Week 1: European Security and Nationalism as an Instrument for
Nation Building
- Jürgen Osterhammel,Transformation(2015): The international
relations we know today were born in the nineteenth century
o This was made possible by the outbreak of the First, Second
and Cold Wars, where political patterns did not revolve around
dynastic interests, but rather diplomacy as a professional
activity
o Not only historians see it this way, but also politicians
(including Henry Kissinger, with his dissertation 'A World
Restored', in which he states that the nineteenth century was
a period of simplicity in terms of international relations)
- International system: the rules that shape international relations
and the practices that shape these relations (Schroeder,The
Transformation of European Politics 1763-1848)
o However, it has no fixed structure, but changed throughout
the nineteenth century
The foundations of the international system
- 1813: ground zeroin Europe; the country has been ruined by twenty
years of warfare
o Amsterdam considered itself the world centre, as can be seen
from the world map in the Paleis van Dam; however, this
lasted until the invention of the continental system by
Napoleon, which had to limit England's trade
▪ England did not suffer from this, due to trade with their
own colonies
▪ Amsterdam was, however, limited in this by Napoleon's
trade restrictions, which caused the number of
inhabitants to decline; the new international system had
to provide a solution to this
- The union of Holland and Belgium created a greater political power
against France, which was supposed to guarantee peace. The Order
of 1815 established foundations, including:
o 'Legitimate' royal power (including the introduction of
monarchy in the Netherlands)
o Defenses around France, by means of the wall around the
country
o ‘Reasonable’ reparations: France had to pay a lot of money to
other states; these reparations were seen as ‘reasonable’,
which prevented a possible revolution
o Colonial exchange, whereby colonies were given 'back' to
states; the idea of colonial hegemony still existed
- Diplomatic foundations included:
o Final Act of Vienna (9 June 1815): ‘founding act of an informal
community of states’ (Ghervas)
, o Second Peace of Paris (November 1815): ‘persistent effort in
peacetime’, with which states repeatedly strive for peace
through multilateral consultation (De Graaf)
o Holy Alliance (26 September 1815), as a spiritual
interpretation of the new order in Europe; alliances such as
the Great Powers were also constantly, with binding protocols
o ‘Formalization’ of diplomacy, which initiated the
professionalization of international relations; nevertheless,
this was a predominantly male profession, with little room for
women (despite their great influence in the salons in previous
centuries)
o The Congress of Vienna (1815) also discussed slave trade,
Jewish rights, the Rhine (which promoted trade) and piracy,
with values of balance of power, collective security and
moderation
- The system was, however, strongly hierarchical: at the top were the
great powers (Great Britain, Russia, Austria and Prussia), followed
by the middle powers (which, by the way, did not retain any ‘real’
power; they were allowed to attend the congresses) (Netherlands,
Spain, Portugal, Sardinia), ending with the small powers (Hanseatic
cities and Italian states). States outside Europe were seen as
uncivilized and were excluded, including the Ottoman Empire
- Fears within Europe included fear of war, revolutions, terror
(chaos,regicide, expropriation) and hegemony as Napoleon did
o The real chaos, however, arose on April 10, 1815 with the
volcanic eruption in Indonesia. This resulted in enormous ash
clouds and unleashed Romanticism ('nature as overwhelming
force'), with literature asFrankenstein in Wuthering Heights
Challengers and opponents
- In 1820, revolutions broke out due to discontent among the 'normal'
population, first in Spain, Portugal, Naples and Greece. Duc de
Berry, the king's cousin, was murdered and the Cato Street
Conspiracy, the plan to murder all ministers, emerged in England.
o They fought for a constitution, civil liberties, political positions,
nationalism and an international system
- This led to the coming together of major powers to put an end to the
revolutions, including the Congresses of Troppau (1820), Laibach
(1821) and Verona (1822)
o With this Metternich got his way: the revolutions were a
continuation of the Jacobins
- Greece, however, was an exception to these oppressions; through
the Greek revolution it sought European intervention
o President Mavrokordatos: This is not a revolution, but rather a
war against the Muslims of the Ottoman Empire; he promises
Britain to remain independent
o At the London Conference (1827) it was decided to establish a
naval fleet to blockade the Ottomans; this was to remain a
peaceful initiative, but this was not carried out
, - The consequences of these revolutions were coordination of
agreements, controlled change, cooperation through competition
and consequences for excluded powers
The outside world
- Sultan Ottoman Empire on Congress of Aachen (1819): no
representation of the Ottoman Empire, allowing European powers to
determine the affairs of excluded states
o John Quincey Adams stelt daarbij dat “[we] not only [need
information] of their acts, but of their intentions – not only of
their final decisions, but of the propositions of each of their
members.”
