Contemporary issues: summary classes
Class 2: The return of Great Power Politics and Europe
1. What is Power?
1.1 Joseph Nye – What is Power?
Power as a resource power as a behavioral outcome
Hard soft power = continuüm
command – coerce – threaten – pay – sanction – frame- perusade – attract – co-opt
hard soft
2. Anarchy and strategic interaction
2.1 Kenneth Waltz – Neorealism (structuralrealism)
Core claim: anarchy compels self-help
State goals:
o Survival
o Balance of power
Cooperation: fragile & limited by fear of cheating
, Change: occurs via shifts in polarity (distribution of power)
Policy: maintain balance & avoid overexpansion
2.2 John Mearsheimer – Offensive realism
Core claim: anarchy compels power maximilisation
State goals: survival requires dominance
aim for hegemony
Cooperation = rare, contemporary & rivalry inevitable
Change: driven by power transitions
Policy: contain rivals & maximise relative power
2.3 Alexander Wendt – Constructivism
Core claim: anarchy = socially constructed
State goals: identities & interests = socially shaped
Cooperation: possible through trust, norms & shared identities
Change: norms & ideas can transform the system
Policy: invest in institutions & build cooperative norms
2.4 Comparison
3. The return of great power politics
3.1 Barry Posen – Emerging multipolar
,4. Europe?
4.1 Can Europe act autonomously?
Strategic autonomy = ability to decide & act free from external pressure
Europe: both ‘playground’ (object of US-China rivalry) & ‘player’ (seeking autonomy)
Requires pooling resources via the EU
Strong in trade & economics (centralised competences)
Weak in defence & foreing policy (member states dominate)
Autonomy = sector-specific & contingent
Europe faces external divisions (US and China are dividing Europeans in order to weaken the
unity of the EU) and internal binding (France, Germany and the Commission push cohesion)
Outcomes depend on:
Franco-German alignment
EU institutional centralisation
Balace of stakes & resources
4.2 US and China approaches
US China
Transantlantic alighnment Prevent transatlantic alignment against
Beijing
Trump: coercion, threats (Huawei, NATO Tools: economic inentives + occasional
burdensharing) coercion
Biden: multilateralism, values
same end goal
=> Europe’s response:
-> atonomous but aligned: EU insists on independent decisions
-> aligns with US in some areas (Ukraine, certain tech)
-> keeps economic ties with China
-> Franco-German engine crucial for unity
, Class 3: India’s Current Geopolitical Context: Scoping Europe-India cooperation
(guest lecture)
1. Sizing up the Indo-Pacific
Central questions:
An Interoceanic continuum or just 2 well complementing Ocean theatres?
o Indo-Pacific seen as a unified strategic space (continuum linking the Indian
and Pacific Oceans) 2 distinct but complementary regions with separate
dynamics
answer influences how states formulate regional strategies and alliances
Has the strategic centre of gravity shifted from the Euro-Atlantic to the Indo-Pacific,
or in fact, are the 2 vectors in intensively complex strategic interaction?
o Is the Indo-Pacific now the primary arena of strategic competition (especially
due to China's rise), or are both regions still deeply interconnected?
The Indo-Pacific-constellation of geographical subsets. Is any of them a fulcrum
(steunpunt)?
Rise of China argued as balancing the US-led regional order. However, the predatory
rise of China, equally needs a ‘rebalance’ against quest for centricity
Pacific vector of the Indo-Pacific marked by militarized high deterrence. Indian Ocean
region is steeped in non-rraditional under-militarized securitization.
