - Emir Amanullah Khan declares independence from British influence.
 1926-29 - Amanullah tries to introduce social reforms, which however stir civil unrest.
He flees.
 1933 - Zahir Shah becomes king and Afghanistan remains a monarchy for next four
decades.
 1953 - General Mohammed Daud becomes prime minister. Turns to Soviet Union for
economic and military assistance. Introduces social reforms, such as abolition of purdah
(practice of secluding women from public view).
 - Mohammed Daud forced to resign as prime minister.
 - Constitutional monarchy introduced - but leads to political polarisation and power
struggles. 1973 - Mohammed Daud seizes power in a coup and declares a republic. Tries
to play off USSR against Western powers.
 - General Daud is overthrown and killed in a pro-Soviet coup. The People's Democratic
Party comes to power but is paralysed by violent infighting and faces opposition by US-
backed mujahideen groups.
Soviet intervention
 December - Soviet Army invades and props up communist government.
 - Babrak Karmal installed as ruler, backed by Soviet troops. But opposition intensifies
with various mujahideen groups fighting Soviet forces. US, Pakistan, China, Iran and
Saudi Arabia supply money and arms to the mujahideen.
 1985 - Mujahideen come together in Pakistan to form alliance against Soviet forces. Half
of Afghan population now estimated to be displaced by war, with many fleeing to
neighbouring Iran or Pakistan. 1986 - US begins supplying mujahideen with Stinger
missiles, enabling them to shoot down Soviet helicopter gunships. Babrak Karmal
replaced by Najibullah as head of Soviet-backed regime.
 - Afghanistan, USSR, the US and Pakistan sign peace accords and Soviet Union begins
pulling out troops. Red Army quits
 220

 - Last Soviet troops leave, but civil war continues as mujahideen push to overthrow
Najibullah.
 1992 - Najibullah's government toppled, but a devastating civil war follows.
 - Taliban seize control of Kabul and introduce hard-line version of Islam, banning women
from work, and introducing Islamic punishments, which include stoning to death and
amputations.
 - Taliban recognised as legitimate rulers by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. They now control
about two-thirds of country.
 - US launches missile strikes at suspected bases of militant Osama bin Laden, accused of
bombing US embassies in Africa.
 - UN imposes an air embargo and financial sanctions to force Afghanistan to hand over
Osama bin Laden for trial.
 2001 September - Ahmad Shah Masood, leader of the main opposition to the Taliban -
the Northern Alliance - is assassinated.
US-led invasion
 October - US-led bombing of Afghanistan begins following the September 11 attacks on
the United States. Anti-Taliban Northern Alliance forces enter Kabul shortly afterwards.
 December - Afghan groups agree deal in Bonn, Germany for interim government. Hamid
Karzai is sworn in as head of an interim power-sharing government.
 January - Deployment of first contingent of foreign peacekeepers - the Nato-led
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) - marking the start of a protracted fight
against the Taliban.
 April - Former king Zahir Shah returns, but makes no claim to the throne and dies in
2007. 2002 June - Loya Jirga, or grand council, elects Hamid Karzai as interim head of
state. Karzai picks members of his administration which is to serve until 2004.
 August - Nato takes control of security in Kabul, its first-ever operational commitment
outside Europe.
Elections
 January - Loya Jirga adopts new constitution which provides for strong presidency.
 October-November - Presidential elections. Hamid Karzai is declared winner.
 September - Afghans vote in first parliamentary elections in more than 30 years.
 December - Parliament opens with warlords and strongmen in most of the seats.
 vote: The first parliamentary poll in more than 30 years
 October - Nato assumes responsibility for security across the whole of Afghanistan,
taking command in the east from a US-led coalition force.
 August - Opium production has soared to a record high, the UN reports.
 June - President Karzai warns that Afghanistan will send troops into Pakistan to fight
militants if Islamabad fails to take action against them.
 221

 July - Suicide bomb attack on Indian embassy in Kabul kills more than 50.
 September - US President George Bush sends an extra 4,500 US troops to Afghanistan,
in a move he described as a "quiet surge".
 January - US Defence Secretary Robert Gates tells Congress that Afghanistan is new US
administration's "greatest test".
 February - Nato countries pledge to increase military and other commitments in
Afghanistan after US announces dispatch of 17,000 extra troops.
New US approach
 2009 March - US President Barack Obama unveils new strategy for Afghanistan and
Pakistan. An extra 4,000 US personnel will train and bolster the Afghan army and police
and there will be support for civilian development.
 2009 August - Presidential and provincial elections are marred by widespread Taliban
attacks, patchy turnout and claims of serious fraud.
 October - Mr Karzai declared winner of August presidential election, after second-placed
opponent Abdullah Abdullah pulls out before the second round.
 December - US President Obama decides to boost US troop numbers in Afghanistan by
30,000, bringing total to 100,000. He says US will begin withdrawing its forces by 2011.
 An Al-Qaeda double agent kills seven CIA agents in a suicide attack on a US base in
Khost.
 February - Nato-led forces launch major offensive, Operation Moshtarak, in bid to
secure government control of southern Helmand province.
 July - Whistleblowing website Wikileaks publishes thousands of classified US military
documents relating to Afghanistan.
 General David Petraeus takes command of US, ISAF forces.
 August - Dutch troops quit.
 Karzai says private security firms - accused of operating with impunity - must cease
operations. He subsequently waters down the decree.
 September - Parliamentary polls marred by Taliban violence, widespread fraud and a
long delay in announcing results.
 November - Nato - at summit in Lisbon - agrees plan to hand control of security to
Afghan forces by end of 2014.
 January - President Karzai makes first official state visit to Russia by an Afghan leader
since the end of the Soviet invasion in 1989.
 February - Number of civilians killed since the 2001 invasion hit record levels in 2010,
Afghanistan Rights Monitor reports.
 April - Burning of Koran by a US pastor prompts country-wide protests in which foreign
UN workers and several Afghans are killed.
 Some 500 mostly Taliban prisoners break out of prison in Kandahar.
 222

 2011 July - President's half-brother and Kandahar governor Ahmad Wali Karzai is killed
in Taliban campaign against prominent figures.
 2011 September - Ex-president Burhanuddin Rabbani - a go-between in talks with the
Taliban - is assassinated.
 2011 October - As relations with Pakistan worsen after a series of attacks, Afghanistan
and India sign a strategic partnership to expand co-operation in security and
development.
Military pact
 November - President Karzai wins the endorsement of tribal elders to negotiate a 10-
year military partnership with the US at a loya jirga traditional assembly. The proposed
pact will see US troops remain after 2014, when foreign troops are due to leave the
country.
 December - At least 58 people are killed in twin attacks at a Shia shrine in Kabul and a
Shia mosque in Mazar-i-Sharif.
 Pakistan and the Taleban boycott the scheduled Bonn Conference on Afghanistan.
Pakistan refuses to attend after a Nato air strike killed Pakistani soldiers on the Afghan
border.
 January - Taliban agree to open office in Dubai as a move towards peace talks with the
US and the Afghan government.
 February - At least 30 people are killed in protests about the burning of copies of the
Koran at the US Bagram airbase. US officials believed Taliban prisoners were using the
books to pass messages, and that they were extremist texts not Korans. Two soldiers are
also killed in reprisal attacks.
 March - US Army Sgt Robert Bales is accused of killing 16 civilians in an armed rampage
in the Panjwai district of Kandahar.
 2012 April - Taliban announce "spring offensive" with audacious attack on the
diplomatic quarter of Kabul. The government blamed the Haqqani Network. Security
forces kill 38 militants.
 Nato withdrawal plan
 2012 May - Nato summit endorses the plan to withdraw foreign combat troops by the
end of 2014. New French President Francois Hollande says France will withdraw its
combat mission by the end of 2012 - a year earlier than planned.
 Arsala Rahmani of the High Peace Council is shot dead in Kabul. A former Taliban
minister, he was crucial in reaching out to rebel commanders. The Taliban deny
responsibility.
 2012 July - Tokyo donor conference pledges $16bn in civilian aid to Afghanistan up to
2016, with US, Japan, Germany and UK supplying bulk of funds. Afghanistan agrees to
new conditions to counter corruption.
 223

 August - The US military discipline six soldiers for accidentally burning copies of the
Koran and other religious texts in Afghanistan. They will not face criminal prosecution.
Three US Marines are also disciplined for a video in which the bodies of dead Taliban
fighters were urinated on.
 September - US hands over Bagram high-security jail to the Afghan government,
although it retains control over some foreign prisoners until March 2013.
 The US also suspends training new police recruits in order to carry out checks on
possible ties to Taliban following series of attacks on foreign troops by apparent police
and Afghan soldiers.
 February - President Karzai and Pakistan's Asif Ali Zardari agree to work for an Afghan
peace deal within six months after talks hosted by Britain's Prime Minister David
Cameron. They back the opening of an Afghan office in Doha and urge the Taliban to do
the same for talks to take place.
 March - Two former Kabul Bank chiefs, Sherkhan Farnood and Khalilullah Ferozi, are
jailed for the multi-million dollar fraud that almost led to its collapse and that of the
entire Afghan banking system in 2010.
 June - Afghan army takes command of all military and security operations from Nato
forces. President Karzai suspends security talks with the US after Washington announces
it plans to hold direct talks with the Taliban. Afghanistan insists on conducting the talks
with the Taliban in Qatar itself. 2014 January - Taliban suicide squad hits a restaurant in
Kabul's diplomatic quarter, the worst attack on foreign civilians since 2001. The 13
foreign victims include IMF country head.
 April - The presidential election produces an inconclusive result and goes on to a second
round between Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani.
 June - Second round of presidential election is held, with more than 50 reported killed in
various incidents during the vote.
 July - Election officials begin recount of all votes cast in June's presidential run-off, as
part of a USmediated deal to end dispute between candidates over widespread claims
of fraud.
Election deal
 2014 September - The two rivals for the Afghan presidency, Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah
Abdullah, sign a power-sharing agreement, following a two-month audit of disputed
election results. Ashraf Ghani is sworn in as president.
 2014 October - The US and Britain end their combat operations in Afghanistan.
 Opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan reaches an all-time high, according to a US
report
 December - NATO formally ends its 13-year combat mission in Afghanistan, handing
over to Afghan forces. Despite the official end to Isaf's combat role, violence persists
 224

across much of the country, with 2014 said to be the bloodiest year in Afghanistan since
2001.
 January - NATO-led follow-on mission "Resolute Support" gets underway, with some
12,000 personnel to provide further training and support for Afghan security forces.
 2015 March - US President Barak Obama announces that his country will delay its troop
withdrawal from Afghanistan, following a request from President Ashraf Ghani.
 The lynching of a woman wrongly accused of burning a Koran in Kabul provokes
widespread revulsion and criticism of hard-line clerics. Police face accusations of doing
too little to save her. The incident leads to widespread protests against the treatment of
women. Four men are later convicted of murder.
 2015 May - Taliban representatives and Afghan officials hold informal peace talks in
Qatar. Both sides agree to continue the talks at a later date, though the Taliban insist
they will not stop fighting until all foreign troops leave the country.
 2015 September - Taliban briefly capture major northern city of Kunduz in their most
significant advance since being forced from power in 2001.
 2015 October - Powerful earthquake kills more than 80 people in northeast of country

International Organizations

Bretton Woods, IMF, WB, WTO, UNO, ICJ

BRETTON WOODS

• Even before the declaration of war on the Axis powers (Germany, Italy, and Japan) in
1942, officials in Washington were pondering the shape and character of the post-1945
international economic system.
• Policymakers came to believe that the Great Depression and the rise of fascism were in
part a consequence of countries pursuing discriminatory trade policies during the
interwar years.
 225

• By 1941, an open trading regime had become a major foreign policy goal of the
Roosevelt administration.
• This was clearly spelt out in the text of the Atlantic Charter. Article IV states that all
countries should have ‘access, on equal terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of
the world which are needed for their economic prosperity’.
Evolution of Bretton Woods

• This approach also underpinned the 1942 Lend–Lease agreement with Britain which
allowed the President to transfer munitions and other war-fighting material to those
countries fighting the Axis powers.
• In the case of Britain, however, this was conditional on its acceptance of a new postwar
international economic order.
• The most significant step in putting this foreign policy goal into practice came just
before the end of the Second World War.
• In August 1944 the United States, Britain, and 42 other countries met at Bretton Woods,
a small resort town in New Hampshire, to sketch out the rules and formal institutions
that would govern their trade and monetary relations.
• The main architects of the conference were Harry White of the US Treasury and John
Maynard Keynes, Britain’s leading economist.
• Evolution of Bretton Woods
• Formally known as the International Monetary and Financial Conference of the United
and
Associated Nations, Bretton Woods made decisions
• that were instrumental, not only in bringing about the economic recovery of Europe,
• but in establishing a framework for commercial and financial conduct which continues
to be influential today.
• Delegates from the former Soviet Union attended, but had little effective say in the
discussions. Given their longstanding antipathy to capitalism, it was not surprising that
the Soviets would not accept the institutional arrangements agreed to by the other
participants.
• Evolution of Bretton Woods
• It is also important to bear in mind that the US had become the predominant military
and economic power.
• Since the late 1930s its industrial output had doubled, it had achieved full employment,
and it was well on the way to winning the war in Europe and the Pacific. It also had the
 226

largest standing army among the Western states and possessed the only functioning
economy of any global significance.
• Thus, while Bretton Woods was meant to be a victors’ conference, the United States set
the agenda and dominated the proceedings.
• The US, for example, rejected Keynes’s idea of creating a central world currency reserve
which would redistribute trade surpluses to those countries in financial deficit.
• Instead, the Americans pushed for a liberal system based on capital mobility and free
trade.