- Therefore, criticism arose of exclusion, fear of interference,
opposition, including through the Monroe Doctrine (1823), which
stated that the European Congress system was not allowed to have
any influence on the West, and conversely, America was not allowed
to interfere with European diplomacy.
- The outside world protested against piracy (including the slave
trade), including Vice Admiral William Sidney Smith. Smith founded
his own order of knights, with which he tried to influence the
European powers by means of a ‘crusade’ to get involved in the
fight against piracy (also known as: ‘crusade, cleanse and civilise’)
o This did indeed make sense: Britain and the Netherlands
bombarded Algiers, in order to force them to abolish Christian
slavery; France then conquered Algiers in June 1830 to
provide ‘international peace’ within Europe, which was the
beginning of the 100-year period of French imperialism in
Algiers
- Jules de Polignac wanted ‘a different order of ideas’ outside Europe
(in other words: rules drawn up on the continent do not count
outside Europe); this led to several Conferences, including one on
Algiers, which justified the conquest and directed the urge for
conquest towards non-European areas
- Several revolutions arose in 1830, including in Belgium (with the
Belgian Revolt), France (with the deposition of the king) and
Germany (with the criticism of congress systems); thus the ghost of
the French Revolution seemed to be back, which meant the end of
the congress system
False and true endings
- Eric Hobsbawm (Age of Revolution): “The revolutions of 1830
destroyed [the Congress System] utterly, for they affected not
merely small states but a great power itself, France.”
o Despite Hobsbawm's claim that 1830 marked the end of
congress systems, a congress was held in London on the
Belgian situation
- New impetus for inclusiveness of revolutionaries included civilian
diplomats, conferences of professionals and a direct link with
, imperialism, through the associated status and power; John Darwin
also speaks of a “supercharged Europe”
- Imperial changes included territorial control, establishing settlement
colonies and also to expel troublemakers, thus maintaining
European peace, free trade and exploitation and taxation (with the
introduction of the Cultivation System in 1830)
o Thus, 1830 is not the ‘end’ of international relations, as can be
seen from the Crimean War (1853-1856), which repeatedly
threatened European peace, the ‘Eastern Question’ (the
disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, where a potential
continental war could be fatal) within the framework of the
system and the Congress of Paris (1856), in which the
Ottoman Empire became a great power (in order to resolve
the ‘Eastern Question’), the law of war at sea is coordinated
through the Danube Commission
o Maartje Abbenhuis argues that some historians accept the
'disintegration' of Congresses because they cannot see that
the Congress system is flexible
o There were also several conferences, interventions and
organizations
- Wars like the Italian and German unification wars were very short;
however, this had to do with the colonial consequences, with which
Germany wanted to capture some colonies. A fatal European war
was prevented by the Africa Conference in Berlin (1884-1885),
which meant that major powers did not have to fight to get hold of
colonies
o Since there is little space left in Africa, it can be said that
imperialism is becoming limited, causing European powers to
fight each other
▪ This can also be called a 'Social Darwinist' idea, which
states that imperialism is a last ditch effort to prevent
'extinction'
▪ Nationalism was also seen as a mass phenomenon,
which was based on imperialism and allowed
propaganda to be spread quickly; this also had to do
with the improvement of communication techniques and
the handling of crises (see, for example, the
assassination of President Lincoln in 1865 and Tsar
Alexander II in 1881, which were known after 13 days
and 12 hours respectively).