Pacific’s challenge is managing conflicts. IOR’s charter is managing connectivity
o Pacific: deals with active tensions (e.g., Taiwan, South China Sea)
o Indian Ocean Region (IOR): focus on economic & infrastructural connectivity
2. The Indian Ocean
The ‘Indo-Pacific’ is the New Ground Zero, but the ‘Indian Ocean Region’ is the Crux
3 strategic sub-regions: Africa & Middle East, South Asia and East Asia and Pacific
Class 2: The return of Great Power Politics and Europe
1. What is Power?
1.1 Joseph Nye – What is Power?
Power as a resource power as a behavioral outcome
Hard soft power = continuüm
command – coerce – threaten – pay – sanction – frame- perusade – attract – co-opt
hard soft
2. Anarchy and strategic interaction
2.1 Kenneth Waltz – Neorealism (structuralrealism)
Core claim: anarchy compels self-help
State goals:
o Survival
o Balance of power
Cooperation: fragile & limited by fear of cheating
, Change: occurs via shifts in polarity (distribution of power)
Policy: maintain balance & avoid overexpansion
2.2 John Mearsheimer – Offensive realism
Core claim: anarchy compels power maximilisation
State goals: survival requires dominance
aim for hegemony
Cooperation = rare, contemporary & rivalry inevitable
Change: driven by power transitions
Policy: contain rivals & maximise relative power
2.3 Alexander Wendt – Constructivism
Core claim: anarchy = socially constructed
State goals: identities & interests = socially shaped
Cooperation: possible through trust, norms & shared identities
Change: norms & ideas can transform the system
Policy: invest in institutions & build cooperative norms
2.4 Comparison
3. The return of great power politics
3.1 Barry Posen – Emerging multipolar
,4. Europe?
4.1 Can Europe act autonomously?
Strategic autonomy = ability to decide & act free from external pressure
Europe: both ‘playground’ (object of US-China rivalry) & ‘player’ (seeking autonomy)
Requires pooling resources via the EU
Strong in trade & economics (centralised competences)
Weak in defence & foreing policy (member states dominate)
Autonomy = sector-specific & contingent
Europe faces external divisions (US and China are dividing Europeans in order to weaken the
unity of the EU) and internal binding (France, Germany and the Commission push cohesion)
Outcomes depend on:
Franco-German alignment
EU institutional centralisation
Balace of stakes & resources
4.2 US and China approaches
US China
Transantlantic alighnment Prevent transatlantic alignment against
Beijing
Trump: coercion, threats (Huawei, NATO Tools: economic inentives + occasional
burdensharing) coercion
Biden: multilateralism, values
same end goal
=> Europe’s response:
-> atonomous but aligned: EU insists on independent decisions
-> aligns with US in some areas (Ukraine, certain tech)
-> keeps economic ties with China
-> Franco-German engine crucial for unity
, Class 3: India’s Current Geopolitical Context: Scoping Europe-India cooperation
(guest lecture)
1. Sizing up the Indo-Pacific
Central questions:
An Interoceanic continuum or just 2 well complementing Ocean theatres?
o Indo-Pacific seen as a unified strategic space (continuum linking the Indian
and Pacific Oceans) 2 distinct but complementary regions with separate
dynamics
answer influences how states formulate regional strategies and alliances
Has the strategic centre of gravity shifted from the Euro-Atlantic to the Indo-Pacific,
or in fact, are the 2 vectors in intensively complex strategic interaction?
o Is the Indo-Pacific now the primary arena of strategic competition (especially
due to China's rise), or are both regions still deeply interconnected?
The Indo-Pacific-constellation of geographical subsets. Is any of them a fulcrum
(steunpunt)?
Rise of China argued as balancing the US-led regional order. However, the predatory
rise of China, equally needs a ‘rebalance’ against quest for centricity
Pacific vector of the Indo-Pacific marked by militarized high deterrence. Indian Ocean
region is steeped in non-rraditional under-militarized securitization.
Pacific’s challenge is managing conflicts. IOR’s charter is managing connectivity
o Pacific: deals with active tensions (e.g., Taiwan, South China Sea)
o Indian Ocean Region (IOR): focus on economic & infrastructural connectivity
2. The Indian Ocean
The ‘Indo-Pacific’ is the New Ground Zero, but the ‘Indian Ocean Region’ is the Crux
3 strategic sub-regions: Africa & Middle East, South Asia and East Asia and Pacific