Components of Bretton Woods System

• The meetings at Bretton Woods resulted in a range of measures to stabilise the

international financial system and facilitate the expansion of trade.
• More specifically, the Bretton Woods system included the creation of three formal
institutions:
• The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), commonly known
as theWorld Bank; to offer assistance in the form of loans to those countries devastated
by the Second World War.
• the International Monetary Fund (IMF); to oversee the management of fixed exchange
rates between member states.
• and the General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade (GATT); to break down discriminatory
trade practices.

Functions of Bretton Woods

• The distinctive feature of the Bretton Woods system, however, was the fixing of
exchange rates.
• All the world’s currencies were valued (by the IMF) in terms of US dollars, and gold was
used to set the value of the dollar.
• In 1945, the US held around 75 per cent of the world’s reserve gold stocks
(approximately US$25 billion).
• Under the agreement, the US promised to convert dollars into gold on demand.

Demise of Bretton Woods

• Although Bretton Woods was remarkably successful in reviving an international

economy destroyed by war, it was seriously flawed as a long-term economic strategy.
• The convertibility of dollars into gold was initially meant to give stability to the financial
system.
 227

• As US dollars were shipped abroad in the form of aid and to pay for goods for US
consumers, foreign reserve banks would convert them into gold.
• By 1970, US gold stocks dropped to US$10 billion. Essentially, Bretton Woods failed to
provide enough new gold to compensate for the growth in world trade.
• The Bretton Woods system formally came to an end in 1971 when Richard Nixon
announced that the US would no longer exchange dollars for gold. From that point on,
currencies began to float freely against each other.

Result of Bretton Woods

• Despite its formal demise, much of the framework of the Bretton Woods system
remains.
• The World Bank, the IMF, and the World Trade Organisation (GATT’s successor)
continue to play a central role in setting the norms and rules of international monetary
and trade relations.
• But rising rates of unemployment, worries about growth sustainability, and increasing
levels of poverty in Africa, Asia, and Latin America are leading to calls for a new Bretton
Woods conference.
• Whether this eventuates is still an open question. The ideology of globalisation would
seem to run counter to such a proposal. There is no doubt, however, that the
conference held in New Hampshire in 1944 has been a major influence on the economic
character of the world since 1945.

International Monetary Fund (IMF)

• Formed in 1944 at the Bretton Woods Conference, it came into formal existence in 1945
with 29 member countries and the goal of reconstructing the international payment
system.
• Countries contribute funds to a pool through a quota system from which countries with
payment imbalances can borrow. As of 2010, the fund had XDR476.8 billion, about
US$755.7 billion at then-current exchange rates.
• Through this fund, and other activities such as statistics keeping and analysis,
surveillance of its members' economies and the demand for self-correcting policies, the
IMF works to improve the economies of its member countries.

Historical Background
 228

• The Great Depression of the 1930s had an enormous impact on the advanced
industrialized states. In the United States and Europe agricultural prices fell,
unemployment skyrocketed, banks closed leaving people penniless, factories stood idle,
and international trade collapsed.
• Indeed, the onset of the Depression was one of the main reasons why so many ordinary
Germans were willing to follow Hitler into war in 1939.
• At the same time, the outbreak of war in Europe proved to be a key factor in the United
States’ economic recovery. Increases in the level of production needed to fight the war
stimulated economic growth, put people back to work, and money into circulation.
• One of the important questions confronting American policymakers, however, was how
to maintain the new level of economic activity after the war.
• The purpose of the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944 was primarily to ensure that
these things did not happen. The goals were to stabilize the value of money and to
promote international trade.

Objectives of IMF

• promote international monetary cooperation;

• facilitate the expansion and balanced growth of international trade;
• promote and maintain high levels of employment;
• promote exchange stability and avoid competitive exchange rate depreciation;
• eliminate foreign exchange restrictions;
• offer resources to countries to correct maladjustments in their balance of payments
without resorting to measures destructive of national or international prosperity;
• shorten the duration and lessen the degree of disequilibrium in the international
balance of payments of its members.

Organization
The Board of Governors consists of one governor and one alternate governor for each
member country. Each member country appoints its two governors. The Board normally
meets once a year and is responsible for electing or appointing executive directors to
the Executive Board.
• 24 Executive Directors make up Executive Board. The Executive Directors represent all
188 member countries in a geographically based roster.
 229

• The IMF is led by a managing director, who is head of the staff and serves as Chairman
of the Executive Board. 5 July 2011 to present; Christine Lagarde from France.
• Voting power in the IMF is based on a quota system. Each member has a number of
basic votes
(each member's number of basic votes equals 5.502% of the total votes)

The Original Mandate of the IMF

• The original mandate of the IMF was achieved primarily by linking the world’s currencies
to the American dollar.
• Members were required to fix the value of their currencies in relation to the dollar.
• Changes beyond 1 per cent had to be discussed with the other members of the Fund
and agreed to by them.
• Investors, manufacturers, and states benefited enormously from what was called the
par value system. Not only did it give them a clear idea of the actual value of different
currencies, it also helped to bring a degree of predictability to the international
economy.

Evolution of IMF

• The par value system lasted until the early 1970s, when the US decided it could no
longer afford to allow countries to convert their US dollars into gold.
• It is customary to talk about the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in the early
1970s. This is not quite correct. In fact, the IMF survived because the need for monetary
stability became more crucial in the absence of fixed exchange rates.
• None the less, the role of the IMF has changed since the 1970s. True, it continues to
promote monetary stability and trade, but increasingly its role is to assist countries that
are in the midst of financial crisis.

Functions of IMF

• it works to foster global growth and economic stability by providing policy, advice and
financing to members, by working with developing nations to help them achieve
macroeconomic stability, and by reducing poverty
• The IMF provides alternate sources of financing.
 230

• Upon initial IMF formation, its two primary functions were: to oversee the fixed
exchange rate arrangements between countries,[9] thus helping national governments
manage their exchange rates and allowing these governments to prioritise economic
growth, and to provide short-term capital to aid balance of payments. The IMF's role
was fundamentally altered after the floating exchange rates post 1971. It shifted to
examining the economic policies of countries with IMF loan agreements to determine if
a shortage of capital was due to economic fluctuations or economic policy. Their role
became a lot more active because the IMF now manages economic policy rather than
just exchange rates.
• Functions of IMF
 Surveillance of the global economy
 Conditionality of loans; The IMF does require collateral from countries for loans
but also requires the government seeking assistance to correct its macroeconomic
imbalances in the form of policy reform.
 Some of the conditions for structural adjustment can include: Cutting
expenditures, also known as austerity, Devaluation of currencies,Trade
liberalisation, or lifting import and export restrictions etc.
Role of IMP in Current Times
• It has become something of an economic crisis management institution.
• It offers financial and technical assistance to countries experiencing monetary problems
and remains a lender of last resort.
• This gives the IMF enormous power to determine the economic fate of countries
experiencing balance-of payment problems.
• If, for example, a member country has continuing economic problems, the IMF will
initiate Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs). These macroeconomic reforms can
include debt reduction strategies, privatization policies, and cuts in public spending.
• Unfortunately, these strategies generally impact on the poor most severely. It is for this
reason that SAPs are regarded as particularly iniquitous by some observers.

Criticism of IMF
 231

• Today, the IMF has more critics than friends. Some economists suggest that the world
economy would function better without it, and that many of its SAPs exacerbate crises
rather than alleviate them.
• Others suggest that while it is an imperfect institution, it is better at maintaining
economic stability than many governments.
• Whatever the truth, there is little evidence to suggest that the IMF is heading for the
institutional scrap-heap.
• There have been muted calls for a new Bretton Woods conference, but this message has
not yet filtered up to policymakers and government officials.
• At the same time, it is hard to imagine how the global economy could function
effectively without some institutional guidance.

Reforms in IMF

• The challenge is to ensure that a balance is struck between good economic

management and
human needs. In striking this balance, the IMF appears to have a long way to go.
The IMF is only one of many international organisations, and it is a generalist institution
that deals only with macroeconomic issues; its core areas of concern in developing
countries are very narrow. One proposed reform is a movement towards close
partnership with other specialist agencies such as UNICEF, the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO), and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).
• Increase and rebalancing of the quotas that determine each country’s voting power and
financial obligation, Greater voting power to developing countries so they have a
greater say.
World Bank
• The World Bank is an international financial institution that provides loans to developing
countries for capital programs.
• It comprises two institutions: the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA).
• The World Bank is a component of the World Bank Group, and a member of the United
Nations Development Group.
• The World Bank's official goal is the reduction of poverty. Established in 1944, the
World Bank Group is headquartered in Washington, D.C. they have more than 10,000
employees in more than 120 offices worldwide.
 232

• According to its Articles of Agreement, all its decisions must be guided by a commitment
to the promotion of foreign investment and international trade and to the facilitation of
Capital investment.
• Jim Yong Kim 2012–present current president, nationality from United States, Former
Chair of the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard, president of
Dartmouth College.

Goals

• The World Bank Group has set two goals for the world to achieve by 2030:
• End extreme poverty by decreasing the percentage of people living on less than $1.25 a
day to no more than 3%
• Promote shared prosperity by fostering the income growth of the bottom 40% for every
country
• Millennium Development Goals targets for 2015
• Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger
• Achieve Universal Primary Education
• Promote Gender Equality Reduce Child Mortality
• Improve Maternal Health
• Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and Other Diseases
• Ensure Environmental Sustainability
Develop a Global Partnership for Development
• Financial Products and Services
• low-interest loans, zero to low-interest credits, and grants to developing countries
• support a wide array of investments in such areas as education, health, public
administration, infrastructure, financial and private sector development, agriculture,
and environmental and natural resource management.
• Some of the projects are cofinanced with governments, other multilateral institutions,
commercial banks, export credit agencies, and private sector investors
• provide or facilitate financing through trust fund partnerships with bilateral and
multilateral donors.
• Innovative Knowledge Sharing
• support to developing countries through policy advice, research and analysis, and
technical assistance.
• analytical work often underpins World Bank financing and helps inform developing
countries’ own investments.
 233

• support capacity development in the countries, sponsor, host, or participate in many

conferences and forums on issues of development, often in collaboration with partners.

Key priorities include:

• Results:
• Reform: working to improve every aspect of the work:
• Open Development: offer a growing range of free, easy-to-access tools, research and
knowledge to help people address the world's development challenges. For example,
the Open Data website offers free access to comprehensive, downloadable indicators
about development in countries around the globe.

Membership

• There are 184 member countries that are shareholders in the IBRD
• To become a member, however, a country must first join the International Monetary
Fund (IMF)
• The size of the World Bank's shareholders, like that of the IMF's shareholders, depends
on the size of a country's economy. Thus, the cost of a subscription to the World Bank is
a factor of the quota paid to the IMF.
• There is an obligatory subscription fee, which is equivalent to 88.29% of the quota that a
country has to pay to the IMF
• a country is obligated to buy 195 World Bank shares (US$120,635 per share, reflecting a
capital increase made in 1988)
• Of these 195 shares, 0.60% must be paid in cash in U.S. dollars while 5.40% can be paid
in a country's local currency, in U.S. dollars, or in non-negotiable non-interest bearing
notes.
• Membership
The balance of the 195 shares is left as "callable capital," meaning the World Bank
reserves the right to ask for the monetary value of these shares when and if necessary.
• A country can subscribe a further 250 shares, which do not require payment at the time
of membership but are left as "callable capital."
• The president of the World Bank comes from the largest shareholder, which is the
United States, and members are represented by a Board of Governors.
• Throughout the year, however, powers are delegated to a board of 24 executive
directors (EDs).
 234

• The five largest shareholders - the U.S., U.K., France, Germany and Japan - each have an
individual ED, and the additional 19 EDs represent the rest of the member states as
groups of constituencies.

How World Bank Operates

• The IBRD was the original arm of the World Bank that was responsible for the
reconstruction of post-war Europe.
• Before gaining membership in the WBG's affiliates (the International Finance
Corporation, the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency and the International
Center For Settlement of Investment Disputes), a country must be a member of the
IBRD.
• International Development Association offers loans to the world's poorest countries.
These loans come in the form of "credits," and are essentially interest-free. They offer a
10-year grace period and hold a maturity of 35 years to 40 years.
• The International Finance Corporation (IFC) works to promote private sector
investments by both foreign and local investors.
• The Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) supports direct foreign
investment into a country by offering security against the investment in the event of
political turmoil.
• the International Center for Settlement of Investment Dispute facilitates and works
towards a settlement in the event of a dispute between a foreign investor and a local
country.

