Class Notes (834,935)
Canada (508,830)
POLB80H3 (152)
G Cupchik (4)
Lecture 2

Lecture 2 POLB80 .docx

6 Pages
91 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Political Science
Course
POLB80H3
Professor
G Cupchik
Semester
Fall

Description
Lecture 2 (Recorded) Sept 18/12 Agenda  IR Forum  How did we get here I: The Evolution of Sovereignty  How did we get here II: The Cold War and Post Cold War Iran-Israel-US  Israel is concerned for it’s safety against Iran’s nuclear ambitions  Iran denies any nuclear weapon production  US is not interfering due to elections  Non Proliferation Treat o Treaty signed in 1968 o Pledged to:  Not acquire nuclear weapons  Work to disarm and provide technical assistance for civilian uses  UN security council o Has the right to reinforce international law  IAEA o Inspects Iran regularly to check for any possible nuclear weapon production sites HOW DID WE GET HERE?  Evolution of Sovereignty o Sovereignty is the underlying principle of the state system  The 20 Century and Today  At the end of the lecture today you should: o Grasp that there are multiple histories that can be told about the development of IR. o Understand the origins of the modern state system and the relationship between territory and authority o Understand how key events in the 20 Century shaped how world politics looks and functions today. MULTIPLE HISTORIES  There isn’t a single answer as to how we got here o There are different ways to tell the history of international relations  Western Civ o The most traditional story o Tells the development of IR in an orderly fashion o Greek City States  People like to talk about it because they believe it looks a lot like European states Lecture 2 (Recorded) Sept 18/12  Small independent states with similar interactions to latter day Europe  Gives way to the Roman Empire o Roman Empire  The beginning of larger scale organizations o Middle Ages  Feudalism and the break up of Rome setting the stage for modern day system o Modern Day System o Very orderly and linear study of IR that looks a lot like western civ o Quite Eurocentric  But because the states system really did come out of Europe in important ways it is not unimportant o In order to get away from that we need to think about the multiple ways that global politics can be organized  War to war o You can tell the history if IR by going from war to war o WWI  Balance of power and alliances and how that shaped international system and how WWI was the embodiment of that set of interactions o WWII  Development of nationalism  The effects of depression  Battle of major –ism’s  Failure of international law to contain conflict  COLD WAR o Nuclear war and bipolarity o Development of hegemony  You can tell the development of IR through war o Given the importance of war to the development of the modern nation state, going from war to war is very valid way of going through IR  Western Domination o Radical way of learning about IR  This viewpoint of IR today is a product of European expansion in the 16 and 17 century o Essentially you have an international system developed in Europe that has been forcibly exported throughout the world and that’s why we see the state system we have today  There are numerous ways to organize the history of world politics o Multiple storylines  Interpret the facts of these storylines and it interrelates and understand the stories of these developments Lecture 2 (Recorded) Sept 18/12 THE EVOLUTION OF SOVERIGNTY “Where modern states came from, how it’s evolved over time and what it might look like today”  What is Sovereignty o The relationship between authority and territory o Having authority to make the rules over a defined territory  Sovereignty underpins the entire international system o There is no on e in the world that is not a citizen of some state and every inch of dry land is covered by state o A state governs within it’s territory  A sovereign actor has central authority over or control over a specified territory  Have authority and territory always matched one to one? o No o Not in ancient empires nor in feudal Europe  In ancient empires; if there was a territory there would be multiple and overlapping authority  Feudal Europe was a quintessential example of this  Example: The Catholic Church o The pope was in charge and made the rules over all Christendom o Within that seemingly unitary system you had kings and lords and fifes  But none of these had a one-to-one match between territory and authority o There were multiple authority therefore there was no single or dominant ruler for a territory o A “Crazy Quilt” of authority relations  Do authority and territory match one to one today? o Over time we went from the “Crazy Quilt” to the one-to-one match  Reasons included; Centralization of authority to fight war, economic relationships at the time, religious war (Catholic vs Protestant in 16 and 17 centuries) PRE-WESTPHALIA  1648 o We highlight 1648 as the birth of the modern day state system because it was the birt
More Less

Related notes for POLB80H3

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit