scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers on "International relations published in 1973"


Book
01 Jan 1973
TL;DR: A classic of international relations, the starting point of Raymond Aron's book is the state of nature that exists between nations, a condition that differs essentially from the civil state that holds within political communities as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: A classic of international relations, the starting point of Raymond Aron's book is the state of nature that exists between nations, a condition that differs essentially from the civil state that holds within political communities. Ever keeping this brute fact about the life of nations in mind and ranging widely over political history and many disciplines, Aron develops the essential analytical tools to enable us to think clearly about the stakes and possibilities of international relations. In his first section, "Theory", Aron shows that, while international relations can be mapped, and probabilities discerned, no closed, global "science" of international relations is anything more than a mirage. In the second part, "Sociology", Aron studies the many ways various subpolitical forces influence foreign policy. He emphasizes that no rigorous determinism is at work: politics - and thus the need for prudent statesmanship - are inescapable in international relations. In part three "History", Aron offers a magisterial survey of the 20th century. He looks at key developments that have had an impact on foreign policy and the emergence of what he calls "universal history", which brings far-flung peoples into regular contact for the first time. In a final section, "Praxeology", Aron articulates a normative theory of international relations that rejects both the bleak vision of the Machiavellians, who hold that any means are legitimate, and the naivete of the idealists, who think foreign policy can be overcome. This new edition of "Peace and War" includes an informative introduction by Daniel J. Mahoney and Brian C. Anderson, situating Aron's thought in a new post-Cold War context and evaluating his contribution to the study of politics and international relations.

304 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Bureaucracies, we are told, have become central to the forging and wielding of American foreign policy, but with consequences adverse to the substance of that policy as discussed by the authors. But what precisely do these propositions mean? Do they mean that bureau, cracies largely determine our foreign policy through their ability to select the informa, tion presented to top political leaders and through the control they exert over the details of implementing policy?
Abstract: Bureaucracies, we are told, have become central to the forging and wielding of American foreign policy, but with consequences adverse to the substance of that policy.* In the words of a past critic and present practitioner of American foreign policy: "The nightmare of the modern state is the hugeness of bureaucracy, and the problem is how to get coherence and design in it" [l]. That bureaucracies are crucial to our foreign policy and that they can make life difficult for Presidents are two propositions with which any analyst of American foreign policy could scarcely disagree. But what precisely do these propositions mean ? Do they mean that bureau, cracies largely determine our foreign policy through their ability to select the informa, tion presented to top political leaders and through the control they exert over the details of implementing policy ? Do they mean that Congress has little effect on foreign policy because Congress as an institution plays a small rote in tbrmulating policy and virtually none in implementing it ? Do they mean that the systemic perspective on international politics is of no use, or that Presidential assumptions, perspectives, and decisions are not the controling factors in our foreign policy? Do they mean that bureaucracies, if they are powerful, are equally powerful in all areas of foreign policy? Do these propositions mean that we must concentrate primarily on the mechanics of the foreign policy bureaucracy in order to understand or adduce the substance of policy ? Must we look to the nuts and bolts of bureaucracy to explain the thrust of policy ? Should we now adopt as the most fruitful method of analysis what is variously called "the governmental politics model," "the bureaucratic