Adapting to the Times

• sometimes as a nation develops, it requires more aid to work its way through the
development process.
• This has resulted in some countries accumulating so much debt and debt service that
payments become impossible to meet.
• Many of the poorest countries can receive accelerated debt relief through the Heavily
Indebted Poor Countries scheme, which reduces debt and debt service payments while
encouraging social expenditure.
• The WBG has also been focusing on reducing the risk of projects by means of better
appraisal and supervision mechanisms as well as a multidimensional approach to overall
development.
• The Bank encourages all of its clients, which number over 100, to implement policies
that promote sustainable growth, health, education, social development programs
 235

focusing on governance and poverty reduction mechanisms, the environment, private

business macroeconomic reform.

Opposition to the Bank

• The globalization of market forces, vigorously promoted by the World Bank, creates
greater inequality.
• The World Bank is wrong in arguing that economic growth will solve the problems we
face.
• The system allows the largest shareholders to dominate the vote, resulting in WBG
policies being decided by the rich but implemented by the poor.
• The real function of institutions such as the World Bank is not to promote
"development" but rather to integrate the ruling elites of third world countries into the
global system of rewards and punishments.
• opponents have observed that developing countries often have to put health, education
and other social programs on hold in order to pay back their loans.
• Evidence from many countries shows that the policies promoted by the World Bank are
disastrous.
• The World Bank's emphasis on expanding exports has been disastrous for the
environment.
• The "free market" economic model being pushed on third world governments is not one
the industrial countries used to develop themselves.
• Globalization-from-above is being rejected and millions of people all over the world are
struggling to build globalization-from-below.

Reform: An Easy Way to Pressure the World Bank for Change

• The World Bank gets most of its capital by selling bonds to wealthy investors.
• If we could pressure large institutional funds (e.g., university endowments and state
worker pension funds) to stop buying World Bank bonds as a way to protest the Bank's
destructive policies, we could exert serious pressure on the Bank.
• Opposition groups have protested by boycotting World Bank bonds such as the huge
impact the divestment campaign had on South Africa's white minority rulers during the
closing days of apartheid
 236

World Trade Organization

• The World Trade Organization is an intergovernmental organization that regulates

international trade.
• Headquarters: Geneva, Switzerland
• Founded: 1 January 1995
• Purpose: Regulate international trade
• Formation: 1 January 1995; 22 years ago
• Official language: English, French, Spanish
• Created by: Uruguay Round negotiations (1986-94)
Membership: 164 countries on 29 July 2016
• Budget: 197 million Swiss francs for 2015
• Secretariat staff: 640
• Head: Roberto Azevêdo (Director-General)

Functions of WTO

• Administering WTO trade agreements

• Forum for trade negotiations
• Handling trade disputes
• Monitoring national trade policies
• Technical assistance and training for developing countries
• Cooperation with other international organizations
• The WTO has many roles: it operates a global system of trade rules, it acts as a forum for
negotiating trade agreements, its settles trade disputes between its members and it
supports the needs of developing countries.
• All major decisions are made by the WTO's member governments: either by ministers
(who usually meet at least every two years) or by their ambassadors or delegates (who
meet regularly in Geneva).
• A number of simple, fundamental principles form the foundation of the multilateral
trading system.
• The primary purpose of the WTO is to open trade for the benefit of all.
Functions
o 1 ... cut living costs and raise living standards
o 2 ... settle disputes and reduce trade tensions
o 3 ... stimulate economic growth and employment
 237

o 4 ... cut the cost of doing business internationally

o 5 ... encourage good governance
o 6 ... help countries develop
o 7 ... give the weak a stronger voice
o 8 ... support the environment and health
o 9 ... contribute to peace and stability
o 10 ... be effective without hitting the headlines

UN: Introduction

• The United Nations was established to preserve peace between states after the Second
World War.
In a number of ways, the institutions of the United Nations reflected lessons learned
from its predecessor, the League of Nations.
• The institutions and mechanisms of the United Nations reflect both the demands of
great power politics (i.e. Security Council veto) and universalism. They also reflect
demands to address the needs and interests of people, as well as the needs and interest
of states. The tensions between these various demands are a key feature of UN
development.
• The UN has its headquarters in New York.

Historical Background

• Two years after the outbreak of the Second World War the British Prime Minister
Winston Churchill met with President Roosevelt of the United States.
• Between them they issued a document called the Atlantic Charter, setting out their war
aims. Apart from the defeat of Nazi Germany, they sought peace, freedom,
collaboration, and security between states, overseen by a wider and permanent system
of general security.
• The Atlantic Charter contained the seeds of the United Nations, whose principles were
adopted by 26 states in January 1942 when they signed a Declaration of the United
Nations.
• In 1944, representatives of the great powers (the Soviet Union, the United States, China,
and Britain) met at Dumbarton Oaks in the United States to draw up firm proposals for
the new international organization, the successor to the League of Nations. In 1945, 51
states met at the United Nations Conference in San Francisco to debate the terms of the
UN Charter.
 238

Objectives of UN

• to maintain international peace,

• to develop friendly relations among states,
• to cooperate internationally in solving international economic, social, cultural and
humanitarian problems
• in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Preamble: UN Charter

• To save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has
brought untold sorrow to mankind; and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights,
in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women
and of nations large and small; to establish conditions under which justice and respect
for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be
maintained; and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger
freedom; to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good
neighbors; and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and
to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed
force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and to employ international
machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples.
Aims and Articles of the Charter

• The United Nations Charter was intended to provide a comprehensive set of

prescription on conflict resolution and the use of force. On the one hand there were the
provisions for settling disputes between States, and the prescriptions as to when force
could or could not be used. On the other was the intended capability of the United
Nations itself to provide collective security, if necessary by enforcing the peace. Chapter
VI of the Charter indicates the appropriate methods of settling international disputes
and gives the Security Council certain powers in relation to these. Whether decisions
taken by the Security Council under Chapter VI can be binding has been the subject of
some controversy .
 239

Organs of UNO:

1. The General Assembly

• The only time that all member states meet together is in the General Assembly. Here
representatives from each of the 187 states that make up the UN gather every year to
discuss the world’s problems in a global parliamentary setting. Much of the Assembly’s
work goes on in its six committees:
• First Committee – disarmament issues, outer space, political and security issues
• Second Committee – economic and financial issues
• Third Committee – social, humanitarian, and cultural matters
• Fourth Committee – colonial matters
• Fifth Committee – administrative and budgetary matters
• Sixth Committee – legal issues
• The Assembly has little influence in world politics. It can debate any issue it chooses,
adopt
Resolutions with a two-thirds majority, help elect members of other UN bodies, and
vote on the UN budget. Ultimately, whatever power it has depends on its moral
authority as a reflection of global opinion.

2. The Security Council

• Security Council remains ready to meet at any time whenever there is a threat to
international peace and security.
• There are 15 members of the Security Council. Five are permanent (the P5), and ten
nonpermanent members are elected for a period of two years from regional groups
within the UN:
Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, Western Europe, and Oceania.
• The P5 are the United States, Russia, China, France, and Britain. Decisions of the Council
have to be accepted by a majority of members, and must include the P5, each of which
is able to veto a decision.
3. UN Secretariat
4. Economic and Social Council
5. International Court of Justice
6. Trusteeship Council
 240

Apart from the other four organs, the UN includes a variety of bodies known as Specialized
Agencies, which regulate specific activities and set world standards. They include the
International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, the World Health Organization (WHO), the
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the UN International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF), the
UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), and the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP).

Evolution of UN System

• The cold war and the decolonization process had discouraged more active involvement
by the United Nations within states, due to the constant use of the veto by the great
powers.
• The UN did oversee the complex process of decolonization, which led to a rapid
expansion in the number of member states in the 1950s and 1960s. It also developed
the practice of peacekeeping, which was in part designed to prevent the superpowers
from intervening in conflicts that might then escalate into a direct confrontation
between them.
• After the cold war, it became more difficult for states and diplomats to accept that what
happened within states was of no concern to outsiders.
• It became more common for governments to see active membership in the United
Nations as serving their national interest as well as being morally right.

Role of the Security Council

• The Security Council has primary responsibility, under the United Nations Charter, for
the maintenance of international peace and security.
• It is for the Security Council to determine when and where a UN Peacekeeping
operation should be deployed.
• The Security Council responds to crises around the world on a case-by-case basis and it
has a range of options at its disposal. It takes many different factors into account when
considering the establishment of new peacekeeping operation, including:
• Whether there is a ceasefire in place and the parties have committed themselves to a
peace process intended to reach a political settlement;
• Whether a clear political goal exists and whether it can be reflected in the mandate;
• Whether a precise mandate for a UN operation can be formulated;
 241

• Whether the safety and security of UN personnel can be reasonably ensured, including
in particular whether reasonable guarantees can be obtained from the main parties or
factions regarding the safety and security of UN personnel.
• The Security Council establishes a peacekeeping operation by adopting a Security
Council resolution. The resolution sets out that mission’s mandate and size.
The Security Council monitors the work of UN Peacekeeping operations on an ongoing
basis, including through periodic reports from the Secretary-General and by holding
dedicated Security Council sessions to discuss the work of specific operations.
• The Security Council can vote to extend, amend or end mission mandates as it deems
appropriate.
• Under Article 25 of the Charter, all UN members agree to accept and carry out the
decisions of the Security Council. While other organs of the UN make recommendations
to Member States, the Council alone has the power to take decisions which Member
States are obligated to implement.

Evolution of UN System

• By the mid-1990s the UN had become involved in maintaining international peace and
security by resisting aggression between states, by attempting to resolve disputes within
states (civil wars), and by focusing on conditions within states, including economic,
social, and political conditions. Such as the successful mediation efforts from 1988 to
1990 related to long-festering regional conflicts: Iran– Iraq, Afghanistan, Cambodia,
Namibia, and El Salvador.
• New justifications for intervention in states were being considered by the 1990s. Most
operations of the United Nations were justified in the traditional way: as a response to a
threat to international peace and security.
• The number of institutions within the UN system that address economic and social
issues has significantly increased. Several Programmes and Funds were created in
response to Global Conferences.
• Despite a shortage of funds and coordination problems, the UN has done important
work in key economic and social areas.
• In the mid- to late 1990s under the leadership of then Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the
UN embarked on an overarching reform effort.

Successes Of UN

• Preservation of Global Balance of Power: In its committees, cafes, bars, lounges and
galleries, various diplomats often meet and happen to chat informally and so daily. In
 242

such relaxed atmosphere, occasionally new ideas and approaches emerge, which
sometimes lead to a fuller appreciation of opposite viewpoints and their eventual
reconciliation. On the face of its, it is a small contribution. But, let us remember, that all
big events or achievements have small beginnings.
• Disarmament and Nuclear Proliferation: Some Success: Among these three special
disarmament sessions, SSOD-I had some limited success in as much as it adopted a
consensual resolution pointing to the grave danger arising from escalating arms race
and urging immediate steps towards global disarmament.
• Successes Of UN
• UN Sanctions against Apartheid
Protection of human Rights especially Children: Closely related to the problem of
decolonization is the issue of fundamental freedom or human rights. Surely, in this field,
the UN has issued the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and several Covenants on
Civil, political and economic rights.
• Reformation of Global Social Sector through International Organizations:
• Successful operation of UN Peace Keeping Missions (Africa) However, the UN has done
a lot in the field of’ peace-keeping' from the time of the Suez crisis in 1956 through
Cyprus, Lebanon and Congo and other areas to its current involvement in Cambodia,
Somalia and Bosnia Herzegovina. But the future of these operations is rather uncertain.
First there is the problem of funding, for already member nations owe more than 500
million dollars to the United Nations on account of these peace-keeping operations.
Secondly, there is the problem of having to raise a sufficiently strong and trained peace-
keeping force to be used as and when an emergency arises.
• Successes Of UN
• Approximately 172 settlements of peace(Serbia, Yugoslavia and Balkan region) in the
post 1945 era, there have been over 150 critical international disputes or conflict
situations, notably, the India-China conflict, India-Pakistan conflicts, Ethiopia-Somalia
conflict, the Afghanistan crisis, the Cuban missile crisis, the crises in Hungary,
Czechoslovakia and Poland, the Vietnam war and the Iran-Iraq war. In all these cases,
the disputes has either lingered on or has been set along three major landmarks in
conflict resolution or the pacific, settlement of disputes-the Shastri-Sirimavo Agreement
1965, the Simla Agreement 1972 and the Farakka Accord 1977, were bilaterally
negotiated.
• Operation of the International Legal Framework and international Laws
• Aid for Food and Refugees (IDPs)
• Management of reproductive health and population (AIDS and POLIO)
 243

• Protection of newly independent states EMOMALI RAHMON, President of Tajikistan,

said that over the past seven decades, the Organization had made a special contribution
to sustaining the establishment of new independent States. Tajikistan had experienced
difficulties during its transition period and had received every kind of support from the
Organization, enabling the country to embark on the road to democratic development.
Today, Tajikistan was contributing to the fight against terrorism and extremism,
transnational organized crime, arms smuggling, and human trafficking. The country’s
police officers were participating in the joint peacekeeping operation of the United
Nations and the African Union in Darfur. The Drug Control Agency, which had been
established with United Nations support, continued to play an important role in fighting
illicit drug trafficking.
• Combating international terrorism, he added, had become a priority issue and
there was a need to develop mechanisms aimed at eliminating channels of financial and
logistic support, recruiting, propaganda of violence, and the use of modern information
and communication technologies for the purpose of terror. Prevention of illicit drug
trafficking should be an integral part of that struggle because the money earned from
illicit drug trade was being channelled to finance the acts of terror. On other matters of
importance to his country, it stood for expanding good neighbourly relations with
Afghanistan, and called on the international community to support that Government’s
efforts. His country also believed that the Joint Plan of Action on Iran’s nuclear
programme would contribute to strengthening regional peace.