- However, during the war telegraph cables were cut, which made the
major powers afraid of cooperation, causing each state to lay their
own cables (including the British 'all-red routes').
o Colonial issues, European tensions and the Morocco crisis
reinforced these divisions
o A compromise was seen as weakness and a war mood arose in
the press; if Europe is divided into two blocs (Triple Alliance
versus Triple Entente) this war mood will become definitive
Nation Building
- Jürgen Osterhammel,Transformation(2015): The international
relations we know today were born in the nineteenth century
o This was made possible by the outbreak of the First, Second
and Cold Wars, where political patterns did not revolve around
dynastic interests, but rather diplomacy as a professional
activity
o Not only historians see it this way, but also politicians
(including Henry Kissinger, with his dissertation 'A World
Restored', in which he states that the nineteenth century was
a period of simplicity in terms of international relations)
- International system: the rules that shape international relations
and the practices that shape these relations (Schroeder,The
Transformation of European Politics 1763-1848)
o However, it has no fixed structure, but changed throughout
the nineteenth century
The foundations of the international system
- 1813: ground zeroin Europe; the country has been ruined by twenty
years of warfare
o Amsterdam considered itself the world centre, as can be seen
from the world map in the Paleis van Dam; however, this
lasted until the invention of the continental system by
Napoleon, which had to limit England's trade
▪ England did not suffer from this, due to trade with their
own colonies
▪ Amsterdam was, however, limited in this by Napoleon's
trade restrictions, which caused the number of
inhabitants to decline; the new international system had
to provide a solution to this
- The union of Holland and Belgium created a greater political power
against France, which was supposed to guarantee peace. The Order
of 1815 established foundations, including:
o 'Legitimate' royal power (including the introduction of
monarchy in the Netherlands)
o Defenses around France, by means of the wall around the
country
o ‘Reasonable’ reparations: France had to pay a lot of money to
other states; these reparations were seen as ‘reasonable’,
which prevented a possible revolution
o Colonial exchange, whereby colonies were given 'back' to
states; the idea of colonial hegemony still existed
- Diplomatic foundations included:
o Final Act of Vienna (9 June 1815): ‘founding act of an informal
community of states’ (Ghervas)
, o Second Peace of Paris (November 1815): ‘persistent effort in
peacetime’, with which states repeatedly strive for peace
through multilateral consultation (De Graaf)
o Holy Alliance (26 September 1815), as a spiritual
interpretation of the new order in Europe; alliances such as
the Great Powers were also constantly, with binding protocols
o ‘Formalization’ of diplomacy, which initiated the
professionalization of international relations; nevertheless,
this was a predominantly male profession, with little room for
women (despite their great influence in the salons in previous
centuries)
o The Congress of Vienna (1815) also discussed slave trade,
Jewish rights, the Rhine (which promoted trade) and piracy,
with values of balance of power, collective security and
moderation
- The system was, however, strongly hierarchical: at the top were the
great powers (Great Britain, Russia, Austria and Prussia), followed
by the middle powers (which, by the way, did not retain any ‘real’
power; they were allowed to attend the congresses) (Netherlands,
Spain, Portugal, Sardinia), ending with the small powers (Hanseatic
cities and Italian states). States outside Europe were seen as
uncivilized and were excluded, including the Ottoman Empire
- Fears within Europe included fear of war, revolutions, terror
(chaos,regicide, expropriation) and hegemony as Napoleon did
o The real chaos, however, arose on April 10, 1815 with the
volcanic eruption in Indonesia. This resulted in enormous ash
clouds and unleashed Romanticism ('nature as overwhelming
force'), with literature asFrankenstein in Wuthering Heights
Challengers and opponents
- In 1820, revolutions broke out due to discontent among the 'normal'
population, first in Spain, Portugal, Naples and Greece. Duc de
Berry, the king's cousin, was murdered and the Cato Street
Conspiracy, the plan to murder all ministers, emerged in England.
o They fought for a constitution, civil liberties, political positions,
nationalism and an international system
- This led to the coming together of major powers to put an end to the
revolutions, including the Congresses of Troppau (1820), Laibach
(1821) and Verona (1822)
o With this Metternich got his way: the revolutions were a
continuation of the Jacobins
- Greece, however, was an exception to these oppressions; through
the Greek revolution it sought European intervention
o President Mavrokordatos: This is not a revolution, but rather a
war against the Muslims of the Ottoman Empire; he promises
Britain to remain independent
o At the London Conference (1827) it was decided to establish a
naval fleet to blockade the Ottomans; this was to remain a
peaceful initiative, but this was not carried out
, - The consequences of these revolutions were coordination of
agreements, controlled change, cooperation through competition
and consequences for excluded powers
The outside world
- Sultan Ottoman Empire on Congress of Aachen (1819): no
representation of the Ottoman Empire, allowing European powers to
determine the affairs of excluded states
o John Quincey Adams stelt daarbij dat “[we] not only [need
information] of their acts, but of their intentions – not only of
their final decisions, but of the propositions of each of their
members.”