176 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The debate about interdependence has proceeded in three separate phases, (i) in the aftermath of World War II, technology was heralded as the stimulus to an interrelationship among states: The world was shrinking; technological, military, and economic factors would produce inter-dependency even among erstwhile enemies, and later this conventional wisdom was challenged by Karl Deutsch and his associates, who purported to show that various economic indicators of external reference were declining as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: One of the uncertainties of modern international relations is the degree of interdependence among states. Some theorists have asserted that interdependence is high and/or growing, and others have maintained that it is low and/or declining. Essentially, the debate about interdependence has proceeded in three separate phases, (i) In the aftermath of World War II, technology was heralded as the stimulus to an interrelationship among states: The world was shrinking; technological, military, and economic factors would produce interdependence even among erstwhile enemies. (2) Later this conventional wisdom was challenged by Karl Deutsch and his associates, who purported to show that various economic indicators of external reference were declining. International transactions were lessening relative to intranational transactions. More and more, citizens were turning to the nation-state for the satisfaction of their needs, and national economies were taking precedence over the previous international economy of the nineteenth century. This theme has recently been powerfully reinforced by Kenneth Waltz. (3) In reaction to the claims of the Deutsch group, which initially predicted stalemate in European unification efforts and a greater autarchy for industrial states, new presentations of the argument in favor of interdependence have been made. According to this view, interdependence among states is certainly increasing. A symposium on the international corporation partly reinforces Deutsch's view, while one on transnational processes argues against it. The resultant of these theoretical vectors remains uncertain. In this essay we hope to offer new data and to provide a modest reconciliation of the contending claims, drawing a trial balance between them.

85 citations


Book
01 Jan 1973
TL;DR: The field of political geography personal space and territoriality has been studied for a long time, see as mentioned in this paper for an introduction to political geography and a discussion of the current state, international relations, international law international trade economic integration.
Abstract: Part 1 Introduction to political geography: the field of political geography personal space and territoriality. Part 2 The state: state, nation, and nation-state the emergence of states modern theories about states. Part 3 Political geography within the state: first order civil divisions civil divisions of the United States special purpose districts. Part 4 Geopolitics: development through World War II. Part 5 Imperialism, colonialism and decolonization: colonial empires the dismantling of empires the new states. Part 6 Contemporary international relations: international law international trade economic integration. Part 7 Our last frontiers: the traditional law of the sea. Part 8 Looking ahead: political geography for the future the United States very small places economics.

73 citations


Book
21 Dec 1973
TL;DR: Good as discussed by the authors provides an immensely readable account of the international politics of the Rhodesian rebellion which, as he demonstrates, put great political and financial strains on Great Britain, placed Zambia in mortal danger, almost destroyed the multiracial Commonwealth, and promoted an unprecedented involvement of the United Nations in programs of dubious effectiveness and doubtful wisdom.
Abstract: Fearing that their "civilization" would be overwhelmed, a tiny enclave of whites in Central Africa rebelled against a power which a little more than twenty-five years before had ruled the largest empire the world had ever known. Robert C. Good provides an immensely readable account of the international politics of the Rhodesian rebellion which, as he demonstrates, put great political and financial strains on Great Britain, placed Zambia in mortal danger, almost destroyed the multiracial Commonwealth, and promoted an unprecedented involvement of the United Nations in programs of dubious effectiveness and doubtful wisdom.The complex sequence of events which led to the "unilateral declaration of independence" of November 1965 and the settlement of November 1971 are probed, and the policies of the British and Rhodesian governments analyzed, particularly the actions and responses of Harold Wilson. Above all, the Rhodesian crisis is placed in its international setting to show that the failure to impose a transition towards majority rule in Rhodesia has meant that a significant chance to reverse present trends in Southern Africa towards the hardening of racial attitudes and erosion of African confidence in Western intentions has been lost.Originally published in 1973.The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These paperback editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

50 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, it is argued that the study of regional international politics is important for empirical reasons having to do with the real world saliency of the region as a factor in international politics.
Abstract: It is argued that the study of regional international politics is important (1) for empirical reasons having to do with the real world saliency of the region as a factor in international politics; (2) for theoretical reasons having to do with the subordinate system as being relatively neglected in scholarship with the exception of the integrationist approach; and (3) for policy reasons having to do with the importance of accurately understanding the dynamics of the region as part of the objective of stabilizing the international system. The dominant approach to regional international politics of the integrationists (neo–functionalists and transactionalists) is then discussed and criticized in terms of the two approaches' normative concerns, the nature of the model utilized, and the theoretical issues that are raised. A major conclusion is that the integrative model used is inappropriate as a vestige of the level of analysis problem, and such theoretical issues as the nature of the dependent variable remain unspecified. It is then argued that the authors' formulation of an empirical systems approach begins to meet these criticisms.

42 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The development of the resident embassy in sixteenth-century Europe was apparently not reflected in West Africa until the nineteenth century, but approximations to the system of continuous diplomacy did arise, probably independently.
Abstract: International relations in pre-colonial West Africa were conducted in accordance with customary law, which exhibited broadly similar characteristics over a wide area. Trade and politics, linking the coast, the forest and the savannah, led to the development of diplomacy in the more centrally-organized states. Inter-African embassies enjoyed a degree of prestige and immunity comparable to that which protected European diplomacy, and a widely accepted protocol regulated negotiations. Treaties were concluded solemnly and sanctions were provided for their observance. Embassies were also sent to Europe and adjacent European possessions and settlements, North Africa and the Near East, and were generally received on a proper footing.The indigenous system of international relations was affected by two major external influences. The first, that of Islam, notably contributed literacy, and led in the Islamized states and in Ashanti to the evolution of chanceries. It also introduced the distinction in international law and practice between Muslims and non-Muslims. The Muslim states exchanged embassies, Bornu, for example, maintaining intermittent relations with North Africa and Istanbul for three centuries. The second influence, that of Western Europe, spread the knowledge of European languages which, like Arabic, facilitated communication between West Africans themselves as well as with outsiders. The development of the resident embassy in sixteenth-century Europe was apparently not reflected in West Africa until the nineteenth century, but approximations to the system of continuous diplomacy did arise, probably independently. Diplomatic relations with both Muslims and Europeans tended to increase the influence in West African politics and society of the literate elite.The indigenous system of international relations in West Africa was flexible and effective, and it seems that it was not so much diplomatic as military incapacity which allowed the Muslims to overthrow governments there and the Europeans to partition the region.

32 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) had to consider whether it should prepare for its fiftieth anniversary in I969, or postpone the event until I98I as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Since the Second World War, more than ever before, the political bearing of international scientific co-operation has been proclaimed. Scientists like to view themselves as spearheading international understanding, building bridges that 'can later be crossed and enlarged by politicians and others to solve economic and political problems among their nations'.' There is little evidence available to assess the ultimate political value of these scientific contacts. It may not be surprising that the most vocal advocates of their usefulness are the groups who are the direct beneficiaries from these international circuits, and who see their socio-professional status enhanced by having attributed to their rehearsal of a New Atlantis, world-wide political significance. No anniversary celebration of an international scientific organization can possibly forego glorifying the international scientific community's role in the advancement of mutual understanding and world peace. In the late I96os, the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) had to consider whether it should prepare for celebrating its fiftieth anniversary in I969, or postpone the event until I98I. The Bureau decided to postpone.2 This is surprising, considering ICSU's general tendency to date its beginnings back from the creation, in 1919, of the International Research Council. The present name, together with a number of organizational changes, was only adopted in I93I. Although it is, therefore, not entirely without foundation to consider i98I as an appropriate year for celebrating ICSU's fiftieth anniversary, it still remains important to under-

30 citations



Book
01 Jan 1973
TL;DR: In this paper, a theory of international relations perception and reality in world politics is presented, with a focus on the Middle East and the Iran-Iraq War as two major examples.
Abstract: Part 1: The nature of international relations introduction the nation-state system and the nature of power. Part 2: The international struggle for power the East/West struggle the North/South struggle the struggle between competing nationalisms in the Middle East - the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Iran-Iraq War the military struggle for power - war in the nuclear age the economic struggle for power. Part 3: The international struggle for order diplomacy and political power international law and political order the United Nations system and political order. Part 4: Toward a theory of international relations perception and reality in world politics.