Failures of UN

• Genocide of Rwanda of 1994: The Rwandan genocide of 1994 details the gross inability
of the United Nations to carry out its sworn duty to maintain peace and security. In
1993, UN peacekeeping forces entered the nation, attempted to secure the capital and
enable humanitarian aid. The peacekeeping forces were not authorized to use military
manoeuvres to achieve these goals. In January of 1994, a cable was sent from the
Canadian Force Commander to the UN headquarters detailing the imminent threat of
genocide by Hutu mobs on Tutsi minorities. The Security Council never received the
cable, and the notice was largely ignored.
• Darfur: In 2003, the unstable nation of Sudan erupted in conflict. Early in the war, rebel
forces defeated the Sudanese military. Seeing that defeat was imminent, the
government funded the Janjaweed, a group of Arabs. By 2005, the Janjaweed were
carrying out attacks on populated villages using artillery and helicopters, prompting
 244

condemnation by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. Despite this condemnation, the UN

did not enter Sudan, instead urging members of the African Union to intervene.
• Failures of UN
• The Cold War : The Cold War exemplifies the failure behind the United Nations Charter.
In 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was established, which was
binding to all nations, along with the Convention Against Genocide. But, almost
immediately, the USSR disregarded these. Civic rights were virtually non-existent and
Stalin continued to rule with an iron fist. With the United Nations unwilling to act upon
such atrocities, the words in the Charter were rendered meaningless for those who
needed them the most
• Khmer Rouge: Khmer Rouge Ruling Cambodia from 1975 to 1979, the Khmer Rouge
practiced an extreme form of Communism, as dictated by their borderline-psychotic
leader Pol Pot. In 1979, the Vietnamese army invaded Cambodia to oust the Khmer
Rouge and end the massacre and a new government was put in place in Cambodia.
Shockingly, the United Nations refused to recognize this new government because it
was backed by Vietnam, which had recently ended a decade-long conflict with the
United States.
• Failures of UN
• Srebrenica Massacre: This 1995 Bosnian War massacre was the single worst act of mass
murder on European soil since World War II. After an ethnic cleansing campaign led by
the Serbs targeted the Bosniaks, a largely Muslim community, the United Nations
designated Srebrenica a safe-zone in 1993. But, as many as 7,800 Bosniaks were killed
by Serbian soldiers mainly due largely to an ill-equipped and unprepared UN force.
• Veto Power : Five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council enjoy the
luxury of veto power; when a permanent member vetoes a vote, the Council resolution
cannot be adopted. Most recent example of a veto came when the UNSC attempted to
evoke chapter VII sanctions from the UN Charter to intervene and prevent genocide in
Syria. But the vetoes by China and Russia halted any international intervention and
rendered the UN hapless.
• Discrimination against Human rights: Palestine issue and Kashmir issue
• Sri Lanka: In the final months of the war between LTTE and Sri Lankan army, the
opposing sides fought in the heavily populated northeast coastline, a designated safe
zone. Independent experts urged the Human Rights Council of the UN to investigate
claims of war crimes, but the United Nations made no attempts to intervene on behalf
of the civilian population.
 245

• Nuclear Proliferation: In 1970, the nuclear non-proliferation treaty was signed by 190
nations, including five nations that admitted to owning nuclear weapons: France,
England, Russia, China, and the US. Despite this treaty, nuclear stockpiles remain high,
and numerous nations continue to develop these devastating weapons. The failure of
the non-proliferation treaty details the ineffectiveness of the United Nations, and their
inability to enforce crucial rules and regulations on offending nations
• Terrorism: Many experts agree that “modern” terrorism began with the 1968 hijacking
of El Al Israel Flight 426 by a Palestinian organization. The United Nations condemned
the action, but failed to take any further action. These terrorist acts continued
throughout the remainder of the twentieth century, with no reaction from the UN; a
simple condemnation was as far as they would go. On Syria, he said, “we have all felt
the failure of inertia”. Italy was proud to be a leading country in the training of security
forces in Iraq and had taken a primary role in the working group to counteract financing
to Da’esh. “Clouds of conflict and tensions sweep across Europe, the Middle East and
Africa and threaten to engulf the Asia-Pacific region. Terrorism remains a potent threat
to international peace and security,” Masood Khan said
• “Abject poverty is the fate of billions of people; our fragile planet is being exploited
irresponsibly,” he said, questioning if these developments were a precursor to another
global crisis or even a war.

Reasons for Decline

• Patterns of war have changed. The Charter of the UN is based on the principles of
sovereignty and non-intervention in the internal affairs of states. The UN is unable to
respond effectively to armed conflict that blurs the line between civil and interstate war.
• Despite the end of the cold war, the UN is only as effective as its member states,
particularly the P5, allow it to be.
• The UN lacks its own military forces, and therefore relies on member states to make
forces available to the Secretary-General on request.
• It is slow to respond to crises, and cannot act in those areas that are regarded as
legitimate spheres of influence by any of the P5, especially the United States, Russia,
and China.
• The UN is wholly funded by its member states, particularly the P5. This enables them to
use their financial power to promote their own national interests at the UN.
• At the end of the twentieth century, there has been much discussion about how to
reform the UN.
 246

Reforms of UN

• Proposals have been put forward to make the organization more representative of the
changing balance of power in world politics. For example, the P5 represent the victors of
the Second World War rather than the most important states of the twenty-first
century.
• Some commentators argue that Japan, Germany, and India deserve greater recognition
and status in the Security Council.
• In addition, there has been much debate over whether and how to provide the UN with
more financial and military power to respond to crises deemed to be within its remit.
• Unless the United Nations is reformed, the gap between expectation and performance is
unlikely to be closed.
• The Millennium Development Goals have focused attention on measurable
socioeconomic targets and have further integrated the work of the UN at the country
level, but progress towards reaching the goals has been uneven.
• This would be unfortunate, since the United Nations remains the only international
organization that approximates a form of global governance.
• Reform of the economic and social arrangements of the UN aimed at improving
coordination, eliminating duplication, and clarifying spheres of responsibility is
pertinent. These efforts would strengthen the norms of the multilateral system.

Evolution of Reforms of UN

• General Assembly Task Force: on security council reform has delivered report on the
question of equitable representation and increase in the membership of the security
council, timeline perspective that member states begin identifying with negotiable to be
included in short term inter governmental negotiations on reform. Hold review
conference, for revision of negotiables.
• Evolution of Reforms of UN
• New Demands by Members
• Demands of G4 plus 1: 1992 germany and japan largest contributer, brazil 5 th largest in
terms of territory, india 2nd largest in terms of population, demanded permanent seats
• Demands of ‘Uniting for consensus’: rival group Italy spain canda mexico Pakistan:
expansion of the non-permanent seats
• Demands of African Group: 2 permanent seats on basis of historical injustices and the
fact that large part of the Council’s agenda is concentrated on the agenda
 247

• Membership of Muslim countries

• Critical Analysis of ‘In larger Freedom’: march 21, 2005 kofi annan called on the UN to
reach a consensus on expanding the membership to 24 members

The Way Forward: Root Cause Prevention Efforts

• Categories of membership: as mentioned earlier the categories of membership Also
claiming aggression from a neighbouring State, Petro Poroshenko, President of Ukraine,
said the Russian Federation, a former strategic partner, had occupied Crimea in
February. An effective instrument that could bring an aggressor country to justice was
needed, he urged, noting that the Russian Federation had used its veto twice during the
Security Council’s consideration of his country. The veto power should not become an
act of grace and pardon for a crime. He welcomed the French Government’s initiative to
restrain veto use and supported an enlargement of the Council’s membership and
improvement of its working methods.
• The Way Forward: Root Cause Prevention Efforts
• Question of veto of P5: Veto Reform? “If you close your eyes to crimes, they do not
disappear,” stressed President Dalia Grybauskaitė of Lithuania, also addressing the use
of the veto power in the Council. Indeed, the ideals and principles of the United Nations
were being threatened around the world. It was crucial that the Organization be
adapted to today’s realities and that it step up its efforts to tackle the underlying causes
— not just the symptoms — of the crisis. It must also improve its work in prevention
and mediation in order to save lives. In the twentyfirst century, the world would need a
strong and reformed Organization. “The United Nations will cease to exist if people stop
believing in it,” she stressed.
• The Way Forward: Root Cause Prevention Efforts
• Regional Representation
• Size of enlarged Council along with its working procedures
• Creating a world government through democracy? R
• Handling terrorism: On the issue of tackling terrorism, Miloš Zeman, President of the
Czech Republic, stressed that words and declarations would never fully eradicate that
scourge. Instead he proposed coordinated action under the umbrella of the Council
with the activation of the “sleeping structures” of the United Nations.
 248

Conclusion

• The United Nations is a criminal enterprise in which no moral nation should ever
participate, let alone perpetuate said Tom DeWeese, one of the US leading advocates of
individual liberty who fought over 30 years against oppression world-wide.
• While most agree that the UN could be improved, Noam Chomsky, a leading critic of US
foreign policy, proposed that measures such as the US relinquishing its veto power in
the Security Council and submitting to the rulings of the International Court of Justice
could significantly improve the UN's ability to foster the growth of democracy and
promote global peace and the protection of human rights.
• Even little wars are dangerous in a nuclear world. The long labour of peace is an
undertaking for every nation - and in this effort none of us can remain unaligned. To this
goal none can be uncommitted — John F. Kennedy

International Court of Justice

1) Introduction
a) The International Court of Justice plays an immense role in the growth and
implementation of International law.
b) It is also known as the “World Court” and is a creation of a multi-lateral treaty.
c) The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is one of the six organs of United Nations.
It is based in The Hague, Netherlands.
d) The ICJ is composed of 15 judges elected to nine year terms by the UN General
Assembly and the UN Security Council. It is stated under Article 93 of the UN
Charter, that all the state parties (192) to the UN charter are automatically
parties to the Court's statute.
2) Main Functions
a) Its main functions are to settle legal disputes submitted to it by member states
and to give advisory opinions on legal questions submitted to it by duly
authorized international organs, agencies and the UN General Assembly.
b) An advisory opinion is a function of the Court open only to specified United
Nations bodies and agencies. In principle, the Court's advisory opinions are only
consultative in character, though they are influential and widely respected.
c) So far, ICJ has given over 115 decisions and resolved issues between states along
with some advisory opinions.
3) The jurisdiction of the ICJ
 249

a) According to article 93 of the UN Charter, all member of UN can automatically be

the parties to the Court.
b) For non-member states, article 93 also provides the right to be the parties of the
Court if they wish to and willing to be bound by the jurisdiction of the Court. For
example: Switzerland used this method to become the party of the Court in 1948
c) Article 34, paragraph 1 of the Statute of ICJ states that only state may be parties
in cases before the Court.
d) The Court has the jurisdiction over the states when the states accept the
jurisdiction and willing to be bound by the jurisdiction.
e) The jurisdiction of the Court is divided into two parts: The first jurisdiction is the
power to decide on the legal dispute which submitted by the states. This kind of
power is called contentious jurisdiction i.e. the Court has the power to settle the
dispute when parties agree to submit to the Court.
f) The second jurisdiction is advisory jurisdiction. The Court gives advisory opinion
to the UN organ such as Security Council or General Assembly when they need
the legal advice from the Court For example, World Health Organization (WHO)
request for an advisory opinion on the legality of the use of nuclear weapons by
a state during armed conflict
4) The ICJ and the Security Council relationship
a) After the Court issue the judgment for the disputed parties, there is one thing
must be done. Implement of judgment is the important step in the Court’s
procedure.
b) ICJ doesn’t have the power to enforce the parties of dispute to comply the
judgment. This job is transfer to the Security Council if the parties fail to
perform the obligation incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the
Court
c) ICJ is not effective if there is not enforcement of Security Council.
5) ICJ on the Case of Nuclear Weapons
a) On 8 July, 1996, The ICJ handed down its Advisory Opinion on the request made
by the General Assembly of the United Nations concerning the “Legality of the
Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict”.
b) The initial request for an advisory opinion by the ICJ was put forward by the
World Health Organization (WHO) on 3 September 1993, but the ICJ did not
render an opinion on this request because the WHO was Ultra Vires (acting
outside its legal capacity).
c) Later another request was presented by the United Nations General Assembly
in December 1994 which was accepted by the Court in January 1995.
 250