- Therefore, criticism arose of exclusion, fear of interference,
opposition, including through the Monroe Doctrine (1823), which
stated that the European Congress system was not allowed to have
any influence on the West, and conversely, America was not allowed
to interfere with European diplomacy.
- The outside world protested against piracy (including the slave
trade), including Vice Admiral William Sidney Smith. Smith founded
his own order of knights, with which he tried to influence the
European powers by means of a ‘crusade’ to get involved in the
fight against piracy (also known as: ‘crusade, cleanse and civilise’)
o This did indeed make sense: Britain and the Netherlands
bombarded Algiers, in order to force them to abolish Christian
slavery; France then conquered Algiers in June 1830 to
provide ‘international peace’ within Europe, which was the
beginning of the 100-year period of French imperialism in
Algiers
- Jules de Polignac wanted ‘a different order of ideas’ outside Europe
(in other words: rules drawn up on the continent do not count
outside Europe); this led to several Conferences, including one on
Algiers, which justified the conquest and directed the urge for
conquest towards non-European areas
- Several revolutions arose in 1830, including in Belgium (with the
Belgian Revolt), France (with the deposition of the king) and
Germany (with the criticism of congress systems); thus the ghost of
the French Revolution seemed to be back, which meant the end of
the congress system
False and true endings
- Eric Hobsbawm (Age of Revolution): “The revolutions of 1830
destroyed [the Congress System] utterly, for they affected not
merely small states but a great power itself, France.”
o Despite Hobsbawm's claim that 1830 marked the end of
congress systems, a congress was held in London on the
Belgian situation
- New impetus for inclusiveness of revolutionaries included civilian
diplomats, conferences of professionals and a direct link with
, imperialism, through the associated status and power; John Darwin
also speaks of a “supercharged Europe”
- Imperial changes included territorial control, establishing settlement
colonies and also to expel troublemakers, thus maintaining
European peace, free trade and exploitation and taxation (with the
introduction of the Cultivation System in 1830)
o Thus, 1830 is not the ‘end’ of international relations, as can be
seen from the Crimean War (1853-1856), which repeatedly
threatened European peace, the ‘Eastern Question’ (the
disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, where a potential
continental war could be fatal) within the framework of the
system and the Congress of Paris (1856), in which the
Ottoman Empire became a great power (in order to resolve
the ‘Eastern Question’), the law of war at sea is coordinated
through the Danube Commission
o Maartje Abbenhuis argues that some historians accept the
'disintegration' of Congresses because they cannot see that
the Congress system is flexible
o There were also several conferences, interventions and
organizations
- Wars like the Italian and German unification wars were very short;
however, this had to do with the colonial consequences, with which
Germany wanted to capture some colonies. A fatal European war
was prevented by the Africa Conference in Berlin (1884-1885),
which meant that major powers did not have to fight to get hold of
colonies
o Since there is little space left in Africa, it can be said that
imperialism is becoming limited, causing European powers to
fight each other
▪ This can also be called a 'Social Darwinist' idea, which
states that imperialism is a last ditch effort to prevent
'extinction'
▪ Nationalism was also seen as a mass phenomenon,
which was based on imperialism and allowed
propaganda to be spread quickly; this also had to do
with the improvement of communication techniques and
the handling of crises (see, for example, the
assassination of President Lincoln in 1865 and Tsar
Alexander II in 1881, which were known after 13 days
and 12 hours respectively).
- However, during the war telegraph cables were cut, which made the
major powers afraid of cooperation, causing each state to lay their
own cables (including the British 'all-red routes').
o Colonial issues, European tensions and the Morocco crisis
reinforced these divisions
o A compromise was seen as weakness and a war mood arose in
the press; if Europe is divided into two blocs (Triple Alliance
versus Triple Entente) this war mood will become definitive