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The negotiations between England and Germany over the future of the Portuguese Empire which were in progress between 1911 and 1914 have been given little attention by historians as discussed by the authors, but their course does reveal some interesting features.
Abstract: The negotiations between England and Germany over the future of the Portuguese Empire which were in progress between 1911 and 1914 have been given little attention by historians. Such as there is has usually taken the form of en passant remarks to the effect that the successful conclusion of an agreement was part of the evidence for something like an Anglo-German detente just before war broke out. Although the view that the episode does not rate full treatment is certainly correct, considerable importance was attached to the negotiations at the time, and their course does reveal some interesting features. There is useful evidence for discussing such problems as the views and influence of the permanent officials at the Foreign Office, the importance of imperial considerations in international politics at the time, and the attitudes of Sir Edward Grey and Mr ‘Lulu’ Harcourt (Secretary of State for the Colonies, 1910–15). The resolution of the divisions on the British side and the way in which the negotiations were handled has not before been put together from the available papers, and to do so gives an opportunity to reconsider what was the true significance of the episode in Anglo-German relations.



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors analyzes conflict formations now prevailing in contemporary international society and concludes that the development of capitalism and anticapitalist move ments in international politics has led to the globalization of international politics and to the emergence of an international society, which is here conceived as an antagonistic totality made up particularly of the following conflict formations: intercapitalist, West-east, North-South, intersocialist, inner-third world, and formations of structural violence where in ternational and national conflict formations intersect.
Abstract: The paper analyzes conflict formations now prevailing in contemporary international society. The study begins with the assertion that the development of capitalism and anticapitalist move ments in international politics has led to the globalization of international politics and to the emergence of an international society. This society is here conceived as an antagonistic totality made up particularly of the following conflict formations: intercapitalist, West-East, North-South, inter-socialist, inner-Third World, and formations of structural violence where in ternational and national conflict formations intersect. The paper includes a short discussion on some fundamental principles of peace and social justice in international society. It concludes with some preliminary remarks on the foundation of a structural theory of international society. The author stresses that a further analysis of inter national society will have to look closely into the production relations and the exchange relations emerging from them on a world scale. The theorem of unequal and combined development is given particular importance. The author con tends that on this basis, causes and regularities of conflict formation dynamics can be better understood than by the highly abstract approaches of the last ten to fifteen years, particularly those of the conventional systems analysis.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Professor Julius Stone asserts that the " Asian States, including especially the newer States, manifest an attitude towards third-party settlement, apparently similar to that of the Communist States."
Abstract: T H E fact has been stressed, and rather overstressed, that the Asian and Mrican countries are generally reluctant to accept the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and are apathetic towards the use of the court or even any other third-party judgement for the settlement of disputes according to law. As the latest Year Book of the International Court of Justice indicates, out of 2.1 Asian and 23 Mrican States members of the United Nations, 8 Asian and 3 Mrican States have accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court under the so-called Optional Clause [Art. 36(2)] of its Statute:1 "This proportion of the Asian-Mrican group," Professor Quincy Wright rightly points out, " is much less than the proportion of Western European and American States which are parties to the Clause."· This is not something extraordinary. He also reminds us that "the historical record of Asian Nations in utilizing adjudication, Whether by adhOf arbitration or by resort to the World Court, is meagre. These nations have preferred negotiations assisted by conciliatory measures. Both India and Pakistan have been unwilling to submit aspects of the Kashmir or Indus River dispute to adjudication." These countries, he further asserts, have also generally resisted "requests for advisory opinions of the court on matters in which they were directly interested, such, for example, as India's controversy concerning the treatment of persons of Indian origin in South Africa in the latter country."s Professor Julius Stone asserts that the " Asian States, including especially the newer States, manifest an attitude towards third-party settlement, apparently similar to that of the Communist States.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article argued that the commitment of the Federal Republic to recreate an all-German state has been abandoned as a matter of practical policy and that the attempt to graft loyalties normally associated with the nation on to a West European construction has similarly been halted.
Abstract: I N the last decade a flood of articles and monographs has analysed the motivations and implications of the Ost and Deutschlandpolitik of successive West German governments. These analyses have generally been pitched at the level of the impact of these policies on international politics. Where the impact of the Ostpolitik on the domestic arena has been analysed it has generally been in relation to the ostensible objects of the policy, i.e., the states of Eastern Europe.1 This article is basically concerned with the impact of these policies on the stability of the Federal Republic. It will be argued that foreign policy decisions taken in Bonn and relating to both Eastern and Western Europe have implied-as Brandt's quotation indicates-a self-acceptance by the Federal Republic and have contributed decisively to the stability of West Germany. In particular, the main body of this article will argue that the commitment of the Federal Republic to recreate an all-German state has been abandoned as a matter of practical policy and that the attempt to graft loyalties normally associated with the nation on to a West European construction has similarly been halted. In this situation, it will be further argued that West Germany is beginning to display characteristics normally associated with the nationstate.