d) The General Assembly or the Security Council has the power to request advisory
opinion from the ICJ under Article 96 of the UN Charter.
e) The opinion provides one of the few authoritative judicial decisions concerning
the legality under international law of the use or the threatened use of nuclear
weapons. Previously, there was no substantive theory or concrete debate over
the issue of use, possession and legality of nuclear weapons. It was after the
request made by the UNGA, the ICJ gave a detailed opinion regarding nuclear
weapons. Apart from the 15 sitting judges, international lawyers from different
states were called upon to put forward the arguments concerning nuclear
weapons.
f) The first issue dealt with by the ICJ concerned “the right to life”. The use of
nuclear weapons posed a threat to life as under article 6 of International
Covenant on Civil, Political Rights (ICCPR).
g) The lawyers argued that this will further the growth of use of nuclear weapons
by the states who are not member of NPT. Thus, the debate over this still
continues and no conclusive decision is yet given on its usage.
6) Reforms of ICJ
a) Ineffectiveness of the present ICJ
i. Only 63 states have recognized the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court
(with or without reservation) through the optional clause system (out of
192; only 1/3rd)
ii. ICJ deal with less than 100 cases in more than 50 years
iii. Reform of Jurisdiction; This character of non-compulsory jurisdiction over
the state is because of the principle of sovereignty
iv. Enforcement of judgment; The problem of enforcement arises when the
Security Council can’t issue the resolution. In order to issue the
resolution, 9 votes of Security Council member are needed.For
substantive matter such as enforcement of ICJ judgment, all permanent
member need to vote without veto of anyone.
v. At the UN General Assembly session in 2000 the Member States adopted
a Millennium Declaration, which sets out an ambitious plan of reform
aiming to gear the Organisation for the challenges of the 21st century.
The document envisages a reform and strengthening of the General
Assembly, the Security Council, ECOSOC and the Secretariat.
vi. Increasing the Number of Judges: An expanded format of the Security
Council with more permanent members would logically result in calls for
the ‘reservation’ of seats on the ICJ bench for the members concerned.
 251

vii. Removal of re-election: The justices of the International Court are

elected for a term of 9 years and according to Article 13 of the Statute
may be re-elected. Every three years one-third of the justices are elected
simultaneously by the General Assembly and the Security Council.
However, re-election campaigns place judges wishing to obtain a second
or a third nine-year tenure in a vulnerable position and raise challenges
for the Court’s independence
viii. there is a need for debate on reforming its working methods, including
by means of establishing individual chambers in order to preclude delays
in the administration of justice.
ix. The second category of reform proposals, which does not require
amending or supplementing the Charter or Statute, includes procedural
matters and working methods. It covers issues such as the need for a
more balanced presence of women on the bench and the potential
introduction of an age limit for nominees applying for election as justices
at the ICJ.
x. Setting up an open-ended working group within the UN General
Assembly to be tasked with discussing and drafting recommendations on
Court reform;
xi. Initiating an informal group of Friends of the Court to be tasked with
rallying sufficient support for proposals and recommendations that
would enhance the efficiency of the Court and global rule of law.
xii. launching, at a later stage, of intergovernmental negotiations on ICJ
reform at UN level on the basis of the model underlying the current
intergovernmental negotiations on the reform of the Security Council.
7)Conclusion

South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation

History
• Idea of regional cooperation was discussed in three meeting
• Asian Relations Conference in New Delhi in April 1947  the Baguio Conference in the
Philippines in May 1950,  the Colombo Powers Conference in April 1954.
• framework for regional cooperation in South Asia was made by the late president of
Bangladesh, Ziaur Rahman, on May 2, 1980.
 252

Introduction to SAARC
• South Asian organization
• Established on December 8,1985
• Founding members are Pakistan ,India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, srilanka,maldives
• Headquarter ,Kathmandu ,Nepal
• Government Organization
• Chairman_________________
• Secretary General ________________
• Official language English
• Annual meeting of head of the states
• Twice in a year
• meeting of foreign secretaries

MEMBERS
• Afghanistan
• Bangladesh
• Bhutan
• India
• Maldives
• Nepal
• Pakistan
• Sri Lanka

OBSERVERS
• Australia
• China
• European Union
• Japan
• Iran
• Mauritius
• Myanmar
• South Korea
• United States
• South Africa has participated in meetings.
 253

Principles of SAARC
• Respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity, political equality and independence of all
members states
• Non-interference in the internal matters is one of its objectives
• Cooperation for mutual benefit
• All decisions to be taken unanimously and need a quorum of all eight members
• All bilateral issues to be kept aside and only multilateral(involving many countries)
issues to be discussed without being prejudiced by bilateral issues

Objectives
• The objectives of the Association as defined in the Charter are:[2]
• to promote the welfare of the people of South Asia and to improve their quality of life;
• to accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region
and to provide all individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to realize their full
potential;
• to promote and strengthen selective self-reliance among the countries of South Asia;
• to contribute to mutual trust, understanding and appreciation of one another's
problems;
• to promote active collaboration and mutual assistance in the economic, social, cultural,
technical and scientific fields;
• to strengthen cooperation with other developing countries;
• to strengthen cooperation among themselves in international forums on matters of
common interest; and
• to cooperate with international and regional organisations with similar aims and
purposes.

Secretariat
• The SAARC Secretariat was established in Kathmandu on 16 January 1987 and was
inaugurated by Late King Birendra Bir Bikram Shah of Nepal.
• It is headed by a Secretary General appointed by the Council of Ministers from Member
Countries in alphabetical order for a three-year term. He is assisted by the Professional
and the General Services Staff, and also an appropriate number of functional units
called Divisions assigned to Directors on deputation from Member States.
• The Secretariat coordinates and monitors implementation of activities, prepares for and
services meetings, and serves as a channel of communication between the Association
and its Member States as well as other regional organizations.
 254

• The Memorandum of Understanding on the establishment of the Secretariat which was

signed by Foreign Ministers of member countries on 17 November 1986 at Bangalore,
India contains various clauses concerning the role, structure and administration of the
SAARC Secretariat as well as the powers of the Secretary-General.
• In several recent meetings the heads of state or government of member states of
SAARC have taken some important decisions and bold initiatives to strengthen the
organization and to widen and deepen regional co-operation.
•
Agreements
• Agreement for establishment of SAARC Arbitration Council
• Final Agreement on Avoidance of Double Taxation
• Final Agreement on Customs Matters
• CHARTER OF SDF 31 July 2008
• Agreement on establishing the SAARC food bank
• Agreement on south Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA)
• Agreement on the Establishment of South Asian Regional Standards Organization
(SARSO)

AN APPRAISAL
• SAARC COULDN’T deliver due
• Charter restricted to multilateral issues
• Rivalry among the member states oPakistan and India oPakistan and Bangladesh oIndia
and Sri lanka
• Serious disputes
• Kashmir issue
• Tamils issue
• water issue
• Issue of terrorism
• Nuclear issue
• Difficult and trouble history
• Religious elements
• Inconsistent democracies
• Hegemonic attitude of India
• Little progress on culture, economics and literature
• No greater interest in games
 255

Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)

By: Manzar Javed Ali Khan

Introduction
• Formation 26 April 1996
• type Mutual-security organization
• Headquarters Beijing, China
• Official languages Chinese Russian
• Secretary General Rashid Alimov of Tajikistan January 2016-present

Member States
• Date 26 April 1996
• China
• Kazakhstan  Kyrgyzstan
• Russia
• Tajikistan
• 15 June 2001
• Uzbekistan
• Observer states
• Afghanistan
• India
• Iran
• Mongolia
• Pakistan

Dialogue partners and guests

• Dialogue Partners
• Belarus
• Sri Lanka
• Turkey
Guest Attendances
• ASEAN
• CIS
• Turkmenistan
 256

Dialogue partner
• The position of Dialogue Partner was created in 2008 in accordance with Article 14 of
the SCO Charter of June 7, 2002. This article regards Dialogue Partner as a state or an
organization who shares the goals and principles of the SCO and wishes to establish
relations of equal mutually beneficial partnership with the Organization
• dialogue partnership to Belarus in 2009 summit despite Russian objection
• dialogue partnership to Sri Lanka in 2009 summit
• Turkey, a member of NATO, was granted dialogue partner status in 2012 summit

COUNCIL OF STATES
• Almazbek Atambayev (Kyrgyzstan)
• Emomalii Rahmon (Tajikistan)
• Shavkat Mirziyoyev (Uzbekistan)
• Xi Jinping (China)
• Nursultan Nazarbayev (Kazakhstan)
• Vladimir Putin (Russia)
• Ram Nath Kovind (India)
• Mamnoon Hussain (Pakistan)

SCO summits
• June 7, 2002 Russia Saint Petersburg
• May 29, 2003 Russia Moscow
• June 17, 2004 Uzbekistan Tashkent
• July 5, 2005 Kazakhstan Astana
• June 15, 2006 China Shanghai
• August 16, 2007 Kyrgyzstan Bishkek
• August 28, 2008 Tajikistan Dushanbe
• June 15–16, 2009 Russia Yekaterinburg
• June 10–11, 2010 Uzbekistan Tashkent
• June 14–15, 2011 Kazakhstan Astana
• June 6–7, 2012 China Beijing

History
• The Shanghai Five grouping , created April 26, 1996 with the signing of the Treaty on
Deepening Military Trust in Border Regions in Shanghai by the heads of states of
Kazakhstan, the People's Republic of China, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan.
 257

• April 24, 1997 the same countries signed the Treaty on Reduction of Military Forces in
Border Regions in a meeting in Moscow.
• summits of the Shanghai Five group occurred in Almaty (Kazakhstan) in 1998, in
Bishkek (Kyrgyzstan) in 1999, and in Dushanbe (Tajikistan) in 2000. In 2001,
admittance of Uzbekistan in sco
. Signing of on June 15, 2001, the Declaration of Shanghai Cooperation Organization,
• On 16 July 2001, Russia and the PRC, signed the Treaty of Good-Neighbourliness and
Friendly Cooperation.
• In June 2002, the heads of the SCO in Saint Petersburg, Russia, signed the SCO Charter
• In July 2005, summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, with representatives of India, Iran,
Mongolia and Pakistan attending an SCO summit for the first time, the president of the
host country, Nursultan Nazarbayev, greeted the guests in words that had never before
been used in any context: "The leaders of the states sitting at this negotiation table are
representatives of half of humanity".
• By 2007 the SCO had initiated over twenty large-scale projects related to
transportation, energy and telecommunications and held regular meetings of security,
military, defense, foreign affairs, economic, cultural, banking and other officials from its
member states.
• The SCO established relations with the United Nations, where it is an observer in the
General Assembly, the EU, (ASEAN), the Commonwealth of Independent States and OIC

Cooperation on Security
• ' Central Asian security-related concerns; main threats are terrorism, separatism and
extremism.
• At the June 16–17, 2004 SCO summit, held in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, establishment of
the Regional Antiterrorism Structure (RATS) .
• On April 21, 2006, the SCO announced plans to fight cross-border drug crimes under
the counter-terrorism rubric.
• In October 2007, the SCO signed an agreement with the Collective Security Treaty
Organization (CSTO), in the Tajik capital Dushanbe, to broaden cooperation on issues
such as security, crime, and drug trafficking. Joint action plan by 2008.
• The organization is also redefining cyber warfare, saying that the dissemination of
information“ harmful to the spiritual, moral and cultural spheres of other states"

Military activities
• Over the past few years, theorganization's activities have expanded to include
increased military cooperation, intelligence sharing, and counterterrorism.
• Military activities
 258

• The SCO has served as a platform for larger military announcements by members.
• PEACE MISSION 2007
• Military activities
• number of SCO joint military exercises.
• in 2003, with the first phase taking place in Kazakhstan and the second in China.
• Since then China and Russia war games in 2005 (Peace Mission 2005), 2007 and 2009,
under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
• Peace Mission 2010, conducted September 9–25 at Kazakhstan's Matybulak training
area, saw over 5,000 personnel from China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and
Tajikistan conduct joint planning and operational maneuvers.

