Domestic politics and international relations are often inextricably entangled, but existing theories (particularly “state-centric” theories) do not adequately account for these linkages. When national leaders must win ratification (formal or informal) from their constituents for an international agreement, their negotiating behavior reflects the simultaneous imperatives of both a domestic political game and an international game. Using illustrations from Western economic summitry, the Panama Canal and Versailles Treaty negotiations, IMF stabilization programs, the European Community, and many other diplomatic contexts, this article offers a theory of ratification. It addresses the role of domestic preferences and coalitions, domestic political institutions and practices, the strategies and tactics of negotiators, uncertainty, the domestic reverberation of international pressures, and the interests of the chief negotiator. This theory of “two-level games” may also be applicable to many other political phenomena, such as dependency, legislative committees, and multiparty coalitions.

/pdf/diplomacy-and-domestic-politics-the-logic-of-two-level-games-fpe0vxji8k.pdf

Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games

Norms have never been absent from the study of international politics, but the sweeping “ideational turn” in the 1980s and 1990s brought them back as a central theoretical concern in the field. Much theorizing about norms has focused on how they create social structure, standards of appropriateness, and stability in international politics. Recent empirical research on norms, in contrast, has examined their role in creating political change, but change processes have been less well-theorized. We induce from this research a variety of theoretical arguments and testable hypotheses about the role of norms in political change. We argue that norms evolve in a three-stage “life cycle” of emergence, “norm cascades,” and internalization, and that each stage is governed by different motives, mechanisms, and behavioral logics. We also highlight the rational and strategic nature of many social construction processes and argue that theoretical progress will only be made by placing attention on the connections between norms and rationality rather than by opposing the two.

/pdf/international-norm-dynamics-and-political-change-37ig9r9dlq.pdf

International Norm Dynamics and Political Change

It is increasingly common for social scientists to describe political processes as “path dependent.” The concept, however, is often employed without careful elaboration. This article conceptualizes path dependence as a social process grounded in a dynamic of “increasing returns.” Reviewing recent literature in economics and suggesting extensions to the world of politics, the article demonstrates that increasing returns processes are likely to be prevalent, and that good analytical foundations exist for exploring their causes and consequences. The investigation of increasing returns can provide a more rigorous framework for developing some of the key claims of recent scholarship in historical institutionalism: Specific patterns of timing and sequence matter; a wide range of social outcomes may be possible; large consequences may result from relatively small or contingent events; particular courses of action, once introduced, can be almost impossible to reverse; and consequently, political development is punctuated by critical moments or junctures that shape the basic contours of social life.

/pdf/increasing-returns-path-dependence-and-the-study-of-politics-32zejax04q.pdf

Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics

This article examines the model of social learning often believed to confirm the autonomy of the state from social pressures, tests it against recent cases of change in British economic policies, and offers a fuller analysis of the role of ideas in policymaking, based on the concept of policy paradigms. A conventional model of social learning is found to fit some types of changes in policy well but not the movement from Keynesian to monetarist modes of policymaking. In cases of paradigm shift, policy respond to a wider social debate bound up with electoral competition that demands a reformulation of traditional conceptions of state-society relations.

Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain

Drawing upon philosophy and social theory, Social Theory of International Politics develops a theory of the international system as a social construction. Alexander Wendt clarifies the central claims of the constructivist approach, presenting a structural and idealist worldview which contrasts with the individualism and materialism which underpins much mainstream international relations theory. He builds a cultural theory of international politics, which takes whether states view each other as enemies, rivals or friends as a fundamental determinant. Wendt characterises these roles as 'cultures of anarchy', described as Hobbesian, Lockean and Kantian respectively. These cultures are shared ideas which help shape state interests and capabilities, and generate tendencies in the international system. The book describes four factors which can drive structural change from one culture to another - interdependence, common fate, homogenization, and self-restraint - and examines the effects of capitalism and democracy in the emergence of a Kantian culture in the West.

/pdf/social-theory-of-international-politics-3eegdnnwai.pdf

Social Theory of International Politics

John Bolton raises two distinct sets of questions about global governance: the first involves the creation of supranational authority structures; the second, the penetration of the American domestic political process, especially by transnational non-governmental organizations ("TNGOs"). Neither of these involves international legal sovereignty, the right of the United States, or any state, to freely enter into agreements with other states. Both do involve issues associated with the nature and autonomy of domestic authority structures, the ability of political actors to determine the kinds of political institutions within which they will function, and the decisions that emerge from these institutions. The rule that one state should not interfere in the internal affairs of another, first articulated by the international jurist Emer de Vattel at the end of the 18th century, has become one of the defining norms of sovereignty. It is, however, a norm that has been frequently violated, sometimes as a result of coercion, for example the Soviet Union's invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 and the American occupation of Panama in 1989, and sometimes as a result of voluntary agreements, such as the 1957 Treaty of Rome and subsequent accords that have created the European Union. Moreover, some political structures are inherently more open to official or unofficial external influence either because there are multiple avenues of access, as is the case with the United States, or because they are weakly institutionalized, as is the case in several African countries. Although domestic autonomy is a widely recognized rule it might, or might not, serve the interests of a specific state. John Bolton worries that the permeability of the American political process may be a threat to the United States. I suggest instead that, given the inordinate international power of the United States, the ability of external actors, including TNGOs, to involve themselves in American decision-making may make it easier to accomplish American objectives by reducing the temptation to balance against, rather than cooperate with, the United States. Some international agreements, especially those that create supranational authority structures such as the International Criminal Court ("ICC"), are antithetical to American national interests, but others, such as the World Trade Organization ("WTO"), particularly with its mandatory dispute settlement mechanism, are beneficial. To secure mutually beneficial contractual agreements the United States might have to limit its own discretion, including in some instances accepting legalized dispute settlement mechanisms, to reassure others that it will not arbitrarily use its extraordinary power and renege, de facto if not de jure, on treaty arrangements. Where mutual benefits are not contingent on the behavior of other states the United States ought to reject any moves toward global governance. The activities of TNGOs, including their ability to operate within states and at the international level, may be beneficial because they facilitate agreements between the United States and other countries. The United States is so powerful that in many instances foreign actors would be anxious about concluding any treaties with the United States unless they were confident that they would have access to the domestic policy-making process, including both information and the ability to lobby. While I am sympathetic to many of the concerns raised by John Bolton's paper and some of the other contributions to this project, they present a picture of a weak and vulnerable polity under siege from the international community, a description that might better be applied to the likes of Liechtenstein or perhaps Costa Rica. In the present environment nothing could be further from the truth. The United States strides the globe like a colossus. Its power is unprecedented. Never in the last several hundred years has a state had such dominance over such a wide range of resources-- economic, technological, monetary, and ideational. …

Power and Constraint

Talking Tough to Pakistan

What do Third World countries want? More wealth. How can they get it? By adopting more economically rational policies. What should the North do? Facilitate these policies. How should the North approach global negotiations? With cautious optimism. What is the long term prognosis for North–South relations? Hopeful, at least if economic development occurs. This is the common wisdom about relations between industrialized and developing areas in the United States and much of the rest of the North, Within this fold there are intense debates among adherents of conventional liberal, reformist liberal, and interdependence viewpoints. But the emphasis on economics at the expense of politics, on material well-being as opposed to power and control, pervades all of these orientations.

Stephen D. Krasner

Papers

Power and Constraint

Talking Tough to Pakistan

Third World vulnerabilities and global negotiations

Recognition: organized hypocrisy once again

Who Gets a State, and Why?