Book
01 Jan 1973

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article argued that such analyses are necessary and useful, but they are incomplete and often misleading in that they do not sufficiently deal with the ethical aspects and dimensions of technology, and argued that the attitudinal changes which were necessary part of any explanation of the rise of capitalism were a necessary and sufficient precondition for their understanding.
Abstract: Most analyses of the relationships between technology and international relations have concentrated on the impact of new technological inputs-nuclear weapons, missiles, fertilizers, IUDs, mass communications media, and the like-upon the international system or upon national decision-making (see particularly Ogburn, 1949; Haskins, 1964; Skolnikoff, 1967). The argument here will be that, while such analyses are necessary and useful, they are incomplete and often misleading in that they do not sufficiently deal with the ethical aspects and dimensions of technology. It is in this sense that this essay, as indicated by the title, is analogous to that of Max Weber's (1958) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Weber argued that capitalism could be properly understood only if one went beyond the prevailing material (and often monocausal) interpretations of capitalism to examine and delineate the underlying cultural and attitudinal changes which he argued were a necessary part of any explanation of the rise of capitalism. His conclusion was that the attitudinal changes

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Sep 1973-Polity
TL;DR: Riley as mentioned in this paper explores the origins of the theory of federalism as an internal scheme for a state and as a plan of international organization, showing that both internal and international federal ideas share hostility to basic aspects of national state supremacy.
Abstract: Professor Riley explores historically the ideas of sovereignty and state and the seventeenth-century federal theories of Hugo and Leibniz. He undertakes to demonstrate that the theory of federalism, both as an internal scheme for a state and as a plan of international organization, had its origin in post-sixteenth-century international relations ideas, that both internal and international federal ideas share hostility to basic aspects of national state supremacy. The oddities of internal federalism reflect its origins in international federalism, that is, a theory of treaties and alliances among nations. Notions of contract and secession provide supports for dissolution of federal states, while the success of federal states provides false hopes for "international quasi federalisms." Thus are undue weakness in the national state and undue hope of strength in the international organization fostered.

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jan 1973


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the results of testing attribute, social field, and status-field theories were reported, utilizing international relations conflict and cooperation data generated in the early 1 960s.
Abstract: This paper begins with the assumption that theoretical elaboration and empirical testing must go hand in hand if progress is to be made in the science of international relations. The purpose is to report on the results of testing attribute, social field, and status-field theories, utilizing international relations conflict and cooperation data generated in the early 1 960s.' Rummel has been primarily responsible for the development of the equations which stand behind attribute, social field, and status-field theories. His elaborations can be found in the various DON Research Reports and elsewhere. A concise mathematical treatment of attribute versus social field theory is given in Rummel (1 969a), and the equations of status-field theory may be found in Rummel (1971). A recent application of attribute theory may be found in Vincent (1972a), which