Economics cooperation
• A Framework Agreement to enhance economic cooperation was signed by the SCO
member
states on September 23, 2003.
At the same meeting the PRC's Premier, Wen Jiabao, proposed a long-term objective to
establish a free trade area in the SCO, while other more immediate measures would be
taken to improve the flow of goods in the region.
• A follow up plan with 100 specific actions was signed one year later, on September 23,
2004
• On October 26, 2005, Moscow Summit of the SCO, priorities to joint energy projects;
 The creation of an Inter-bank SCO Council for funding fund future joint projects. 
Russia is plans for an SCO "Energy Club".
• on August 28, 2008 summit it was stated that "Against the backdrop of a slowdown in
the growth of world economy pursuing a responsible currency and financial policy,
control over the capital flowing, ensuring food and energy security have been gaining
special significance".
• On June 16, 2009, at the Yekaterinburg Summit, China announced plans to provide a
US$10 billion loan to SCO member states to shore up the struggling economies of its
members amid the global financial crisis.
• the China-Russia demand for a bigger quota in the International Monetary Fund.
• At the 2007 SCO summit ,Iran's proposal of developing new banking system free from
international banking .

• The address by Putin also included these comments: "We now clearly see the
defectiveness of the monopoly in world finance and the policy of economic
selfishness”. Economics cooperation
 259

• "The world is seeing the emergence of a qualitatively different geo-political situation,

with the emergence of new centers of economic growth and political influence".
• "We will witness and take part in the transformation of the global and regional security
and development architectures adapted to new realities of the 21st century, when
stability and prosperity are becoming inseparable notions".
• Cultural cooperation

Geopolitical aspects
 Russia and china following Brzezinski theory
 Head of states OF SCO declared “call upon the international community to form a new
concept of security based on mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality and interaction”.
 SCO “working to establish a rational and just world order"
 China point of view is; the United States is arrayed along China's periphery, with a long-
term presence in Japan and South Korea, strong ties with Thailand and the Philippines,
a blossoming partnership with India and a growing role in Central Asia.
 President Vladimir Putin in 2008 stated that Russia could aim nuclear missiles at
Ukraine if Russia's neighbour and former fraternal republic in the Soviet Union joins the
NATO alliance and hosts elements of a U.S. missile defence system. "It is horrible to say
and even horrible to think that, in response to the deployment of such facilities in
Ukrainian territory, which cannot theoretically be ruled out, Russia could target its
missile systems at Ukraine"

Association of south east asian nations(ASEAN)

Member states
 Brunei
 Cambodia
 Indonesia
 Laos
 Malaysia
 Burma (Myanmar)
 Philippines
 Singapore
 Thailand
 Vietnam
INTRODUCTION
 The Association of Southeast Asian Nations(ASEAN) is a geo-political and economic
organization of ten countries located in Southeast Asia, which was formed on 8 August
 260

1967 by Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. Since then,
membership has expanded to include Brunei, Burma (Myanmar), Cambodia, Laos, and
Vietnam.
 Its aims include accelerating economic growth, social progress, cultural development
among its members, protection of regional peace and stability, and opportunities for
member countries to discuss differences peacefully.

ASEAN
 covers a land area of 4.46 million km², which is 3% of the total land area of Earth,
 and has a population of approximately 600 million people, which is 8.8% of the world's
population.
 The sea area of ASEAN is about three times larger than its land counterpart.
 In 2010, its combined nominal GDP had grown to US$1.8 trillion.If ASEAN were a single
entity, it would rank as the ninth largest economy in the world, behind the United
States, China, Japan, Germany, France, Brazil, the United Kingdom, and Italy.

History of ASEAN
 ASEAN was preceded by an organisation called the Association of Southeast Asia,
commonly called ASA, an alliance consisting of the Philippines, Malaysia and Thailand
that was formed in 1961.
 The bloc itself, however, was established on 8 August 1967, when foreign ministers of
five countries – Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand – met at
the Thai Department of Foreign Affairs building in Bangkok and signed the ASEAN
Declaration, more commonly known as the Bangkok Declaration. The five foreign
ministers – Adam Malik of Indonesia, Narciso Ramos of the Philippines, Abdul Razak of
Malaysia, S. Rajaratnam of Singapore, and Thanat Khoman of Thailand – are considered
the organisation's Founding Fathers.
 The motivations for the birth of ASEAN were so that its members’ governing elite could
concentrate on nation building, the common fear of communism, reduced faith in or
mistrust of external powers in the 1960s, and a desire for economic development; not
to mention Indonesia’s ambition to become a regional hegemony through regional
cooperation and the hope on the part of Malaysia and Singapore to constrain Indonesia
and bring it into a more cooperative framework. Papua New Guinea was accorded
Observer status in 1976 and Special Observer status in 1981. Papua New Guinea is a
Melanesian state. ASEAN embarked on a program of economic cooperation following
the Bali Summit of 1976. This floundered in the mid-1980s and was only revived around
1991 due to a Thai proposal for a regional free trade area. The bloc grew when Brunei
 261

Darussalam became the sixth member on 8 January 1984, barely a week after gaining
independence on 1 January.
 On 28 July 1995, Vietnam became the seventh member. Laos and Myanmar (Burma)
joined two years later on 23 July 1997.Cambodia was to have joined together with Laos
and Burma, but was deferred due to the country's internal political struggle. The
country later joined on 30 April 1999, following the stabilisation of its government.
 During the 1990s, the bloc experienced an increase in both membership and drive for
further integration. In 1990, Malaysia proposed the creation of an East Asia Economic
Caucuscomprising the then members of ASEAN as well as the People's Republic of
China, Japan, and South Korea, with the intention of counterbalancing the growing
influence of the United States in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and in
the Asian region as a whole. This proposal failed, however, because of heavy opposition
from the United States and Japan. Despite this failure, member states continued to
work for further integration and ASEAN Plus Three was created in 1997.
 In 1992, the Common Effective Preferential Tariff (CEPT) scheme was signed as a
schedule for phasing tariffs and as a goal to increase the region’s competitive
advantage as a production base geared for the world market. This law would act as the
framework for the ASEAN Free Trade Area. After the East Asian Financial Crisis of 1997,
a revival of the Malaysian proposal was established in Chiang Mai, known as the Chiang
Mai Initiative, which calls for better integration between the economies of ASEAN as
well as the ASEAN Plus Three countries (China, Japan, and South Korea).
 Aside from improving each member state's economies, the bloc also focused on peace
and stability in the region. On 15 December 1995, the Southeast Asian Nuclear-
Weapon-Free Zone Treaty was signed with the intention of turning Southeast Asia into
a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone. The treaty took effect on 28 March 1997 after all but one
of the member states have ratified it. It became fully effective on 21 June 2001, after
the Philippines ratified it, effectively banning all nuclear weapons in the region.
 East Timor submitted a letter of application to be the eleventh member of ASEAN at the
summit in Jakarta in March 2011. Indonesia has shown a warm welcome to East Timor.

Fundamental Principles
 "The fundamental principles include: respect for the independence, sovereignty,
equality, territorial integrity and national identity of all ASEAN Member States;
 shared commitment and collective responsibility in enhancing regional peace, security
and prosperity;
 renunciation of aggression and of the threat or use of force or other actions in any
manner inconsistent with international law;
 reliance on peaceful settlement of disputes;
 262

 non-interference in the internal affairs of ASEAN Member States;

 respect for the right of every Member State to lead its national existence free from
external interference, subversion and coercion;
 enhanced consultations on matters seriously affecting the common interest of ASEAN;
 adherence to the rule of law, good governance, the principles of democracy and
constitutional government;
 respect for fundamental freedoms, the promotion and protection of human rights, and
the promotion of social justice;
 upholding the United Nations Charter and international law, including international
humanitarian law, subscribed to by ASEAN Member States;
 abstention from participation in any policy or activity, including the use of its territory,
pursued by and ASEAN Member State or non-ASEAN State or any non-State actor,
which threatens the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political and economic stability
of ASEAN Member States;
 respect for the different cultures, languages and religions of the peoples of ASEAN,
while emphasising their common values in the spirit of unity in diversity;
 the centrality of ASEAN in external political, economic, social and cultural relations
while remaining actively engaged, outward-looking, inclusive and non-discriminatory;
and
 adherence to multilateral trade rules and ASEAN's rules-based regimes for effective
implementation of economic commitments and progressive reduction towards
elimination of all barriers to regional economic integration, in a market-driven
economy".

Asean Regional Forum

 The ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) is a formal, official, multilateral dialogue in Asia Pacific
region. As of July 2007, it is consisted of 27 participants.
 ARF objectives are to foster dialogue and consultation, and promote confidence-
building and preventive diplomacy in the region. The ARF met for the first time in 1994.
 The current participants in the ARF are as follows: all the ASEAN members, Australia,
Bangladesh, Canada, the People's Republic of China, the European Union, India, Japan,
North Korea, South Korea, Mongolia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea,
Russia, East Timor, United States and Sri Lanka. The Republic of China (also known as
Taiwan) has been excluded since the establishment of the ARF, and issues regarding the
Taiwan Strait are neither discussed at the ARF meetings nor stated in the ARF
Chairman's Statements.

From CEPT to AEC

 263

 A Common Effective Preferential Tariff (CEPT) scheme to promote the free flow of
goods within ASEAN lead to the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA).
 The AFTA is an agreement by the member nations of ASEAN concerning local
manufacturing in all ASEAN countries.
 The AFTA agreement was signed on 28 January 1992 in Singapore.
 When the AFTA agreement was originally signed, ASEAN had six members, namely,
Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. Vietnam joined in
1995, Laos and Burma in 1997, and Cambodia in 1999. The latecomers have not fully
met the AFTA's obligations, but they are officially considered part of the AFTA as they
were required to sign the agreement upon entry into ASEAN, and were given longer
time frames in which to meet AFTA's tariff reduction obligations.
 The next step is ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) with main objectives are to create
a: single market and production base
 highly competitive economic region
 region of equitable economic development
 region fully integrated into the global economy
 Since 2007, the ASEAN countries gradually lower their import duties among them and
targeted will be zero for most of the import duties at 2015.
 Since 2011, AEC has agreed to strengthen the position and increase the competitive
edges of small and medium enterprises (SME) in the ASEAN region.
 aseanblogger.com has agreed to set up online ASEAN community with aim to raise
people's awareness on the issue of AEC by 2015. The content of the portal currently
consisted of subjects varying from security to culinary and in the future will also touch
tourist sites and local culture.[

Comprehensive investment area

 The ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Area (ACIA) will encourage the free flow of
investment within ASEAN. The main principles of the ACIA are as follows
 All industries are to be opened up for investment, with exclusions to be phased out
according to schedules
 National treatment is granted immediately to ASEAN investors with few exclusions
Elimination of investment impediments
 Streamlining of investment process and procedures
 Enhancing transparency
 Undertaking investment facilitation measures
 Full realisation of the ACIA with the removal of temporary exclusion lists in
manufacturing agriculture, fisheries, forestry and mining is scheduled by 2010 for most
 264

ASEAN members and by 2015 for the CLMV (Cambodia, Lao PDR, Burma, and Vietnam)
countries.

Trade in services
An ASEAN Framework Agreement on Trade in Services was adopted at the ASEAN
Summit in Bangkok in December 1995. Under AFAS, ASEAN Member States enter into
successive rounds of negotiations to liberalise trade in services with the aim of
submitting increasingly higher levels of commitments. The negotiations result in
commitments that are set forth in schedules of specific commitments annexed to the
Framework Agreement. These schedules are often referred to as packages of services
commitments. At present, ASEAN has concluded seven packages of commitments under
AFAS.

FDI
 In 2009, realized Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) was $37.9 billion and increase by two-
fold in 2010 to $75.8 billion. 22 percent of FDI came form the European Union, followed
by ASEAN countries themselves by 16 percent and then followed by Japan and US.
European Union and US has debt problems, while Japan should make tsunami recovery.
China who helped Asia lead the global post-2008 recovery still grapples with 3-years
high inflation. So, in the long term all of the problems will give negative impact to ASEAN
indirectly. There are possibility to push some programs of ASEAN Economic Community
before 2015.

Intra-asean travel
 with free visa among ASEAN countries, a huge intra-ASEAN travel occurred and on the
right track to establish an ASEAN Community in the years to come.
 In 2010, 47 percent or 34 million from 73 million tourists were intra-ASEAN travel.
 Until end of 2010, Intra-ASEAN trade were still low which mainly of them were mostly
exporting to countries outside the region, except Laos and Myanmar were ASEAN-
oriented in foreign trade with 80 percent and 50 percent respectively of their exports
went to other ASEAN countries.

Cultural activities

Education and human development

 University Network
 The ASEAN University Network (AUN) is a consortium of Southeast Asian universities. It
was originally founded in November 1995 by 11 universities within the member
states.Currently AUN comprises 26 Participating Universities.
 265

 The Southeast Asia Engineering Education Development Network (SEED-NET) Project,

was officially established as an autonomous sub-network of the ASEAN University
Network (AUN) in April 2001'. AUN/SEED-Net aimed at promoting human resources
development in engineering in ASEAN. The Network consists of 19 leading Member
Institutions selected by the Ministries in charge of higher education of respective
countries) from 10 ASEAN countries with the support of 11 leading Japanese Supporting
Universities (selected by Japanese Government). AUN/SEED-Net is mainly supported by
the Japanese Government through the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA),
and partially supported by the ASEAN Foundation. AUN/SEED-Net activities are
implemented by the AUN/SEED-Net Secretariat with the support of the JICA Project for
AUN/SEED-Net, now based at Chulalongkorn University, Thailand.

