When to use: explanation of connection between national and international levels
Main ideas:
- States have an interest in trying to shape systems into more congenial and security-
enhancing forms – major link between levels 2 and 3 in IR
- Threats and vulnerabilities multiply and evolve at the same time as the system advances
towards maturity, making security a highly dynamic problem of uncertain dimensions.
- Security complex is a good way of analysing system security complexes pay attention
to the macro-level of great power impact on the system, and the micro-level of local
state relations
The nature of International Anarchy
- The political connection between states and system is very intimate
- They represent opposite ends of a continuous political phenomenon: international
system is anarchy, state – sovereignty the essential character of states defines the
nature of international political system, and the essential character political system
reflects the nature of states means that problems arising from anarchic structure
cannot be treated purely as level 3 matters
- Anarchy is not a negative concept, it is simply a fact of absence of government, it is not
chaos as in Hobbes
- Difference between character and structure: while a system may have a single structure,
like anarchy, knowledge of that structure does not allow us to infer much about its
character.
- The character of the system is determined by patterns among the characters of its
component parts
- spectrum of anarchies: immature(total chaos – no recognition of others as legitimate
units) mature(recognition and acceptance of legitimacy here the idea of the state,
its territory and its institutions would have to be well-developed and stable, regardless
of its relative power as a state in the system)
- The present anarchy lies in the middle of the spectrum
- Signs of evolving maturity: 1) national self-determination – the nation as the foundation
of the state legitimacy attaching to the processes of national unification in Germany
and Italy by 1919 it was close to being a system-wide principle
2) international organisations: LoN UN + attempts to fix territorial boundaries and to
establish norms and principles aimed at restraining the use of force
3) long-established states themselves had time to develop their own ideas and
institutions + reach accommodation with neighbours on boundaries
CA: progress towards maturity is not a cause for congratulation but only if it seems to be
outpacing the simultaneous increase in threats escalating risk of war + survival of
large numbers of people has become dependent on the maintenance of high levels of
social order(not enough food for population) + prospective construction of large civil
nuclear power sector in many states creates the long-term problem of disposal and
managements of radioactive wastes.
The Limitations of System Structure Analysis
- In relations to the central contemporary issue of the impact of bipolar power structures
opinions contradict completely:
Rosecrance – a tight bipolar system is the most intractable in terms of controlling
international conflict
Main ideas:
- States have an interest in trying to shape systems into more congenial and security-
enhancing forms – major link between levels 2 and 3 in IR
- Threats and vulnerabilities multiply and evolve at the same time as the system advances
towards maturity, making security a highly dynamic problem of uncertain dimensions.
- Security complex is a good way of analysing system security complexes pay attention
to the macro-level of great power impact on the system, and the micro-level of local
state relations
The nature of International Anarchy
- The political connection between states and system is very intimate
- They represent opposite ends of a continuous political phenomenon: international
system is anarchy, state – sovereignty the essential character of states defines the
nature of international political system, and the essential character political system
reflects the nature of states means that problems arising from anarchic structure
cannot be treated purely as level 3 matters
- Anarchy is not a negative concept, it is simply a fact of absence of government, it is not
chaos as in Hobbes
- Difference between character and structure: while a system may have a single structure,
like anarchy, knowledge of that structure does not allow us to infer much about its
character.
- The character of the system is determined by patterns among the characters of its
component parts
- spectrum of anarchies: immature(total chaos – no recognition of others as legitimate
units) mature(recognition and acceptance of legitimacy here the idea of the state,
its territory and its institutions would have to be well-developed and stable, regardless
of its relative power as a state in the system)
- The present anarchy lies in the middle of the spectrum
- Signs of evolving maturity: 1) national self-determination – the nation as the foundation
of the state legitimacy attaching to the processes of national unification in Germany
and Italy by 1919 it was close to being a system-wide principle
2) international organisations: LoN UN + attempts to fix territorial boundaries and to
establish norms and principles aimed at restraining the use of force
3) long-established states themselves had time to develop their own ideas and
institutions + reach accommodation with neighbours on boundaries
CA: progress towards maturity is not a cause for congratulation but only if it seems to be
outpacing the simultaneous increase in threats escalating risk of war + survival of
large numbers of people has become dependent on the maintenance of high levels of
social order(not enough food for population) + prospective construction of large civil
nuclear power sector in many states creates the long-term problem of disposal and
managements of radioactive wastes.
The Limitations of System Structure Analysis
- In relations to the central contemporary issue of the impact of bipolar power structures
opinions contradict completely:
Rosecrance – a tight bipolar system is the most intractable in terms of controlling
international conflict