European union

 Capital Brussels (de facto) 50°51′N 4°21′E

 Largest cities Paris and London
 Official languages 24 languages
 Official scripts Latin, Greek and Cyrillic
 Religion (2012) 48% Roman Catholic o23% irreligious o12% Protestant o8% Eastern
Orthodox 4% other Christian2% Muslim 3% other faiths
 Demonym: European
 Type Political and economic union
 Member states 28 states Leaders
 President of the European Parliament
 President of the European Council: Donald Tusk
 President of the European Commission: Jean-Claude Juncker
 Legislature: Council of the EU, European Parliament
Member states
 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic ,Denmark, Estonia ,Finland, France,
Germany, Greece Hungary, Ireland ,Italy ,Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg ,Malta,
Netherlands, Poland ,Portugal, Romania ,Slovakia, Slovenia ,Spain Sweden,
Institutions of the EU
 The EU operates through a system of supranational
 European Commission.
 the Council of the European Union.
 the European Council.
 the Court of Justice of the European Union,
 the European Central Bank.
 266

 The European Parliament is elected every five years by EU citizens.

 The European Council gives direction to the EU, and convenes at least four times a year.
It comprises the President of the European Council, the President of the European
Commission and one representative per member state; either its head of state or head
of government.
 The European Council has been described by some as the Union's "supreme political
authority". It is actively involved in the negotiation of the treaty changes and defines the
EU's policy agenda and strategies.

The European commission

 FOR the day-to-day running of the EU.
 The Commission as the motor of European integration.
 The European Commission acts as the EU's executive arm and is responsible for
initiating legislation
 operates as a cabinet government,
 with 27 Commissioners for different areas of policy, one from each member state,
though Commissioners are bound to represent the interests of the EU as a whole rather
than their home state.

The European parliament

 The European Parliament (EP) forms one half of the EU's legislature .
 The 736 (soon to be 751) Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) are directly
elected by EU citizens every five years on the basis of proportional representation.
 Although MEPs are elected on a national basis, they sit according to political groups
rather than their nationality.
 Each country has a set number of seats and is divided into sub-national constituencies
where this does not affect the proportional nature of the voting system.
 The council of European union
 The Council of the European Union (also called the "Council" and sometimes referred to
as the "Council of Ministers") forms the other half of the EU's legislature.
 It consists of a government minister from each member state and meets in different
compositions depending on the policy area being addressed.
 Notwithstanding its different configurations, it is considered to be one single body.
 In addition to its legislative functions, the Council also exercises executive functions in
relations to the Common Foreign and Security Policy.
European court of auditors
 The European Court of Auditors aims to ensure that the budget of the European Union
has been properly accounted for.
 267

 The court provides an audit report for each financial year to the Council and the
European Parliament.
The Parliament uses this to decide whether to approve the Commission's handling of
the budget.
 The Court also gives opinions and proposals on financial legislation and anti-fraud
actions.

Court of justice of EU
 The judicial branch of the EU—formally called the Court of Justice of the European
Union— consists of three courts:
 the Court of Justice,
 the General Court,
 the European Union Civil Service Tribunal.
 Together they interpret and apply the treaties and the law of the EU.

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
 The treaties declare that the EU itself is "founded on the values of respect for human
dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights,
including the rights of persons belonging to minorities... in a society in which pluralism,
non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men
prevail.“
 Charter of fundamental rights of European union was provided in Lisbon treaty of 2009.
 European convention of human rights..
 abolishing of death penalty
 Justice and Home affairs
 agencies have been established that co-ordinate associated actions:
 Europol for co-operation of police forces,[
 Eurojust for co-operation between prosecutors,[
 Frontex for co-operation between border control authorities.
 The EU also operates the Schengen Information System which provides a common
database for police and immigration authorities. This cooperation had to particularly be
developed with the advent of open borders through the Schengen Agreement and the
associated cross border crime.
 the Union has legislated in areas such as extradition, family law, asylum law, and
criminal justice.
 Foreign policy cooperation
 268

 Foreign policy cooperation between member states dates from the establishment of the
Community in 1957, when member states negotiated as a bloc in international trade
negotiations under the Common Commercial Policy.
 Steps for a more wide ranging coordination in foreign relations began in 1970 with the
establishment of European Political Cooperation which created an informal consultation
process between member states with the aim of forming common foreign policies.
 It was not, however, until 1987 when European Political Cooperation was introduced on
a formal basis by the Single European Act.
 EPC was renamed as the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) by the Maastricht
Treaty.
 Foreign policy cooperation
 The aims of the CFSP are to promote both the EU's own interests and those of the
international community as a whole, including the furtherance of international co-
operation, respect for human rights, democracy, and the rule of law
Military cooperation
 No EU military
 NATO fulfills the requirements
 21 EU members are of NATO, remaining ,,neutarlity
Following the Kosovo War in 1999, the European Council agreed that "the Union must
have the capacity for autonomous action, backed by credible military forces, the means
to decide to use them, and the readiness to do so, in order to respond to international
crises without prejudice to actions by NATO".
 To that end, a number of efforts were made to increase the EU's military capability,
notably the Helsinki Headline Goal process.
 EU Battlegroups initiative, each of which is planned to be able to deploy quickly about
1500 personnel.
 EU forces have been deployed on peacekeeping missions from Africa to the former
Yugoslavia and the Middle East.
 EU military operations are supported by a number of bodies, including the European
Defence Agency, European Union Satellite Centre and the European Union Military Staff.
 In an EU consisting of 27 members, substantial security and defence cooperation is
increasingly relying on great power cooperation.
 Military cooperation
 According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI),
 France spent more than €44 billion ($61bn) on defence in 2010,; third in the world after
the US and China,
 the UK spent almost £39 billion ($57bn), the fourth largest.
 269

 Together, France and the United Kingdom account for 45 per cent of Europe's defence
budget, 50 per cent of its military capacity and 70 per cent of all spending in military
research and development.
 In 2000, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, and Germany accounted for 97% of the
total military research budget of the then 15 EU member states.

HUMANITARIAN AID
 The European Commissions Humanitarian Aid Office, or "ECHO", provides humanitarian
aid from the EU to developing countries.
 In 2006 its budget amounted to €671 million, 48% of which went to the African,
Caribbean and Pacific countries

ECONOMY
 The EU has established a single market across the territory of all its members.
 A monetary union, the eurozone, using a single currency comprises 17 member states.
 In 2011 the EU had a combined GDP of 17.57 trillion international dollars, a 20% share
of the global gross domestic product (in terms of purchasing power parity).
 Of the top 500 largest corporations measured by revenue , 161 have their headquarters
in the EU.
 significant variance for GDP (PPP) per capita within individual EU states, these range
from €11,300 to €69,800 (about US$15,700 to US$97,000)
 Structural Funds and Cohesion Funds are supporting the development of
underdeveloped regions of the EU. Such regions are primarily located in the states of
central and southern Europe Single market
 core objectives of the European Economic Community were;
 the development of a common market, subsequently renamed the single market, and a
customs union.The single market involves the free circulation of goods, capital, people
and services within the EU,
 the customs union involves the application of a common external tariff on all goods
entering the market
 Once goods have been admitted into the market they cannot be subjected to customs
duties, discriminatory taxes or import quotas
 Free movement of capital is intended to permit movement of investments such as
property purchases and buying of shares between countries.
 The free movement of persons means that EU citizens can move freely between
member states to live, work, study or retire in another country

European central bank

 270

 The ECB is the central bank for the eurozone,

 and thus controls monetary policy in that area with an agenda to maintain price
stability.
 It is at the centre of the European System of Central Banks, which comprehends all EU
national central banks and is controlled by its General Council, consisting of the
President of the ECB, who is appointed by the European Council, the Vice-President of
the ECB, and the governors of the national central banks of all 27 EU member states.
 European central Bank,Frankfurt
Energy policy
The EU has key points in its energy policy:
 increase competition in the internal market,
 encourage investment and boost interconnections between electricity grids;
 diversify energy resources with better systems to respond to a crisis;
 establish a new treaty framework for energy co-operation with Russia while improving
relations with energy-rich states in Central Asia and North Africa;
 use existing energy supplies more efficiently while increasing use of renewable
energyand finally increase funding for new energy technologies.

Infrastructure
 The EU is working to improve cross-border infrastructure within the EU, through the
TransEuropean Networks (TEN).
 Projects under TEN include the Channel Tunnel, LGV Est, the Fréjus Rail Tunnel, the
Öresund Bridge, the Brenner Base Tunnel and the Strait of Messina Bridge.
 In 2001 it was estimated that by 2010 the network would cover: 75,200 kilometres
(46,700 mi) of roads; 78,000 kilometres (48,000 mi) of railways; 330 airports; 270
maritime harbours; and 210 internal harbours.
Agriculture
 The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is one of the oldest policies of the European
Community, and was one of its core aims. The policy has the objectives of increasing
agricultural production, providing certainty in food supplies, ensuring a high quality of
life for farmers, stabilising markets, and ensuring reasonable prices for consumers.
 It was, until recently, operated by a system of subsidies and market intervention.
 Until the 1990s, the policy accounted for over 60% of the then European Community's
annual budget, and still accounts for around 34%.
 CAP
 The policy's price controls and market interventions led to considerable overproduction,
resulting in so-called butter mountains and wine lakes.
 271

 The overproduction has also been criticised for encouraging environmentally unfriendly
intensive farming methods
 the McSharry reforms in 1992 ;the introduction of set-aside in 1988, where a proportion
of farm land was deliberately withdrawn from production, milk quotas.
 the Fischler reforms in 2004 ;the 'de-coupling' (or disassociation) of the money farmers
receive from the EU and the amount they produce . Agriculture expenditure will move
away from subsidy payments linked to specific produce, toward direct payments based
on farm size.

Religion
 The EU is a secularbody with no formal connection to any religion.
 The Article 17 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union recognises the
"status under national law of churches and religious associations" as well as that of
"philosophical and non-confessional organisations".
 The preamble to the Treaty on European Union mentions the "cultural, religious and
humanist inheritance of Europe".
 Discussion over the draft texts of the European Constitution and later the Treaty of
Lisbon included proposals to mention Christianity or "God" or both, in the preamble of
the text, but the idea faced opposition and was dropped.
 Christians in the EU are divided among followers of Roman Catholicism, numerous
Protestant denominations, and the Eastern Orthodox Church.
 Islam and Judaism are also represented in the EU population.
 As of 2009, the EU had an estimated Muslim population of 13 million,  an estimated
Jewish population of over a million.
 Eurostat's Euro barometer opinion polls showed in 2005 that 52% of EU citizens
believed in a god, 27% in "some sort of spirit or life force", and 18% had no form of
belief.
 The countries where the fewest people reported a religious belief were Estonia (16%)
and the Czech Republic (19%).
 The countries where the fewest people reported a religious belief were Estonia (16%)
and the Czech Republic (19%).
 The countries where the fewest people reported a religious belief were Estonia (16%)
and the Czech Republic (19%).
 Maribor in Slovenia, ECC

(Some of the data of the Organizations needs to be updated, kindly do so)

 272

Jammu & Kashmir Issue

• Contents
• History of Conflict
• Why Kashmir is Important for Pakistan and India
• Geographical Location and Features
• Possible Solutions of the Issue

Introduction
• Core Issue between India and Pakistan
• Legacy of Partition
• 2/3 is Control by India
• 1/3 by Pakistan
• Population: 15000000 Approx
• Area: 84471 Sq / M
• Three Wars
• Nuclear Flash Point

History
• Issue of Accession
 Hyderabad, Junaghar and Jammu & Kashmir
 Dual Policy of India
 Rule: Geographical Location, Communal Interest and Will of People
 Maharaja Wanted it to be Independent
 Indigenous People Revolted Against the Dogra Rule Oct 1947
 Help from Tribes Men from Pakistan
 In Panic Maharaja Hari Singh asked for India’s Help
 India Obliged after Accession (Alistair Lamb) War of Words
 Quid-e-Azim: Vital Sign Of Pakistan
 Nehru: Security and International Contacts
 Gandhi: Great Strategic Value
• Involvement of United Nations
• During the War of 1948 Nehru Took the Case to United Nations Security Council
• India’s Stance: Legal Accession and Aggression by Pakistan (Lord Bridwood, Eng
Historian)
 273

• Pakistan’s Stance: Revolt is from Indigenous Population.

• The UN Security Council resolutions of August 13, 1948 and January 5, 1949, proposed
the plebiscite option for resolving the Kashmir Dispute.

Kashmir Issue 1951-71

• Both Pakistan and India Accepted it
• Diplomatic Failure of Pakistan
• Shift in India’s Stance;
 No Agreement to demilitarize the Area
 Autonomy to State of Kashmir and Portrayed as People’s Will Ayub Khan:
1961
 “If there is any other reasonable solution as would satisfy the people of Kashmir
we should be prepared to listen.”
Simla Agreement 1972
• Charter of the United Nations shall Govern the Relations between the Countries
• The two countries are resolved to settle their Differences by Peaceful Means through
Bilateral Negotiations
• In Jammu and Kashmir, the Line of Control resulting from the cease-fire of December
17, 1971 shall be Respected by both sides.
Siachen Conflict 1984

Armed Struggle of 1989

The 90’s
• India kept accusing for Unrest in Kashmir with Threats of Dire Consequences
• US held back its Aid to Pakistan
• Atomic Bomb by India and Pakistan May 1998
• Kargil War 1999
• Missile Race between India and Pakistan
 Parathive by India, Ghori by Pakistan
 US Blamed Pakistan for having Ties to North Korea
 274

The 2000’s
• Military Regime
• “Islam does not recognize political boundaries, and Jihad is a concept of God.” General
Musharaf (India Times)
• 2001 Agra Talks: No Result
• Possible War between and India Avoided US Intervention(2002)
• War On Terror
• Shift in Pakistan’s Stance on Kashmir
“Both sides need to talk with each other with flexibility meeting halfway
somewhere”
• After Musharaf Pakistan went back to its Old stance “Kashmir is the Core Issue
between Pakistan and India”
• Mumbai Attacks 2008
• 2010 Unrest in Kashmir
 112 Deaths
 Demand for abrogation of AFSPA of 1958

Present Developments
• March 2011 Composite Dialogues with India
• Most Favoured Nation Nov 2011
• Right Of Self Determination for People of Kashmir (Official Stance of Present
Government)
• Economic Interest is Swaping the Hard Lined Militory Option for Kashmir
• Geographical Location & Importance
• Why Kashmir’s Solution Is Important For Pakistan?
• Water is Required for Agriculture and Energy Sector
• Strategic Location for Future Trade with China
• Brotherhood; Muslim Suffering
• Tourism (5.63% of Total GDP)
• Forest (20441 sq./km) and Natural Resources (Limestone, Coal, Zinc and Copper)
• Defense: Siachin, Kargil, Hostile and Expensive Border with India
• Trade: 10% of Indian Middle Class: it will Double the Market Share of Pakistani
Businesses (State Bank Pakistan)
 275

Importance for India

• Issue of Honor for the Indian Military
• Water for Its Growing Economy and Population
• Restraining China to Use the Area for its gains
• Control Pakistan by Controlling Water ($10 Billion loss in Agriculture) Religious
Shrines and Tourism

Possible Solutions
Option 1
UN resolutions 1948 and 1949
 Plebiscite
 Initially was Accepted by India
 No agreement on Demilitarizing the Area

Option 2
The UN Trusteeship
• 10 Years Under UN Control
• Not Viable as Kashmiries Always wanted Self determination Right.

Option 3
The Partial Referendum
• Given By UN Representative in 1950-51
• Areas where Muslims are in Majority referendum should be held in there only
• Rejected by Pakistan and India
Option 4
Partition On Cultural, Religious, Linguistic Lines
• Given By Kashmir Study Group, US
• Kashmiri Speaking Areas be Independent
• Jammu And Ladakh to India
• Azad Kashmir and Gillgit Balatistan to Pakistan
• Not Acceptable to Any Party Involved
Option 5
Independent Option
 276

• Pre- Partition Status Restored and Declare Independent

• JKLF Major Supporter
• Not Viable: Most Areas have Evolved and Became Autonomous
• Not Acceptable to India
• Favorable to Pakistan

Palestine Issue
By: Manzar Javed Ali Khan

Contents
• Palestine, in the prism of past
• Ancient period
• Classical antiquity
• Middle ages
• Modern period
• Migration of Zionists
• Balfour declaration
• British mandate
• Referral of mandate to UNGA
• Declaration of Israel and civil war
• Arab Israel war 1967 and 1973
• Camp David accord 1979 ,Egypt-Israel
• Palestinian intifada 1987
• Oslo accord 1993
• Al-Aqsa intifada 2000
• Camp David summit 2000
• Clinton plan
• Taba summit 2001
Road map force of quartet in 2002
Arab peace initiative

Palestine in history
• Ancient period
• Earliest place of habitation, agriculture and civilization
 277

• During bronze age ,Canaanites were established, which were influenced by Egypt,
Mesopotamia, Syria
• Battle of Canaan in 1178 BC and occupation by Egypt
• 1020BC arrival of Palestine's and establishment of kingdom of Israel, which later on
split of kingdom into kingdom of Israel and Judah
• 740 BC part of new Assyrian empire
• Twelve tribes of israel
• 627BC ; part of new Babylonian empire

Classical antiquity
• 330 BC, conquest of Alexander the great
• 116bc,establishment of Hosmonean principality and forming of Judean state
• 63 BC, roman empire conquered it
• 28-30 CE, crucifixation of Jesus
• 70 CE, Titus sacked Jerusalem and expelled Jews and Christians
• 306-324 CE; victory of Christian emperor Constantine and Christianization of roman
world
• His mother Helena visited Jerusalem and construction of churches and shrines
• It became centre of Christianity
• 614 CE; palestine was annexed by Sassanid's
• 628CE,it was recaptured by byzantine

Middle Ages
• 636 CE ,battle of Yarmoak and capturing of Syria by Hazarat Umar
• 661,Amir Muwayia was crowned in Jerusalem and order of construction of dome of
the rock
• 750 CE ,taken over by Abbasids and Ramala centre of administration
• 878 CE, a semi autonomous rulers; Ahmad bin Tulan, a famous Turkish ruler
• 970 CE, Fatimids took it over
• 1074 CE Seljuk rulers captured it
• 1099CE, Crusaders captured it 1187,saladin recaptured it
1260,mongol raids
1486 CE, ottomans and mumluks started fighting on it
1516,ottomon captured the area
MANDATE OF BRITAIN
 278

Modern Period
• 1832 CE, captured by Muhamamd Ali of Egypt
• 1840,Britain intervened and returned it back to ottomans
• 1900’s,zionist migration
• Revival of Hebrew language
• Support of great Britain
• 1917,balfour declaration
• British captured Jerusalem and was given mandate in 1922 by league of nations
• Revolt of non Jewish people in 1920,1929,1936
• 1947, great Britain wanted to shun mandate and referred the matter to UN GA, which
proposed to divide it into Arab state and Jewish state
• Civil war broke out
• 700000 Palestinians were expelled ,which to this day couldn’t return
• Israel captured further areas of un mandate
• 1948 Declaration of Israel as independent

Arab Israel war 1967

• 6 days war
• Israel captured the rest of the areas of mandate Palestine
• And started settlements in Arab areas
• Arab Israel war 1973,
• also Ramadan war
• First Egypt and Syria captured some Israeli areas
• Israel captured Sinai desert of Egypt and Golan heights of Syrian and moved further
towards Damascus and Cairo

Camp David accord

• 1979 Camp David accord between Egypt and Israel Egypt pledged peace
• Israel vacated Sinai desert and returned it to Egypt
• Starting of intifada
• first intifada in 1987 to 1993
• Resistance to Israel forces
• Killing of Palestinians
• settlement of more Jews
 279

Madrid conference
• It was convened in 1991 by government of Spain co-sponsered by US and Russia
• To start a peace process
• Jordan, Lebanon and Syria were invited
• No PLO in conference
• Oslo accord Yasser and Rabin

Oslo peace accord

• concluded between Yasser Arafat and Israeli PM, Rabin in 1993
• 5 years interim arrangement
• Face to face agreement between PLO and Israel
• Creation of PNA
• Withdrawal of IDF from Gaza and west bank
• Gradual handing over of Palestinian territories to Palestinian authority
• Letters of mutual recognition
• Peace by Palestine
• It couldn’t progress much due to assassination of Rabin
• Oslo 2nd at Taba
• 1995 at Taba, Egypt
• “ neither side shall initiate or take nay step that will change the status of the WB and
Gaza strip pending the outcome of permanent status”

Hebron protocol
• 1997
• Re-deployment of Israeli forces in Hebron
• Wye river memorandum 1998
• Sponsored by us
• Held at aspen institute wyre river conference centers near wyes river Mary land
• Agreed between PLO and Israel
• Settlement of interim government issue
• Transfer of territories in stipulated time
• Area A; full Palestine control
• Area B; civil control of Palestine but military of Israel
• Area C; full control of Israel
 280

• Discussed security issues

• Outlawing terrorist organizations, preventing incitements ,security cooperation
• Palestine police force
• PLO charter
• Human rights violation
• Economic development in Gaza Gaza port
• Gaza industrial area
• Opening up of safe passage between WB AND GHAZA strip
• Sea port in gaza
• Time scale for implementation
• Permanent status on UN resolutions ;no 242 and 338
• July 2000,settlement;sep 200o permanent agreement

Camp David summit 2000

• Clinton convened between Palestine and Israel
• Ehud Barak put forward proposal
• 92% of west bank
• Entire Gaza strip
• Palestinian capital in Jerusalem
• 69 Jewish settlements would be ceded to Israel
• Arafat rejected and no counter proposal
• It failed due to non-agreement on
• Territory
• Jerusalem and mount temple
• Refugees and right of return
• Security arrangement
• settlement

Clinton plan 2000

• Establishment of sovereign Palestine state in Gaza and 94.96% WB
• On Jerusalem ,Arab areas are Palestinians and Jewish areas for Israelis
• Holy sites split ;Palestinians will have control over temple mount / NOBEL SANCTUARY
• Refugees ,compensation, right to return to Palestine and acknowledgement of
suffering by Israel
 281

• Non militarized Palestine state

• International forces for border security
• Both sides accepted it and became basis for Taba 2001

Taba summit
• 2001,taba, Egypt
• Could,t reach any final agreement
• Looming election in Israel
“the sides declare that they have never been closer to reaching an agreement and it is
thus our shared belief that the remaining gaps could be bridged with the resumption of
negotiation following the Israeli elections”
Aerial Sharon ,Likud party and abandoned high level talks
• road map for peace
• Quartet in 2002 gave road map for peace
• Propose phase wise settlement
• Phase 1-
Halt of Israeli settlement construction
Halt to Israeli and Palestinian violence none was achieved
Arab peace initiative

Beirut summit of Arab leage,2002

• Crown prince Abdullah proposed
• Arab ,Israeli conflict in general and Palestine –Israel conflict in particular
• Spelled out ”final solution”
• Un borders before 1967 war
• Normalization of relation with Israel in exchange for withdrawing it s forces from
occupied territories
• Return of Golan heights to Syria
 Arab initiative….
• Recognition of independent Palestine with east Jerusalem as capital with Gaza strip
and west bank
• Just settlement of refugees
• Israel cautious support and number of meetings between Israelis and Arabs
 282

Annapolis conference
• Nov 2007,US naval academy in Mary land
• President Muhmood Abbas and PM Olmert
• Agreed on two state solution
• EU and un behind US, US as mediator
• Khamnee condemned it
• Hamas agitated
• Jews also agitated against division of Jerusalem
• elections in Palestine
• Elections in Palestine
• Fighting between Hamas and Al-fateh

Palestine at UN
• PLO has requested full member state at UN
• Recognition at 1967 borders
• Palestine recognized by 114 countries
• US, UK ,several European countries have not yet recognized
• Netanyao criticizes for bypassing direct talks
• Mahmood abbas objects on continued settlements

Present status
• Internal
• Death of yasser arafat 2004
• Mahmood Abbas as successor
• Present election in 2005
• Hamas boycotted ,Fateh participated
• Mahmood Abbas elected president
• March 2007, a unity government ,
• Ismael Hania as PM
• JUNE 2007.dismmasal of Hanai Government and replaced by Salam Fayyad by
Mahmood abbas
• Hamas taken over in Gaza from Fateh
• Ismael Haniya rules in Gaza now
 283

• Abbas led government in WB

WITH ISRAEL
• Two state solution
• Its vitiation by certain factors
• Issue of capital
• Issue of settlement construction
• Issue of security
• Issue of military of Palestine
• Issue of refugees
References and Further Readings

• Politics Among Nations by Hans Morgenthau

• International Relations by Parkash Chander
• International Relations by Joshua Goldstein
• Understanding International Relations by Chris Brown
• Globalization of World Politics by Baylis
• World Politics: Trends and Transformations by Kegley
• Virtual University Notes
• International Relations by Ikram Rabbani (Important)
• http://www.amitavacharya.com/sites/default/files/Changing%20Conceptions%20of
%20Security %20in%20the%2021st%20Century.pdf
• http://diplomacy.bg/archives/1445?lang=en
• http://unsystemessays.blogspot.com/2008/01/reform-of-icj.html
• Some of the Topics taken from Notes/Slides of Sir Ahtesham, Mr. Shahzeb Khalil,
Manzar Javed Ali Khan and NOA Academy Notes.
•